~Blu-Ray vs HD-DVD~

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

How can you just ignore a 66% increase in capacity (50GB vs 30GB)? There is more to the HD market than just watching 2 hour movies.

the same way i can ignore dual layer dvd-r's. if it costs less to burn two hddvds then who cares if bluray is a little bigger.

You might want to avoid getting into an argument about the cost of blank HD and BD media. For all the gnashing of teeth about the cost of manufacturing Blu-ray discs, guess what, HD DVD media will hit the Japanese market early in July for the same price. But hey, I can easily fit a 2 hour movie in HD using a single dual-layered DVD and it's cheaper too! Who needs more capacity? I mean other than those that want more episodes per disc, higher bitrates, more extras in HD, higher storage, etc, etc.

HD DVD-R/RW media available July 5 in Japan
Hitachi and Mitsubishi have both announced today that (in Japan at least), they will be releasing single layer HD DVD-Rs, with RW and dual layer blanks to come later this summer. Still no recorders announced, but with their importance in the Japanese market and media now scheduled, they can't be very far off. Impress approximates the price at about 2,000 yen ($17.75 US), which is about the same price as single layer Blu-ray media. What the press releases don't seem to say is whether this media is 1X or 2X speed rated; because of the difference in the specifications 1X (36.55mbps) media could still play HD DVD content, but would be a slower burner than the Blu-ray drives that are coming out rated at 2X (72mbps) or higher. Impress only mentions the Hitachi as being 1X.

 

[0roo0roo]

You might want to avoid getting into an argument about the cost of blank HD and BD media. For all the gnashing of teeth about the cost of manufacturing Blu-ray discs, guess what, HD DVD media will hit the Japanese market early in July for the same price. But hey, I can easily fit a 2 hour movie in HD using a single dual-layered DVD and it's cheaper too! Who needs more capacity? I mean other than those that want more episodes per disc, higher bitrates, more extras in HD, higher storage, etc, etc.

i really dont' care since they both cost far more than even dual layer dvdr which is the point. they won't be viable for quite some time, and then when they are hddvd still may win if it drops fast and far enough pricewise in the end. and it looks like hddvd just may have the ability to price itself down faster, just look at the release price of their player. just pointing out how little consumers really will pay for something thats "better". i mean seroiusly, dvd 2layer has twice the capacity! the discs are only a buck but still look how slow their adoption is.

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

You might want to avoid getting into an argument about the cost of blank HD and BD media. For all the gnashing of teeth about the cost of manufacturing Blu-ray discs, guess what, HD DVD media will hit the Japanese market early in July for the same price. But hey, I can easily fit a 2 hour movie in HD using a single dual-layered DVD and it's cheaper too! Who needs more capacity? I mean other than those that want more episodes per disc, higher bitrates, more extras in HD, higher storage, etc, etc.

i really dont' care since they both cost far more than even dual layer dvdr which is the point. they won't be viable for quite some time, and then when they are hddvd still may win if it drops fast and far enough pricewise in the end. and it looks like hddvd just may have the ability to price itself down faster, just look at the release price of their player. just pointing out how little consumers really will pay for something thats "better". i mean seroiusly, dvd 2layer has twice the capacity! the discs are only a buck but still look how slow their adoption is.

The point of this thread is HD DVD versus Blu-ray. The argument has repeatedly been made that Blu-ray costs significantely more to manufacture than HD DVD. But blank media and movies from Sony are on sale right now that are the same price as HD DVD. Actually, one correction - you can't buy blank HD DVD discs yet.

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: KnightBreed
The point of this thread is HD DVD versus Blu-ray. The argument has repeatedly been made that Blu-ray costs significantely more to manufacture than HD DVD. But blank media and movies from Sony are on sale right now that are the same price as HD DVD. Actually, one correction - you can't buy blank HD DVD discs yet.

