Blu-ray not delivering on their promises

[Jedi2016]

30GB will be enough to hold a high-definition film, yes. But it will have to be more compressed, and there will probably be noticable artifacts as a result.

You can fit a three and a half hour movie on a single DVD9. But if you spread the same movie over two discs, even though you're using the "same codec", the quality is vastly improved. LOTR demonstrated this quite clearly. I don't even have an HDTV yet, and my ancient 27" Sanyo displays a noticable difference when playing high-compression movies vs low-compression movies.

That comment about the "same codec" tells me you have no clue what you're talking about. Even the MP3 argument kills your statement. I happen to know quite a bit about how video compression works, thank you, since I work with it on a regular basis. Less compression = higher quality. There is no argument against this. A 50GB movie will look significantly better than the same movie compressed down to 30GB using the same codec.

So, let's ask another question... you keep asking us why we think Blu-Ray is better... so how about YOU tell US why you think HD-DVD is better? I can't wait to hear this.

 

[BMXTRIX]

What percentage of PS3 buyers do you think will actually have the display inputs to handle blu-ray movies? Do you think they'll have enough software out at launch to satisfy people? Just curious what you think about this.

errrmmmm... what is the market penetration of HDTV? I would be hard pressed to say that most, or even a high percentage will be able to enjoy the full capability of HD discs right out of the box. But, if I have a HD disc player and buy a disc, I will buy that disc in the format that plays in my player. You show me a disc that says "Blu-Ray/PS3 Compatible" and that's what I will buy. I think that a lot of consumers will buy that way as well. The majority? Perhaps not, but the biggest impact on HD disc production, manufacturing, and the amount of discs being produced will be based on what will make who the most money. That's just where I think BD has the market advantage. HD-DVD may be out first, but will be immediately eclipsed by BD. Most manufacturers are pretty gung-ho about saying (not officially) that BD looks like it will win this battle.

How much will be out on the initial release? Well, I would think that we will see as many titles as we usually see with a new game platform release... which I have no idea about. 20? 40? 60? Probably 2 or 3 that are actually worth owning. But, developers are making a ton of money on games on both PS/XBOX systems and it is an inevitability that a ton of games will be out before you know it. Some games will be ready to go on the PS3 simply because they are in full development on the XB360 as well.

It's all a bit off topic I guess. At this point, while Microsoft - which obviously has a vested interest in anything that can hurt Sony's market share, is making claims about Blu-Ray Disc not living up to expectations, the only company that has actually not met its goals has been HD-DVD.

To me I won't buy a HD player until after this battle is over... but like a million+ others, I will have a PS3 in my home ready to play Blu-Ray Discs.

 

[racquetman]

30GB will be enough to hold a high-definition film, yes. But it will have to be more compressed, and there will probably be noticable artifacts as a result.

You can fit a three and a half hour movie on a single DVD9. But if you spread the same movie over two discs, even though you're using the "same codec", the quality is vastly improved. LOTR demonstrated this quite clearly. I don't even have an HDTV yet, and my ancient 27" Sanyo displays a noticable difference when playing high-compression movies vs low-compression movies.

That comment about the "same codec" tells me you have no clue what you're talking about. Even the MP3 argument kills your statement. I happen to know quite a bit about how video compression works, thank you, since I work with it on a regular basis. Less compression = higher quality. There is no argument against this. A 50GB movie will look significantly better than the same movie compressed down to 30GB using the same codec.

So, let's ask another question... you keep asking us why we think Blu-Ray is better... so how about YOU tell US why you think HD-DVD is better? I can't wait to hear this.

Actually Jedi, I know exactly what I'm talking about. What do you know about the approved mandatory codecs for both formats? I'll tell you what I know. They are vastly superior to MPEG-2, and more compression can be used to achieve the same quality. That means you don't need nearly as much storage space to achieve the desired effect (i.e. stunning video).

Are you trying to tell me that Blu-ray is going to use the full 50 gigabytes to encode the movie's video portion? Please!! You sound like the ignorant one to me.

