Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

Two opposing views on who will win the HD battle


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
117 replies to this topic

#1 of 118 OFFLINE   ppltd

ppltd

    Producer



  • 3,044 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 30 2006

Posted October 26 2006 - 09:30 AM

I found both of these editorials on-line today, and find them quite ammusing.

For those in th BD camp, read the following;
Quote:
Blu-ray Will Win HDTV DVD War
http://www.tvpredict...ywins102306.htm

And for those in the HD camp;
Quote:
Blu-ray Wins? Not So Fast
http://www.tvpredict...ipblu102406.htm

Enjoy. I did.
Thomas Eisenmann(Last updated 09/30/11)

Blu-Ray Collection  DVD Collection, Numerous BD players,

LG 55LX6500 55-Inch 3D 1080p 240 Hz LED

Pioneer VSX-94TXH, Panasonic PT-AE7000U 3D 1080p (PT-AE8000 Just Ordered, 

1124 BDs and going up, 1028 - DVDs and going down.


#2 of 118 OFFLINE   Peter Overduin

Peter Overduin

    Supporting Actor



  • 781 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 1969

Posted October 26 2006 - 11:15 AM

I have to chuckle at the pro-BD writer's assertion that both Hid def formats have been a disaster...a convenient line to take for proponents of BD.

What neither he or any credible writer has yet to articulate is how BD; whatever the spec may be on papaer what with 50GB discs et al...is in fact 'better' than HD.

Thus far, HD DVD clearly has the better working spec currently, considering audio in particular, and any idea that 50 GB disc will actually 'look' or 'sound' better is purely hypothetical at this point, and will in the end likely prove moot for any number of reasons.

The PS# will not be a huge boon to BD except for early HT adopters...gamers will no more buy PS3 for BD movies than they did PS2 for DVD...which they did not.

The unfortunate loser in all of this continues to be the consumer.
Peter

My Collection

#3 of 118 OFFLINE   Ron-P

Ron-P

    Producer



  • 6,283 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 25 2000
  • Real Name:Ron

Posted October 26 2006 - 05:02 PM

So many use studio support as to why BD will win, I say studio support means very, very little in this war.

It comes down to the entry fee into this war, the price of the players. The more players sold, the more movies sold and the studios will go where the money is. If BD keeps their prices at twice that of HD-DVDs, HD-DVD will sell more, faster and the studios will take notice. If this pricing trend keeps up into mid-next year I bet we start seeing those BD only studios rethinking their support.
You have all the weapons you need...Now fight!


#4 of 118 OFFLINE   MarekM

MarekM

    Supporting Actor



  • 858 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 11 2006

Posted October 26 2006 - 09:47 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Overduin
I have to chuckle at the pro-BD writer's assertion that both Hid def formats have been a disaster...a convenient line to take for proponents of BD.

What neither he or any credible writer has yet to articulate is how BD; whatever the spec may be on papaer what with 50GB discs et al...is in fact 'better' than HD.

Thus far, HD DVD clearly has the better working spec currently, considering audio in particular, and any idea that 50 GB disc will actually 'look' or 'sound' better is purely hypothetical at this point, and will in the end likely prove moot for any number of reasons.

The PS# will not be a huge boon to BD except for early HT adopters...gamers will no more buy PS3 for BD movies than they did PS2 for DVD...which they did not.

The unfortunate loser in all of this continues to be the consumer.

wow Posted Image uncompressed PCM or DTS-HD master on Blu-ray is bad and purely hypothetical according to you ? well only DolbyTrueHD on HD-DVD is on the same boat in audio field...

did you read any reviews of some PCM soundtracks ?

Marek

#5 of 118 OFFLINE   ppltd

ppltd

    Producer



  • 3,044 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 30 2006

Posted October 27 2006 - 01:32 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarekM
wow Posted Image uncompressed PCM or DTS-HD master on Blu-ray is bad and purely hypothetical according to you ? well only DolbyTrueHD on HD-DVD is on the same boat in audio field...

did you read any reviews of some PCM soundtracks ?

Marek

Marek,

What Peter was talking about, and I quote "will actually 'look' or 'sound' better is purely hypothectical" is whether BD will look and sound better than HD-DVD, not wheter it supports PCN and DTS HD.

Fact is, it will not 'look and sound' better, it only has the potential to look and sound the same.
Thomas Eisenmann(Last updated 09/30/11)

Blu-Ray Collection  DVD Collection, Numerous BD players,

LG 55LX6500 55-Inch 3D 1080p 240 Hz LED

Pioneer VSX-94TXH, Panasonic PT-AE7000U 3D 1080p (PT-AE8000 Just Ordered, 

1124 BDs and going up, 1028 - DVDs and going down.


#6 of 118 OFFLINE   Shawn Perron

Shawn Perron

    Supporting Actor



  • 500 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 25 2002

Posted October 27 2006 - 05:59 AM

Quote:
Fact is, it will ot 'look and sound' better, it only has the potential to look and sound the same.