Blank media and the media used for mass manufacturing are not the same thing, though. A writeable HD DVD can cost 80 cents less than a Blu-Ray and it makes no difference. If it costs 80 cents less in mass manufacturing, that is a noticeable difference.

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: KnightBreed
The point of this thread is HD DVD versus Blu-ray. The argument has repeatedly been made that Blu-ray costs significantely more to manufacture than HD DVD. But blank media and movies from Sony are on sale right now that are the same price as HD DVD. Actually, one correction - you can't buy blank HD DVD discs yet.

Blank media and the media used for mass manufacturing are not the same thing, though. A writeable HD DVD can cost 80 cents less than a Blu-Ray and it makes no difference. If it costs 80 cents less in mass manufacturing, that is a noticeable difference.

80 cents is important for disc manufactures only, not the end consumer. A disc that costs 2 bucks to manufacture will still cost $30 MSRP. Why should I concern myself about the cost to press a dics? The majority of the cost at retail is not packaging/manufacturing. You are paying for the content, not the disc.

By the way, pre-recorded content for both formats are the same price. HD DVD and Blu-ray movies both cost in the $25-40 range. Once again, with all the warnings about the cost to manufacture a read-only disc, the final cost at retail for both formats is roughly the same.

 

[torpid]

You shouldn't concern yourself, but greedy movie studios might when deciding which format to favor.

 

[0roo0roo]

well its a concern in the bottom line. if the hddvd discs cost less to manufacture in mass quantities the price can drop without the studios taking a hit. and well greed is the best motivator. already the studios are gripin that their profits on dvd are getting lower because consumers expect lower and lower prices.

 

[Staples]

Either one would be fine but I lean towards Blu Ray because more space equates into more potential.

 

[n7]

This thread proves there won't be a winner, just like there wasn't between the DVD-R & DVD+R war.

It seems the only way to get widespread sales will be to create Blu-Ray/HD-DVD combo players/burners, since obviously neither side is going to win.

 

[arod]

Originally posted by: n7
This thread proves there won't be a winner, just like there wasn't between the DVD-R & DVD+R war.

It seems the only way to get widespread sales will be to create Blu-Ray/HD-DVD combo players/burners, since obviously neither side is going to win.

Ill agree with that.... I think this will be a -+R all over again where the combo players will be the only thing that matters.

and for the record:

RIGHT NOW Blueray is 25 gigs and HD-DVD is 30 (the movie discs that you go out and buy at the retailers). Couple that with the fact that the initial blueray movies are only using mpeg2 (which is roughly 2x as big as mpeg4/vc1) blueray movies look horrible compared to hd-dvd movies (and the reviews are pointing this out). Also you are comparing a single layer bd to a dual layer hd-dvd so that is why the costs are so close (and imo both are priced pretty well at around 20 bucks a movie). But blueray players also cost $1000 and HD-DVD are running $500. So you have to pay 2x as much for less PQ with hd-dvd.

Sony better get their crap together and very quickly so bluray is destined to be the next failed format for them. If/When sony gets their dual layer discs going they should be able to match hd-dvd (and possibly beat them if they use mpeg4/vc1) but it begs the question why arent all the movies on dual layer if its not a problem to produce the discs.... ESPECIALLY the first run ones which are what the fomat will be judged by. I really think dual layer discs will be atleast a year off (where most movies are produced on them) or sony has always planned on using the dual layer discs as special edition bd's only (like superbit with extra quality) which would make sense because the price WILL go up for dual layer discs.

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: arod

Originally posted by: n7
This thread proves there won't be a winner, just like there wasn't between the DVD-R & DVD+R war.

It seems the only way to get widespread sales will be to create Blu-Ray/HD-DVD combo players/burners, since obviously neither side is going to win.