The fact that you are proclaiming Blu-ray's superiority when they haven't even finalized their specification makes me wonder whether you know what you're talking about.

I don't need to defend HD-DVD. I can't defend HD-DVD!! I haven't seen their product. You haven't seen Blu-ray's product. I can tell you that I will be shocked if their is a clear winner in the video quality department for either side.

Here is a quote for you from a staff writer at DVD Town:

"Both formats will fit a standard-length motion picture on a single disc, and both formats produce the same high-definition picture quality because the bit stream was standardized some time ago."

 

[racquetman]

errrmmmm... what is the market penetration of HDTV? I would be hard pressed to say that most, or even a high percentage will be able to enjoy the full capability of HD discs right out of the box. But, if I have a HD disc player and buy a disc, I will buy that disc in the format that plays in my player. You show me a disc that says "Blu-Ray/PS3 Compatible" and that's what I will buy. I think that a lot of consumers will buy that way as well. The majority? Perhaps not, but the biggest impact on HD disc production, manufacturing, and the amount of discs being produced will be based on what will make who the most money. That's just where I think BD has the market advantage. HD-DVD may be out first, but will be immediately eclipsed by BD. Most manufacturers are pretty gung-ho about saying (not officially) that BD looks like it will win this battle.

How much will be out on the initial release? Well, I would think that we will see as many titles as we usually see with a new game platform release... which I have no idea about. 20? 40? 60? Probably 2 or 3 that are actually worth owning. But, developers are making a ton of money on games on both PS/XBOX systems and it is an inevitability that a ton of games will be out before you know it. Some games will be ready to go on the PS3 simply because they are in full development on the XB360 as well.

It's all a bit off topic I guess. At this point, while Microsoft - which obviously has a vested interest in anything that can hurt Sony's market share, is making claims about Blu-Ray Disc not living up to expectations, the only company that has actually not met its goals has been HD-DVD.

To me I won't buy a HD player until after this battle is over... but like a million+ others, I will have a PS3 in my home ready to play Blu-Ray Discs.

What if HD-DVD movies are hybrids, with a DVD layer on one side and an HD-DVD layer on the other? People will buy these discs, use them immediately, and when prices come down on hardware, BAM, they buy an HD-DVD player and get to see the good stuff on the flip side!!

That is sort of like what is happening with dual discs. SACD and DVD-audio failed miserably, but for some reason this hybrid format is selling much better.

 

[racquetman]

This is a succinct statement of my thoughts on Blu-ray vs. HD-DVD:

"Now, who deserves to win? Who has the best format? A very hard question to answer. Many Web sites have been quick to announce Blu-ray the winner because Blu-ray seems to be the strongest of the two. I don’t agree and feel these sites have been caught up in Blu-ray’s publicity machine. A format should not be judged on technical specifications alone. It is an important factor, but in the case of Blu-ray and HD-DVD, the two formats will both be able to deliver the best-looking HD content possible. So one should also look at the cost for implementation and manufacturing. Here HD-DVD is much cheaper and faster to produce. Another thing that many people forget is the power of a name. Ordinary people know what DVD is about, and they can easily understand that HD-DVD has the benefits of DVD, but with HD content. With Blu-ray you have to explain all over again that it is like DVD, only better. Then, ask the public, why don’t you call it DVD?

No, I don’t think that Blu-ray should just role over and play dead, but I think that Sony (the main company behind Blu-ray) should have tried harder to work with the DVD Forum and to work toward a unified format instead of simply believing that whatever they came up with would be the best. Let’s pray for a miracle and that a unified format is still possible.

The last word has not been said in this saga, and we will continue to follow the developments closely and give you all the stories as they happen. So as they say – Stay tuned."

Henning Molbaek
Editor-in-Chief
HDDVD.org

 

[BMXTRIX]

I think that is a horrid statement. When the DVD forum went forward with HD-DVD and took the vote on what format to be used, Blu-Ray Disc had already been announced and in the works with a lot of backing. The DVD Forum specifically did not even introduce the Blu-Ray Disc standard as a possible format to consider.