Fact is that Blu-Ray has the potential to look better due to increased storage space on BD50s and the ability to use higher bitrates (both average and peak) then HD-DVD is capable of. A BD50 could theorectically use a average bitrate thoughout an entire movie that HD-DVD could only peak at.

Both formats use the same exact encoding/decoding for both video and lossless audio. In fact I bet when the formats become more established they will both use pretty much the same exact hardware with only the disc reader being different.

In reality HD-DVD has no technical advantages at all over Blu-Ray, while Blu-Ray has more headroom for both storage needs and higher bitrates. If you want to argue that HD-DVD will never need a higher bitrate or the ability to supply a huge bitrate peak on demand, you'd most likely be standing on shaky ground.

#7 of 118 OFFLINE   Ron-P

Ron-P

    Producer



  • 6,283 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 25 2000
  • Real Name:Ron

Posted October 27 2006 - 06:04 AM

What about the 45 gig HD-DVDs? Clearly those are a reality and therefore BD really has no storage advantage over HD-DVD.
You have all the weapons you need...Now fight!


#8 of 118 OFFLINE   Shawn Perron

Shawn Perron

    Supporting Actor



  • 500 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 25 2002

Posted October 27 2006 - 06:42 AM

Quote:
What about the 45 gig HD-DVDs? Clearly those are a reality and therefore BD really has no storage advantage over HD-DVD.

While they have been talked about, they do not exist in the current specs of the shipping players. Many people speculate that while triple layer discs may be feasible, they were never truly intended to be used and hence the lack of a spec for triple layer discs on the current players.

Also the additional space of a triple layer disc will not negate that fact that Blu-Ray has a bitrate limit of 54Mb/s while HD-DVD has a 30Mb/s limit.

In order for triple layer discs to ever be used they'd have to be placed into the official HD-DVD specs which could open up the possibility that all the current and near future HD-DVD players may not support the discs. If they ever really intended to use triple layer discs, why isn't it in the official specs already?

To be fair, Blu-Ray has shown quad layer discs are feasible, but they cannot be used because they also are not in the Blu-Ray specs. You'd have to imagine that if something isn't in the official specs after a year, it will probably never be officially supported. So we shall see what happens in the near future.

#9 of 118 OFFLINE   Ron-P

Ron-P

    Producer



  • 6,283 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 25 2000
  • Real Name:Ron

Posted October 27 2006 - 08:06 AM

Thanks Shawn.
You have all the weapons you need...Now fight!


#10 of 118 OFFLINE   ppltd

ppltd

    Producer



  • 3,044 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 30 2006

Posted October 27 2006 - 08:51 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shawn Perron
Fact is that Blu-Ray has the potential to look better due to increased storage space on BD50s and the ability to use higher bitrates (both average and peak) then HD-DVD is capable of. A BD50 could theorectically use a average bitrate thoughout an entire movie that HD-DVD could only peak at.

In reality, both formats have the ability to look identical in both sound and video. The extra 20 GB will have no difference in 95% of all releases. The added bandwidth of BD gives it no advantage in picture or sound.

I am getting so tired of this 'my disk has more space than yours' arguments. They are totally meaningless at this time.

I own a Chrysler 300C that has had the engine rebuilt by Hennesey. It now pushes out more than 440HP, up from the 340 HP of the stock vechile, and now has a top speed of 171 MPH, up from the 131 MPH of the stock vechile. Guess what. The stock vechile will do exactly what mine will do. And while I can now do 171 MPH, I will never use it.

Sorry for the slightly off analogy, but I see this discussion of HD vrs. BD in the same vain. Extra HP that is not used is waisted. When I actually see any reason for the extra space, we might be into an entirely different format.

BTW, I have both formats, and for all of the promise of BD, the releases have not held up to the promise.
Thomas Eisenmann(Last updated 09/30/11)

Blu-Ray Collection  DVD Collection, Numerous BD players,

LG 55LX6500 55-Inch 3D 1080p 240 Hz LED

Pioneer VSX-94TXH, Panasonic PT-AE7000U 3D 1080p (PT-AE8000 Just Ordered, 

1124 BDs and going up, 1028 - DVDs and going down.


#11 of 118 OFFLINE   MarekM

MarekM

    Supporting Actor



  • 858 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 11 2006

Posted October 27 2006 - 10:15 AM

no advantage ?
like mentioned in other thread, BD can use two loosles track (like for movie and for music only track..), while HD-DVD can't due bandwith limit, which was confirmed by AMIR (from avs forum)

so you really think that for example LOTR will look identical if made for HD-DVD 30GB and BD 50GB, same vc-1 codec used ?