Ill agree with that.... I think this will be a -+R all over again where the combo players will be the only thing that matters.

and for the record:

RIGHT NOW Blueray is 25 gigs and HD-DVD is 30 (the movie discs that you go out and buy at the retailers). Couple that with the fact that the initial blueray movies are only using mpeg2 (which is roughly 2x as big as mpeg4/vc1) blueray movies look horrible compared to hd-dvd movies (and the reviews are pointing this out). Also you are comparing a single layer bd to a dual layer hd-dvd so that is why the costs are so close (and imo both are priced pretty well at around 20 bucks a movie). But blueray players also cost $1000 and HD-DVD are running $500. So you have to pay 2x as much for less PQ with hd-dvd.

I agree completely! The fact is, the format was launched before everything was ready.

1. Current movies are on 25GB discs.
2. Current movies are encoded with MPEG2, supposedly due to compatability issues between players using VC-1.

IMO, #2 is the bigger problem and will probably be the quickest to fix. The image quality issues will be resolved when they starting using VC-1 or MPEG4. Warner will be using the same bitstream for their initial dual format releases - i.e. the same encoded movie will be on both formats and the image quality will be virtually identical.

 

[mrrman]

My friend has the Toshiba HD player and its awesome, watched Chronicles of Riddick and Van Hesling last night and all I can say is wow( Kate looks even better in HD lol) I also heard that Best Buy has a BlueRay setup in some of there stores playing a movie but its actually a HD DVD movie. They are trying to suck the public into buying the $1000 unit over the $500 Toshiba unit. The movie name doesnt come to mind but its starts with an S. This movie is only available on HD. They have the HD player hidden playing the movie while the Blue Ray is shown in the rack. Also Sony has payed Best Buy a premium to display the Blue Ray unit near the HD players. I am still going with HD even if the Blue Ray price drops. I also heard that Samsung is working on a combo Blueray/HD player.

 

[Jadow]

This thread proves there won't be a winner, just like there wasn't between the DVD-R & DVD+R war.


Can't we declare -R as the winner? When I went to Office Depot to pick up the $7.99 blank DVD's, they'd SOLD OUT of the -R's and had about 200 of the +R packs.

Luckily, I was able to get a rain check for the -R's.

 

[Topweasel]

Originally posted by: KnightBreed

Originally posted by: Topweasel
For most viewings (Movies) with a VC-1 type compression a 50GB disc would be near useless, and with a Mpeg2 compression they absolutely have to have the 50GB discs to a decent viewing experience.

People need to let go of this size benifit, Its really only usefull for computers, and if it is needed I trust the DVD-Forum when they say if need be they should be able to had a third layer and maybe only require a Firmware update.

Besides computers and television series, there is no use for 50GB discs. What the hell sense does that make? TV shows on DVD has been the biggest growth segment in the DVD market the past couple years. Not to mention the billions in sales of computer drives for backing up files and making home movies.

How can you just ignore a 66% increase in capacity (50GB vs 30GB)? There is more to the HD market than just watching 2 hour movies.

And on a Final notice, read the enthusiests sites, there seems to be a huge question on whether the Samsung Player can even play DL Blu-Ray Discs.

Only a huge question for the folks that don't do any research before spreading misinformation.

Discussion at AVSforum (read the whole thread)
Samsung BD-1000 Product Manual

Look at page 4 for references to 50GB dual layered discs. The compatability chart on page 8 refers to "single sided" discs. This does not imply that dual layered discs are not compatible.

Blu-ray Discs can store 25 GB (single layer) or 50 GB
(dual layer) on a single sided disc - about 5 to 10
times the capacity of a DVD.
Blu-ray Discs also support the highest quality HD
video available in the industry (up to 1920 x 1080 at
40 Mbit/sec) - Large capacity means no compromise
on video quality. Furthermore, a Blu-ray Disc has the
same familiar size and look as DVD.

Blu-Ray for backing up isn't a bad Idea, infact its a great Idea. This discussion is about Movie viewing not computer uses. Second, Specs say it does but there are a few DL discs rolling around somewhere that have been tried in the Samsung with little succes, The VAIO on the other hand hasn't had this issue, same goes for BD-E discs.