They specifically introduced a competing format that would ensure that there would be posts and topics just like this. When a great idea came along with a lot of backing, they had the opportunity to get on board, instead the DVD Forum set up what may become the next format war.

The DVD Forum hasn't worked at all towards a single format and has specifically acted in the interest of a format that would not be compatible with Blu-Ray Disc.

How about BD/DVD dual format discs? Figure that'll work as well as HD-DVD/DVD discs. Or just a Blu-Ray Disc that already works in your PS3?

I think HD-DVD is blowing a lot of smoke to try to promote an inferior format. Production runs may cost a lot to set up initially, but movie studios will market what sells. If 1 million+ players are in people's homes by next Christmas due to PS3 and there are only 10,000 HD-DVD players - what would you want YOUR movie to come out on? Especially if you can do a dual format for either.

Sony, Panasonic, and a host of other very large and very serious companies are behind Blu-Ray. It isn't Mini-Disc... it isn't digital 8. Who will win? Dang, I don't even know if one will win. Who won in the DVD+/- format war? Exactly!

 

[Jedi2016]

What if HD-DVD movies are hybrids, with a DVD layer on one side and an HD-DVD layer on the other? People will buy these discs, use them immediately, and when prices come down on hardware, BAM, they buy an HD-DVD player and get to see the good stuff on the flip side!!

That is sort of like what is happening with dual discs. SACD and DVD-audio failed miserably, but for some reason this hybrid format is selling much better.

Blu-Ray has those as well. Unlike HD-DVD, however, both "versions" will be on the same side of the disc. Which means there won't be any problems for consumers trying to decipher which side of the disc they want to watch.. they just pop it in and it plays, on whichever player they're using.

Alandamp, you're not listening. I know the codecs have been standardized. That doesn't mean the actual compression settings are fixed. They can't possibly be fixed, because it varies from movie to movie, scene to scene, shot to shot. Hell, I've seen bitrates change in mid-shot, for cryin' out loud. You should do a bit of reading and find out the difference between codec and bitrate. The codec is nothing more than the software used to COmpress and DECompress the video stream. That doesn't mean that every film will use the exact same settings within those codecs. You're ignoring the evidence that's already been thrown at you. A 320Kb/sec MP3 is noticably better than a 128Kb/sec MP3. Same codec, different settings. LOTR on two discs is noticably better than the same film stuffed onto one disc. Same codec, different settings. This is fact. You cannot dispute it. And if you think that the extra space on Blu-Ray won't be utilized, then it's you who are ignorant.

When the reports start coming out, comparing films that are released on both formats, you'll see. When places like The Digital Bits start reporting on Blu-Ray's superior image quality, you'll see. Or when they complain about compression artifacts or softer images on HD-DVD, or when HD-DVD films have to be released on two discs to fit all the bonus material, while Blu-Ray can do it all on one disc, then you'll see.

Or, just forget the whole movie thing for a minute, and look at the other major use of optical discs... computer usage. And when it comes to computers, all your talk of codecs and standardization goes right out the window. The only thing that matters to a computer user is space. And HD-DVD simply cannot compete in that regard. Why in the hell would I install an HD-DVD burner on my system, when I would need to spend so much more on discs in order to back up my data? And don't think for a minute that I don't know anything about computer storage.. I work on computers, mainframes, and data storage systems for a living.

All I know is that over half of Hollywood and almost the entire computer industry (with the exception of some incredibly stupid companies like MS and Intel) are backing Blu-Ray. Hell, my own company will probably be using Blu-Ray once it's standardized. Our clients require massive amounts of storage. Currently, they're using 24GB tape drives (in addition to the insane hard drive storage). Very few of our clients use DVDs because they're too small, and HD-DVD offers no significant advantage in terms of space. BD does.

You have read the report from Dell and Hewlett-Packard refuting Microsoft's statement, yes?