BD have advantage to use higher bitrate, to uses 2 loosless tracks, plus maybe a few extras... and HD-DVD will be at it's MAXIMUM compresion even with still better and better vc-1 authoring...., I bet they will not get TRANSPARENT quality with full movie plus at least DoblyTrueHD and few other soundtracks,.. because there will be no BITRATE for other music only track...

Marek

#12 of 118 OFFLINE   MarekM

MarekM

    Supporting Actor



  • 858 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 11 2006

Posted October 27 2006 - 10:18 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by ppltd
Marek,

What Peter was talking about, and I quote "will actually 'look' or 'sound' better is purely hypothectical" is whether BD will look and sound better than HD-DVD, not wheter it supports PCN and DTS HD.

Fact is, it will ot 'look and sound' better, it only has the potential to look and sound the same.

Thomas, he mentioned "THUS FAR HD-DVD has clearly the better working spec currently, considering audio in particular"

WHICH IS NOT TRUE !

Marek

#13 of 118 OFFLINE   Peter Overduin

Peter Overduin

    Supporting Actor



  • 781 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 1969

Posted October 27 2006 - 10:29 AM

Few argue that Beta was 'better' than VHS. Having lived in EDurope for 8 years, I am also familiar with the merits of PAL over NTSC.

One of the problerms with the 'my disk is bigger than yours' theory is that there are not likely to be any display devices, or receivers, or players in the market that will demonstrably show that bigger is better.

Thus, the general consumer wanting an HD format of any kind will base the purchase on what he or she can see, and folks...whatever the 'on-paper' merits of BD....I would be hard pressed to convince a buyer that 1080p on BD will look and sound better than 1080p on HD, given that no hardware exists that will allow me to actually show anyone the difference, if any.

I don't care who wins...I like this war to some extent because it forces both sides to watch the pricing. However, any percieved technical superiority in the long term (there is none at this time whatsoever in practical, measureable terms) is going to be lost becuase BD cant get it's shit together in either the hardware or software department; charges too much for too little, and Toshiba is doing a pretty masterful job of spearheading the HD camp, aka the new promo, that I have already elsewhere indicated will be announced in Canada on Monday.

BD can have all the technical advantages it cares to trumpet. No one on God's green earth can actually show me a single one of them, or let me hear them for that matter. Wendy said it best hehe..."Where's the beef?"
Peter

My Collection

#14 of 118 OFFLINE   Shawn Perron

Shawn Perron

    Supporting Actor



  • 500 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 25 2002

Posted October 27 2006 - 12:08 PM

Quote:
In reality, both formats have the ability to look identical in both sound and video. The extra 20 GB will have no difference in 95% of all releases. The added bandwidth of BD gives it no advantage in picture or sound.

I am getting so tired of this 'my disk has more space than yours' arguments. They are totally meaningless at this time.

We are not talking about "at this time". We are talking about future potential. That 20 GB difference may be the difference between a HF filtered transfer so that the studios can cram 4 hours of HD extras and 4 audio tracks along with the main feature on a 30GB HD-DVD as they currently do with DVD-9s. Do you really think that if studios will ruin a DVD to jam pack a single disc with far too much content that they won't do so with an HD-DVD if it becomes mainstream? Hell, I saw a DVD release a couple years ago that the studio had put a sticker on the front bragging about the 6 hours of extras on board... it was a single disc DVD-9.

Don't bother to reply with the "they can just include a 2nd disc for extras" arguement, because if HD-DVD becomes mainstream, low profile catalog releases are not going to get 2nd discs (just as they don't with DVD now). It'd be nice if the format that wins has enough room where this problem can be minimized if not eliminated.

I keep getting the impression that people are willing to compromise on the long term potential of HD on disc just to save a few bucks now.

Quote:
In reality, both formats have the ability to look identical in both sound and video.

To quote you again, why stand up for a format that:

Has less potential in storage capacity
Has less potential for bitrate
Has far less studio support
Has almost no manufacturer support outside of Toshiba

The only thing that HD-DVD has going for it is a cheaper price. Since you admit tht HD-DVD and Blu-Ray have identical futures in the video and audio department, the current lackluster releases are a moot point to argue about. We are discussing a HD format that may be with us for 10 years as DVD has been, so focusing ona few dollars price difference today is pretty shortsighted.

