 |
 |
Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: From Long Island, at college in Plattsburgh
Status:
Offline
|
|
I'm a huge movie buff and when Best Buy finally got the Westlinghouse with HD-DVD playing, I was there every week just to watch the demo disc. A month or so ago I went back to Best Buy and noticed they finally got Blu-Ray set up on an end cap. To tell you the truth, I am not impressed at all. I thought the quality from the blu-ray player was crap compared to HD-DVD. Before seeing the quality, I was all for Blu-Ray. Now I feel HD-DVD is the format for movies, Blu-Ray for data storage.
What do you guys think? Have you guys seen Blu-Ray and HD-DVD? How about HD (1080p) ever on iTunes??
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Status:
Offline
|
|
I totally agree with you about the quality of Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD.
The first time I saw the HD-DVD player, I had to go back again and again to see it....the Blu-Ray player was much less than impressive. It did not impress me at all, in fact.
Blu-Ray= 
HD-DVD= 
|
|
This land is your land...SO GET CLEANIN'!!!
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Northern California
Status:
Offline
|
|
I've yet to see any HD players on display (though I'm curious). Were they the same movies on both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray? Were the TVs the same? I don't trust stores like BestBuy when judging TVs because generally they are terribly configured and are displaying hideous low quality video. In this case there are so many variables... maybe one of the players was using a different video connection, or the movie wasn't properly mastered for HD. I would want to know if the setups were exactly the same before comparing formats.
What kinds of encoding technologies does each format use? If it was the same, then Blu-ray should theoretically win since it has larger storage size = less compression needed.
(
Last edited by Apfhex; Jul 30, 2006 at 01:14 AM.
)
|
Mac OS X 10.5.0, Mac Pro 2.66GHz/2 GB RAM/X1900 XT, 23" ACD
esdesign
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: From Long Island, at college in Plattsburgh
Status:
Offline
|
|
That would be true if Blu-Ray was using a double layer (50gb) disc, but as of right now there is only single layer (25gb) discs out and being used. HD-DVDs are double layer (30 gb) so that could be the difference. The bit rate is different due to the size problems. My worry is if there is such a big difference between of formats with only 5 gbs, how are things going to look when Blu-ray comes out with 50 gb, and HD-DVD release their triple layer 45 gb....
Westlinghouse + HD-DVD = "want it now"
Samsung + Blu-ray = "pixels pixels pixels"
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Northern California
Status:
Offline
|
|
Ah, I didn't know that. Still, like you say, that shouldn't account for a large quality difference. I feel like investigating for myself—but the fact remains that I'm not going to touch either format with a long stick until there's a clear victor (or until hybrid players come out, which I see happening if neither format can "win").
|
Mac OS X 10.5.0, Mac Pro 2.66GHz/2 GB RAM/X1900 XT, 23" ACD
esdesign
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top