 

[racquetman]

Alandamp, you're not listening. I know the codecs have been standardized. That doesn't mean the actual compression settings are fixed. They can't possibly be fixed, because it varies from movie to movie, scene to scene, shot to shot. Hell, I've seen bitrates change in mid-shot, for cryin' out loud. You should do a bit of reading and find out the difference between codec and bitrate. The codec is nothing more than the software used to COmpress and DECompress the video stream. That doesn't mean that every film will use the exact same settings within those codecs. You're ignoring the evidence that's already been thrown at you. A 320Kb/sec MP3 is noticably better than a 128Kb/sec MP3. Same codec, different settings. LOTR on two discs is noticably better than the same film stuffed onto one disc. Same codec, different settings. This is fact. You cannot dispute it. And if you think that the extra space on Blu-Ray won't be utilized, then it's you who are ignorant.

You really need to get off the mp3 analogy. I know the difference between a codec and the bitrate used for that codec. You're the one that is not listening. Listen now. I'm saying that HD-DVD and Blu-ray will be using the same codecs and the same bitrates to encode the video. If they don't, then I might be a happy man. Then there may be an obviously better format. That would be great. Keep in mind, that still doesn't end the war. Betamax was supposedly better quality than VHS and no one gave a damn.

When the reports start coming out, comparing films that are released on both formats, you'll see. When places like The Digital Bits start reporting on Blu-Ray's superior image quality, you'll see. Or when they complain about compression artifacts or softer images on HD-DVD, or when HD-DVD films have to be released on two discs to fit all the bonus material, while Blu-Ray can do it all on one disc, then you'll see.

I read the Digital Bits everyday. They sure aren't as arrogant as you. They don't sit there and sing the praises of Blu-ray. They have no idea which is the better format right now. This isn't MPEG-2 video we are dealing with. You have no idea what H.264 or VC-1 or VC-9 are going to look like, what bitrates will be used, how much storage space will be required, or anything else for that matter. Once again, do you really think the HD-DVD group developed a format vastly inferior to Blu-ray? Why would you bring it to market then? If they are that stupid, then I hope they lose.

Or, just forget the whole movie thing for a minute, and look at the other major use of optical discs... computer usage. And when it comes to computers, all your talk of codecs and standardization goes right out the window. The only thing that matters to a computer user is space. And HD-DVD simply cannot compete in that regard. Why in the hell would I install an HD-DVD burner on my system, when I would need to spend so much more on discs in order to back up my data? And don't think for a minute that I don't know anything about computer storage.. I work on computers, mainframes, and data storage systems for a living.

The computer industry is not going to decide the winner or this war. Put in all the Blu-ray drives you want. Have a good time.

All I know is that over half of Hollywood and almost the entire computer industry (with the exception of some incredibly stupid companies like MS and Intel) are backing Blu-Ray. Hell, my own company will probably be using Blu-Ray once it's standardized. Our clients require massive amounts of storage. Currently, they're using 24GB tape drives (in addition to the insane hard drive storage). Very few of our clients use DVDs because they're too small, and HD-DVD offers no significant advantage in terms of space. BD does.

I'm sure your company is almost as big as that stupid company Microsoft. If your "not stupid" company puts in Blu-ray, then it is all over for HD-DVD. That was sarcasm by the way.

You have read the report from Dell and Hewlett-Packard refuting Microsoft's statement, yes?

I'm sure you think Dell and HP are brilliant companies, unlike Microsoft and Intel. What did you want them to say? "Ya, Microsoft is right, Blu-ray sucks."

This is a war of words. Like I said before, I don't believe anything either side is saying right now. I started this thread to have some fun arguments. I guess that worked!!

 

[racquetman]

I think that is a horrid statement. When the DVD forum went forward with HD-DVD and took the vote on what format to be used, Blu-Ray Disc had already been announced and in the works with a lot of backing. The DVD Forum specifically did not even introduce the Blu-Ray Disc standard as a possible format to consider.