#15 of 118 OFFLINE   Cees Alons

Cees Alons

    Executive Producer



  • 18,651 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 31 1997
  • Real Name:Cees Alons

Posted October 27 2006 - 01:52 PM

And, of course, BD has potentially more consumer unfriendliness than HD DVD, like the BD+ specs and other DRM unpleasantness.
They can "revoke" your player's licences. (They "won't do it", I'm sure, but just imagine what you will have to do if a reading error, or another temporary digital glitch, renders your player revoked.)


Cees

#16 of 118 OFFLINE   Bob Black

Bob Black

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 239 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 16 1999

Posted October 27 2006 - 01:54 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shawn Perron
We are not talking about "at this time". We are talking about future potential. That 20 GB difference may be the difference between a HF filtered transfer so that the studios can cram 4 hours of HD extras and 4 audio tracks along with the main feature on a 30GB HD-DVD as they currently do with DVD-9s.


HD-DVD has already proven it can release a near-3 hour movie with lossless sound, IME, and a host of other supplemental features. HD-DVD also has the future capacity of 3-layered discs at 45 GB. It CURRENTLY has the combo format that allows for 30GB HD side and DVD-9 or DVD-18 on the flip side. Plenty of room for a long feature in HD with many supplemental features.

Blu-Ray currently has exactly ONE dual-layered disc on the market, and by all reports it is very underwhelming. I wouldn't go blowing the BD horn just yet, as this format has proven nothing except for the fact that it is STILL playing catch-up to its competitor.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shawn Perron
Don't bother to reply with the "they can just include a 2nd disc for extras" arguement, because if HD-DVD becomes mainstream, low profile catalog releases are not going to get 2nd discs (just as they don't with DVD now). It'd be nice if the format that wins has enough room where this problem can be minimized if not eliminated.

And what if BD wins? They can't get their shit together in the midst of a format war - what makes you think if they suddenly became the standard format they would have 50GB discs for every release including catalog films? Hell, they have about a dozen BD-50's planned through the end of the year that will represent about 5% of their releases. Is this an indication that BD50 will be the standard for the future? A bit premature to make that leap of faith.

What about the costs of BD 50, or the reports that Sony is currently subsidizing the disc replication process? Or the fact that Sony still insists on using a 10-year-old video codec and PCM audio that eat more than TWICE the space of VC-1 and TruHD? What if they continue along those lines? At 50GB you would get less space from their discs than a 30GB HD-DVD!


Quote:
Originally Posted by Shawn Perron
I keep getting the impression that people are willing to compromise on the long term potential of HD on disc just to save a few bucks now.

I keep getting the impression that a minority of people continue to clutch this theoretical "superiority" of Blu-Ray that exists only in their minds even after several months following the launch. Sony botched this format from Day 1 and now seem to be placing all their hopes into the launch of a videogame! That, my friend, is simply pathetic. If the Blu-Ray format is indeed so superior, why are the early adopters choosing the alternative? The average consumer depends on $ to make their decisions - early adopters simply go for the best quality. HD-DVD offers BOTH.

#17 of 118 OFFLINE   PeterTHX

PeterTHX

    Screenwriter



  • 2,034 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 30 2002

Posted October 27 2006 - 04:19 PM

Quote:
HD-DVD has already proven it can release a near-3 hour movie with lossless sound, IME, and a host of other supplemental features. HD-DVD also has the future capacity of 3-layered discs at 45 GB. It CURRENTLY has the combo format that allows for 30GB HD side and DVD-9 or DVD-18 on the flip side. Plenty of room for a long feature in HD with many supplemental features.

Blu-Ray currently has exactly ONE dual-layered disc on the market, and by all reports it is very underwhelming. I wouldn't go blowing the BD horn just yet, as this format has proven nothing except for the fact that it is STILL playing catch-up to its competitor.

"Batman Begins" is nowhere near 3 hours long. It does NOT have a 45GB capability IN SPEC. By that fashion BD has a 200GB capability then.
Judging by polls people HATE the combo discs.
Nor can you have a DVD-18 on a combo disc.

Already we are seeing the limitation of HD DVD's storage capability with the multi-disc set of "Mission Impossible III" and the upcoming "World Trade Center"

"Click" may be underwhelming because of the filmmakers' decision to add grain and colorize the image. It IS transparent to the source. That is the true goal of HD: being transparent to the source.

Quote:
Sony botched this format from Day 1

Again, you insist on calling it a "sony" format yet there is mountains of evidence that it is anything BUT. Panasonic, Philips, Samsung and soon Pioneer are carrying the flag because the BD group is a true coalition. No one except Toshiba has yet to offer consumers another choice for HD DVD.