Movies Still account for a mojority of sales and a mojority of profits. A Movie for $20 vs A season for $50 at 2 discs vs 6-8 discs comes to a advantage for Movies, Seasons also have been selling in the single millions with the first couple of Simpsons series hitting 4-5 million at the top, vs Shreck 2 that sold almost 30 million copies opening weekend. And for any of this to matter we have to see VC-1 and Mpeg4-AVC releases on BD first. And untill they start making BD50 discs at success rate of ~70% then even at the same cost per disc (whether disc is good or bad) its still going to be more expensive over all for BD series over HD-DVD series. Since BD25 production is still sub 30% I do see that happening anytime soon.

 

[sdifox]

HD-DVD for me. I hate Sony antics, and that 0.1mm protective layer is not going to last.

 

[Syrch]

Dont' get me wrong, Blu-Ray is nice and definetly has its perks but if they are truly going to sacrifice image quality for DVD Extras i say to the hell with you. I want to see the clearest most realistic picture i can. I am not going to invest $1000 for a DVD player and another $5000 for a top end TV To see Cinderella sing me an extra song. I am going to buy that equipment to get the most realistic experience I can. Even the DVD extras now i barely ever use. I want to see a good quality movie. HD-DVD For me!.

 

[Syrch]

I forgot to mention that I'd like to see blu-ray win when/if i get my PS3

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

The initial reviews indicate that the same titles look better on HD-DVD, likely because of the codec issue. At this point I will probably buy the HD-DVD add-on drive for my Xbox 360.

 

[Fingolfin269]

I'm in the HD-DVD corner for now.

Also, I'm fairly convinced that Sony had to put the Blu-Ray in the PS3 because they know their technology is inferior and this will be the main way to force it into homes.

 

[Thraxen]

HVD! HVD! HVD!

I guess if I had to choose between these two formats I'm pulling for HD-DVD. But neither is as big a jump as I would like... I wish we could just skip both and go straight to a better format like HVD.

 

[yukichigai]

Until I know the specifics of the video formats supported I can't really pick one or the other for sure. From what data is currently available, however, I'm in the Blu-Ray camp. I really, really don't like the all-but-mandatory video downscaling/obscuring if you use, say, Component video instead of HDMI + HCDP, but the storage specs clearly kick HD-DVD to the curb. Then again, if HD-DVD supports everything DVD does + more and Blu-Ray only supports a few choice resolutions then I'm going for HD-DVD. I like my burnable media formats to be flexible.

 

[jpeyton]

With the PS3, Sony is ensuring tens of millions of Blu-Ray players in consumers homes by the middle of next year.

Is HD-DVD going to be adopted as fast?

That said, I'll probably own an HD-DVDRW drive in my PC, and I'll make sure my Netflix queue will have HD-DVD rentals.

 

[Schfifty Five]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
With the PS3, Sony is ensuring tens of millions of Blu-Ray players in consumers homes by the middle of next year.

Is HD-DVD going to be adopted as fast?

That said, I'll probably own an HD-DVDRW drive in my PC, and I'll make sure my Netflix queue will have HD-DVD rentals.

LOL, tens of millions by mid next year? What are you smoking dude.

You know how long it will be before 10 million PS3's are sold worldwide? Longer than "middle of next year". And ten's of millions? hahahah.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
With the PS3, Sony is ensuring tens of millions of Blu-Ray players in consumers homes by the middle of next year.

Is HD-DVD going to be adopted as fast?

That said, I'll probably own an HD-DVDRW drive in my PC, and I'll make sure my Netflix queue will have HD-DVD rentals.

Sony is going to be lucky to have 1-2 million PS3s by the end of this year. What magical factory is going to get tens of millions out by the middle of next year?

MS is forecasting 10 million 360s by the end of this year. There will probably be no more than that many PS3s by the end of 2007.

 

[shilala]

I am firmly entrenched in the "I could give a ******" corner.