I can't take it anymore, I've jumped to backing Blu-ray! (1 Viewer)

[Larry Sutliff]

I think it has a lot to do with the Samsung player/Sony software debacle that really hurt BD at launch. That, combined with the cheaper hardware and(mostly) stellar software from the HD DVD side, gave a lot of early adapters the impetus to support HD DVD. I think BD is more than likely going to win the battle, but I think the format war has been healthy. Without it, we might not be seeing a $599 Sony BD player, or the very high quality software that is now the norm.

 

[John Berggren]

Thus far the only thing I can find regarding BD+ on the internet refers to the fact that as a copy protection measure, it's more attractive to studios than lacking it.

Care to elaborate on what it is?

 

[Austan]

The Samsung launch was to steal the thunder from the HD-A1 launch. Remember a few years back before all this started? Blu Ray was suppose to be years behind and cost more... well 2 months behind and pricing on software is about equal. on the hardware side, the $499 PS3 was the budget player starting in November 2006, and this summer a $600 Sony stand alone player...

What some view as a debacle may have been something else all together. If HD DVD remained un-challenged until Blu Ray was ready, then there would be no perception of a war and the momentum may have flooded to HD DVD. The perception of a format war was what Blu Ray needed... It was a stalling tactic to give time for the format to mature.

 

[Cees Alons]

John,

BD+ has a very dangerous underlying mechanism: it plays a "script" from the individual disc. Thus it can possibly only decode the disc by its own little program (or a key), which, if that was all, isn't too bad in itself.

But unfortunately it could do anything the creator of the disc has thought up, including possible bugs. It could change some settings of the player, it could "demand" an internet connection, it could retrieve a key from the web or send info. Penalty if the requirements are not met: anything the programmer wanted. This could be as direct as refusing to play the disc, or more malignant like setting a change on the player.

It was proposed (requested) by Fox, and the DVD Forum rejected it as potentially too dangerous, so they went to BD, who accepted it.

Some call it a mini-OS on the player, a Virtual Machine.
Note that it isn't operational on any BR-disc released so far (as far as we know).

I have loosely explained it before on this forum, lastly here in another thread.

Apparently, people don't read it, don't want to remember it, or simply ignore it. Depending on one's personal weighing of characteristics of the two formats, someone may deem it insignificant or not too disgusting, or outweighed by perceived advantages of BD, which is his/her right of course - but completely ignoring it is misleading at best, IMO.


Cees

 

[LarryH]

Actually I have cut back on purchasing BR disks (oh, and HD DVD's, too). Not so much for fear of failure, but because initially I was desperate to get new software and now I am being much more selective. With the dearth of good titles from either format, this has not been so hard. It does look as though HD DVD benefited from my early enthusiasm - by the time BR got their act together it had all become rather ho-hum.

Of course if the general public continues to show indifference towards both formats, they may both be obsolete.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Your movies in high-def is ho-hum after just a few months?

And you call yourself an enthusiast?

 

[Dave H]

Regarding some of the "diehard" support of HD DVD, I think a lot of it is/was "love at first sight." I mean HD DVD was the first HD disc format and produced the best HD film quality ever seen on one's display for many people - they instantly fell in love and began (and have continued) supporting it - especially since it only cost $499 to jump in which was almost unbelievably low a year ago. Furthermore, as mentioned, the infamous Samsung launch and poorly mastered initial titles only served to reinforce some of those people at the time to stick with HD DVD. All of this served as a strong emotional attachment that continues through today.

 

[Dave H]

Even though I only buy Blu-ray, I'm still very selective - reasons being 'price' - if I pay $20-25, I will be more selective and who really knows how all of this will play out. My fear is both formats could fail as you mention. I think I read somewhere (don't quote me) that only 700,000 titles combined for both HD formats have been sold to date. Uggh.

 

[Mark Zimmer]

As of yet, I haven't seen a single BD title that I want that hasn't also been released on HD DVD. That could have changed if Dances with Wolves and Silence of the Lambs (wolves and lambs hmmm) had come out, but they were canceled, so I still see no compelling reason to add BD capability. I expect it'll come at some point, but content is more important than specs to me.

 

[Chris S]

That number came from a Home Media Retailing article and was from only a single studio and not all titles released to date. IIRC, the studio name was not mentioned in the article.

 

[Shawn Perron]

Cees, could you be a bit more dramatic? It's yet to be determined how it will be used if and when they get around to it. With the power of the internet community, any disc that overstepped it's authority would be immediately singled out and cause a very negative response. Gone are the days when companies could be downright nasty without anyone knowing about it. The first title that went too far would cause a huge backlash and lead to demands of explainations from the offending studio. It's yet to be proven that BD+ is anything more then an additional attempt at DRM. It's apparently needed badly by the studios since AACS has so dramatically failed recently.

 

[Jason Seaver]

One could argue that that's bad enough.

 

[todd s]

What is "BD-J"?

Thanks!

 

[DaViD Boulet]

It's the interactive layer for BD... similar to the iHD stuff for HD DVD.

 

[Paul_Dunlop]

I think it is J for Java

It's the interactive piece for Blu Ray

 

[Cees Alons]

Then why have it in place?

I've said it before and, to add some drama as you requested ( ): if someone places a big load of Semtex and C-4 under my house, complete with a wire leading to a button in his hand, I wouldn't feel comfortable if they assured me that they wouldn't DARE to use it. I would say: remove it NOW.

Also: no need to accuse me of being overly dramatic: the whole HD DVD group (DVD Forum) rejected it as potentially too dangerous when Fox requested this functionality (and this was in no way related to the "format war": Fox went over to BD after the plan was rejected).

It's there. You're not afraid of it: so be it. But it's there.


Cees

 

[Stephen_J_H]

Keep in mind that it took a class action lawsuit to get rid of copy protection on CDs, and that was only after several other incidents with incompatibility with CD-ROM drives,virus infected CDs and DVDs (The Powerpuff Girls Meet the Beat-Alls, anyone?). I will not support media with such draconian DRM measures in place. I'd rather stick with SD than kowtow to that.

 

[Geoffy]

I know exactly what you mean - I can't help but chuckle when I visit some online boards where people will snap up anything if it has HD DVD or Blu Ray written on it somewhere. Some of the zealotry is hilarious - I've read posts defending higher prices because it makes the next-gen more exclusive; similarly. posts championing the lack of extras on discs, because they 'just get in the way of the film'. None of this applies to this board I must add - sanity reigns supreme.

I've tightened my criteria for double-dipping in HD/BD now - if the overall package is less than the SD, it doesn't get bought. That's why my collection is so meagre

 

[Jason Seaver]

Oh, I don't know about that... There must still be a few people who pine for the days of the exclusive LaserDisc club around.

 

[Rob_Walton]

BD+ was submitted to the DVD forum as an addition to AACS for HD DVD? When did that happen?