BD may not be perfect. But pretending that it's somehow inferior picture wise is ignoring that current releases from multiple studios are every "bit" as good as the competiton. You rail against an "older" codec yet Paramount's MPEG2 versions look as good as the VC-1 versions. Soundwise there is no contest. A handful of HD DVD releases have Dolby TrueHD, yet every Columbia/MGM and Disney have uncompressed multichannel PCM. Some with 24 bit resolution! Fox is coming up with DTS-MA on every release as well.

You also dismiss the PS3 factor. I can say without hesitation that it will be a boon for BD. Myself I've spoken with a couple dozen folks who's eyes light up when mention of the PS3's BD capabilities. Does it mean for sure that each and every one of them will buy a PS3 and use it for BD films? Of course not. But it does mean that the interest is there. We'll know for sure in less than a month.

#18 of 118 OFFLINE   Ryan-G

Ryan-G

    Supporting Actor



  • 621 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 13 2005

Posted October 27 2006 - 07:55 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Black
And what if BD wins? They can't get their shit together in the midst of a format war - what makes you think if they suddenly became the standard format they would have 50GB discs for every release including catalog films? Hell, they have about a dozen BD-50's planned through the end of the year that will represent about 5% of their releases. Is this an indication that BD50 will be the standard for the future? A bit premature to make that leap of faith.

What about the costs of BD 50, or the reports that Sony is currently subsidizing the disc replication process? Or the fact that Sony still insists on using a 10-year-old video codec and PCM audio that eat more than TWICE the space of VC-1 and TruHD? What if they continue along those lines? At 50GB you would get less space from their discs than a 30GB HD-DVD!

So BR is terrible because they're ramping up an entirely new form of disc that uses cutting edge technology, while the company using fairly standard "Yesterday's tech" for it's discs is wonderful? Thank god the market didn't say that when AMD ramped up Athlon production, or Intel would just now be getting around to releasing 2ghz CPU's.

You're also neglecting to mention that BD50 can be overkill for some media. Not much sense in releasing a 60 minute kids movie on a 50 when a 25 has plenty of space. Just like there's not much sense in releasing the same thing on a dual layer DVD when it'll fit fine on a single layer DVD. Everything has it's place.

I also find it interesting that you neglect to comment on Toshiba subsidizing Laptops-in-a-box while slamming Sony for subisidizing cutting edge tech. I'm sorry, I don't care what Tosh claims, I've built enough computers to know that they're not selling those things at a profit, before considering the quality non-computer components they added in.

As far as the codecs go, perhaps you should be looking at Microsoft rather than Sony. You don't really think Microsoft would give one of their biggest competitors a leg-up on them when they can make life difficult and shut down a selling feature of a direct competitor do you? I mean honestly, MS has no problem going out of their way to make life difficult for competitors, why would they suddenly want to play fair with Sony and risk pretty much the entire future of the company?

BR isn't perfect, and it didn't come out of the gate looking good compared to HD-DVD. But if you're going to slam BR, at least slam it's problems, or comment on both sides. Tosh isn't any better than BR right now on a number of fronts.

#19 of 118 OFFLINE   Rob_Walton

Rob_Walton

    Second Unit



  • 308 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 03 2004

Posted October 27 2006 - 09:35 PM

It will be interesting to see how the two formats play out over here in Europe. Certainly it has been explained by one of the lead designers of Pioneer's BD player that they chose that format specifically for the European angle. It seems their calculations reveal that there's not enough room on an HD DVD30 for a full HD movie plus multiple quality audio tracks, and HD extras.

BTW have any of the HD DVDs released so far had all of their extras ported from the DVD but in HD resolutions?

#20 of 118 OFFLINE   Cees Alons

Cees Alons

    Executive Producer



  • 18,651 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 31 1997
  • Real Name:Cees Alons

Posted October 27 2006 - 10:10 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Black
Sony botched this format from Day 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterTHX
Again, you insist on calling it a "sony" format
And you continue to see implications that objectively aren't there. He doesn't call it that in his post: he mentions "Sony" a few times in a context that's correct, because Sony is indeed involved. No need to deny that, I suppose? (And why "again"?)

Fact is: until today Sony DID botch the format's launch since day 1 (and DID the other things he mentions), whether or not it is their format, and they do that even if Bob Black, or anyone else, believed it to be theirs or not.


Cees

HTF Rules (uhm ... and has Rules)

HTF Mission Statement



Back to Blu-ray, DVD, LD, Tivo, Satellite and Other Playback Devices



Forum Nav Content I Follow