They specifically introduced a competing format that would ensure that there would be posts and topics just like this. When a great idea came along with a lot of backing, they had the opportunity to get on board, instead the DVD Forum set up what may become the next format war.

The DVD Forum hasn't worked at all towards a single format and has specifically acted in the interest of a format that would not be compatible with Blu-Ray Disc.

How about BD/DVD dual format discs? Figure that'll work as well as HD-DVD/DVD discs. Or just a Blu-Ray Disc that already works in your PS3?

I think HD-DVD is blowing a lot of smoke to try to promote an inferior format. Production runs may cost a lot to set up initially, but movie studios will market what sells. If 1 million+ players are in people's homes by next Christmas due to PS3 and there are only 10,000 HD-DVD players - what would you want YOUR movie to come out on? Especially if you can do a dual format for either.

Sony, Panasonic, and a host of other very large and very serious companies are behind Blu-Ray. It isn't Mini-Disc... it isn't digital 8. Who will win? Dang, I don't even know if one will win. Who won in the DVD+/- format war? Exactly!

The movies will have to be comparably priced to current DVDs or neither group is going anywhere. I don't care if you have a Blu-ray drive in your PS3 or not.

Sony has a history of making bad decisions. I realize they are not the only ones involved on their side, but they are certainly steering the ship. This content protection stuff might be just enough to tick everyone off. Sony is restructuring, putting all their eggs in the Blu-ray basket. I kinda hope they fall on their face. They had a chance to compromise and make one format, but I think they clearly think they are better so why not squash the competition and keep all the money for themselves. Sony wants the royalties that they didn't get from the original DVD format. They are just as greedy as any other corporation.

 

[Jedi2016]

Listen now. I'm saying that HD-DVD and Blu-ray will be using the same codecs and the same bitrates to encode the video. If they don't, then I might be a happy man. Then there may be an obviously better format. That would be great. Keep in mind, that still doesn't end the war. Betamax was supposedly better quality than VHS and no one gave a damn.

That's where you're mistaken. BD's maximum bitrate is 50% faster than HD-DVD. HD-DVD maxxes out at 36Mb/sec, BD can stream video at 54Mb/sec. I'm not sure what the difference is with video, but it's got people referring to BD drives as "1.5x".

As an example, here's some math:

A two-hour film encoded at maximum bitrate of 36Mb/sec will come to around 32.4GB in size, just over the capacity of HD-DVD. The VBR will take care of the inconsistancy and bring it under 30GB, so it'll fit. The same two-hour film encoded at 54Mb/sec comes to around 48.6GB, which will fit on a Blu-Ray disc (VBR will play a factor as well in order to make room for the audio tracks). But the end result is the same: that Blu-Ray will be able to use the extra room.

If you did read the Bits, you'd know that while Bill's professional analyses of the two formats is impartial, he personally prefers Blu-Ray, for the same reasons I do.

As for the hi-def codecs, you're right, I don't know exactly what they can do. I do have H.264, but I haven't run any compression tests on it yet. The last few weeks have been kind of hectic for me, and I haven't yet come up with any video footage with which to test it out.

As for inferior formats, yes, I do believe that they created an "inferior" format in HD-DVD. But not intentionally. They simply limited themselves by sticking too closely to the existing DVD format. Their main concern was to "upgrade" DVD, whereas the BDA actually created something new from scratch. I consider HD-DVD to be like the "middle" format between DVD and BD.


The computer industry is not going to decide the winner or this war. Put in all the Blu-ray drives you want. Have a good time.

I'm sure your company is almost as big as that stupid company Microsoft. If your "not stupid" company puts in Blu-ray, then it is all over for HD-DVD. That was sarcasm by the way.

Of course we're not as large. But we're not alone, either. And while the computer industry won't "decide" the format war, they will have an impact. It's going to cause some problems if HD-DVD wins the war, and you suddenly have a few million customers complaining that they have to "settle" for the smaller disc for their computer.

