Who WOULDN'T pick Blu-Ray??? (2 Viewers)

[MattGuyOR]

I think it's really a no-brainer. 1080P vs. 1080i. Plus of all the support Blu-Ray is getting, not to mention the reported higher quality images and storage capacity. I read recently of the price they may charge on new and catalog titles and it seems fair. Isn't it just a matter of time for Blu-Ray to take the crown?

 

[BrettGallman]

You'd think so, but it really isn't as simple as that. I think a huge advantage really is in the name itself for HD-DVD. People know what DVD's are, but Blu-Ray is going to draw a lot of blank stares for the average customer.

Also, technical superiority does not ensure victory. Beta was supposedly superior to VHS, and we know how that turned out. Also, SACD and DVD-A are way better in terms of quality than portable MP3 music, and that competition isn't even close.

 

[Brent M]

Brett's right. Better does not always mean successful and just because BR sounds superior on paper certainly doesn't guarantee its' dominance in the marketplace. On top of that, Sony certainly doesn't have the best image with the public right now.

 

[Paul_Scott]

1080p is determined at the player. the early (and significantly more expensive) Bd players will output 1080p, the early HD DVD players won't support that, but future players probably will.

now, how many displays are able to currently support 1080p?

by the time a more significant # of 1080p capable displays are available, i'm sure there will be HD DVD players that can output 1080p.

hopefully by that time, Blu-ray will no longer be using Mpeg-2.

 

[Vincent_P]

Betamax had better picture quality than VHS- which of those formats won?

Vincent

 

[TravisR]

Unlike VHS vs. Beta, the only people who will initially be buying high def will be HT enthusiasts. They will make Blu Ray the victor and leave that as the only choice for whenever the average consumer jumps on. Hopefully anyway.

 

[BrettGallman]

Don't be surprised if HT enthusiasts end up being the only people buying into either format, period. It's entirely possible that HD formats can end up like LD, which is better than them completely failing. I would say that DVD has only really dominated the home video market for about 4 years, maybe 5. I don't think the public at large will be willing to adopt something new so quickly. VHS lasted for a long time, and I expect SD DVD to do the same thing. I won't mind if I'm wrong though.

 

[Stan Rozenfeld]

Do we really have a confirmed report that blu-ray has better picture quality than hd dvd?

I think one or both of these formats will be a succes, but of course it will take time. I remember when I bought my first dvd player, about a year after the format came out. So many people were telling me how it just wasn't going to be popular, because it doesn't record.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

I think it's obvious that Matt's original question was posed to enthusiasts here at HTF...not so much the general shopper at WalMart or uninformed consumer/market.

 

[Ryan-G]

Ah! But the difference is that High-Def can be slowly phased in on a hardware level until it reaches critical mass without Joe Sixpack even knowing.

If Players convert to hybrids-only, in 5-10 years all players will be High-Def capable.

Unlike Laserdisc where it wasn't able to play any media but Laserdisc.

The conversion will take place, it's just a question of when HDTV becomes commonplace.

 

[Jesse Skeen]

I have both VHS and Beta and have watched several tapes on each, and honestly I find little to no difference in the picture or sound quality between the two. Each format has its advantages and disadvantages. Both seem to last if well cared for; the oldest VHS tape I have is from 1979, the oldest Beta from 1976.

Blu-ray looks to be the better of the two formats, but of course I haven't seen either in action yet. I have very little confidence in Sony at this point so I almost hope it fails just because they're behind it. Regardless, as long as there are two formats with exclusive titles on each, I won't be buying either until they make a machine that can play both, which I don't think is an unreasonable request given the size of the discs are the same.

 

[BrettGallman]

I hadn't thought of the fact that HD players will be SD players too, so I guess it is possible that once the technology becomes cheaper, ALL players on the market will be HD-DVD players, and those without HD capability can still enjoy their SD DVD's. So I guess we just have to worry about the software selling.

 

[Stan Rozenfeld]

this is the one thing that we have to remember, that hd players are backwards compatible. You're getting an upscaling dvd player and hd player in one. If you have an hdmi display and you're shopping for a new dvd player, how can you pass up getting Toshiba and/or PS3, even if you're less than a videophile?

I would understand if you needed a separate unit for high def dvd, and I do sympathize with those videophiles who are currently stuck with non-hdmi high def TV sets.

 

[Jerome Grate]

The one thing that is apparent, high def tv sets are selling very well. Even the joey six packs are getting into high def and probably don't realize what they got. The point I'm making is with a little education it could be a major part everyone's home and change the way we look at DVD as we know it.

 

[Ken_F]

Both HD-DVD and Blu-ray both use 1080p/24 on the actual disk.

Toshiba designed their first-generation player to reach a certain price point ($499) with the technology that was available at the time, and that meant forgoing native 1080p output. Expect second-generation HD-DVD players coming late this year to offer 1080p output.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Correct.

for me the issue is one of bandwidth and storage space.

BD has higher real-time bandwidth (so you can do more angles and more audio soundtracks etc.) and will evolve over the next year or so to 50gig and possibly 100gig capacity.

 

[Paul_Scott]

i make no bones about not being as up on this stuff as most of you, but from my perspective, Bandwidth is the only spec difference that really, honestly means anything.
Capacity is a non-issue for movie watching. 30gb should be sufficent, and 50 gb will no doubt have plenty of space left unused (just as Sony already leaves plenty of wasted bit space on its current dvds) it only comes into play when the discs are loaded down with extra content and in that scenario its more likley a studio will put out a 2 disc version anyway for the percieved 'added value'.
in fact its going to be pretty amusing when Sony cranks out 2 disc Bd sets (just like they had the magical inspiration to put out high quality discs sans extras when other companies found a way to do both at the same time).

i would probably be much more of a Bd supporter cheerleader, if Sony hadn't already demonstrated snake oil marketing with the superbits (not that they weren't good- just that the implication was that they were inherently superior to what anyone else could do because the other people 'compromised' theirs with extra content), and that they continue to show a lack of respect to film lovers with continued Non-OAR releases.

 

[Jeff(R)]

Sony won't be the only company releasing Blu-ray software and perhaps with long films that are "loaded down with extra content" there might be two disc editions on Blu-ray Disc that will end up being three disc editions on HD DVD. No one is going to convince me that more space is a bad idea. The space will also be helpful for BD-R and rewritable BD-RE.

Jeff

 

[Paul_Scott]

didn't say more space was a bad idea- just that it probably isn't going to be neccessary(tho i could be proven wrong)- unless you are using a more inefficent codec- then the extra space is a bigger factor.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Paul,

Jeff is right. It doesn't make sense to try to categorize the Blu-ray format or how it will be used by what Sony studios will do.

At this time EVERY other studio except Universal is signed onto Blu-ray...so whether Sony is a model disc-producing studio or not is irrelevent: Warner and Fox and Live will have plenty of room to do things *right* with Blu-ray.

And let's not pretend that facts about specs can be so easily dismissed. Even if Sony studios doesn't make use of the fully available bit-rate or storage capcity of Blu-ray says NOTHING about what that new Lord of the Rings BD disc or Ben-Hur HD special edition can do. 50 gigs has a lot of value. I'm so tired of "good enough for a movie" attitudes around here and at AVS. Anyone who has ANY special-edition DVD that they enjoy or who has TV series collected on DVD is proving to themselves that 50 gigs WOULD have value. If all those TV shows from all those seasons could be put on a single disc it would save a lot of money in duplication and increase the convenience-factor of watching the content exponentially. Personally, I *hate* having to switch DVDs back and forth when accessing bonus material or switching shows. Having it all there at the touch of a button would be a dream come true for most collectors.