You're not going to be able to change my mind, you know. Unless the BDA makes some huge mistakes and totally beefcakes their format, it's going to the be the better.

 

[racquetman]

I certainly am not trying to change your mind. I don't pretend to know exactly what is going on behind closed doors with these formats. I am just presenting the other side.

Like I said, I hope you and BMXTRIX are right on the money. I hope Blu-ray is the high def video messiah!! If both formats tough it out, though, I fear it's going to be a stalemate. You or I unfortunately don't get decide which format is better. The "average joe" will decide whether one of these formats succeed, and unfortunately "joe" don't know video!! (I realize that was bad grammar, but I couldn't resist)

 

[Jedi2016]

You're quite right. But if BD does end up being noticably better than HD, then store employees are going to start saying so. When Joe Consumer asks which one is better, and the employee says "X format is definitely better than Y format", then he's going to buy X format. I just really think that X format is going to end up being Blu-Ray.

 

[abarry126]

The funny thing is if the internet had existed back in the early eighties and people had been informed about A/V like they are now, you would have had all these people debating the Beta/VHS formats. Just a random thought. Here's another:
If someone had a time machine and went into the future a couple of years and came back and then declared that HD-DVD was the winner of this format war, I would still buy a PS3 and so would just about every one else who is planning on buying one. The PS3 is THE trump card, the Ace of Spades or whatever you want to call it. It might have been Microsoft 5-20 years ago, but in this specific case, the PS3 is the 800lb gorilla.

 

[westcott]

NO The PVR is the 800# Gorilla

The PVR is actually the fastest growing segment of the market and it will heavily depend on a technology that can both read and write (a.k.a. HD DVD).

I agree that even I may buy a PS3 but I doubt it will be my primary video component. And I doubt it will have all the capabilities that one would require for true video recording and playback, but it will at least see the light of day by Christsmas, I hope.

Do not underestimate the power of first to market.

Their are a few HD equiped viewers out there chomping at the bit for more programming NOW!

I am hoping that the average 'Joe Apex Buyer' will care less about the better PQ and stay out of the market entirely and leave the format war to those mentioned above who know what quality video is.

I also do not think any of the studios are going to release dual DVD's (at least not on new release material). They want to make money over and over again and have no financial impetus to give you two formats for the price of one.

Lastly, if we are not careful, we will all be relegated to internet downloaded content that may or not be of near the quality that could be created by either of the new formats mentioned and will reak of copy protection and limited use. The studios would like nothing more than to cut out one of the middlemen and a tremendous amount of current overhead associated with "printed' material. Not to mention forcing studios to install digital cameras in all the theaters.

Who will win? At this point I could care less, but I hope someone is declared the winner soon!

 

[BMXTRIX]

I am hoping that the average 'Joe Apex Buyer' will care less about the better PQ and stay out of the market entirely and leave the format war to those mentioned above who know what quality video is.

See, I think he will - right after his kid goes out and buys a PS3 with a few million other kids. Then they can just buy PS3 compatible discs (one format) like all the other kids and people are doing.

Yeah - lots of eggs - one basket. I have no clue IF it will work and happen. But, my gut tells me that PS3 is the real gorilla in this particular battle and will throw a very mighty blow.

First to market means nothing if prices aren't reasonable and penetration isn't enormous. I can't believe that it will be. It may surprise me, but early adopters are crazy in this race. Nobody loses by purchasing a PS3 - even if BD falls flat. The game system will still be fun.

PVRs are great... I've got my cable version. Still can't record HD movies and take them with me anywhere at all. When bi-directional cable cards finally exist and a new HD-PVR is available direct to consumers with as much functionality as my Scientific Atlanta, (the new Sony doesn't come close), then I will consider it. But, I don't rent movies to watch on my PVR and pay-per-view is more for one movie than my monthly subscription to Blockbuster Online.

 

[abarry126]

Paramount to release on both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray

Paramount is seeing the writing on the wall, writing that says PS3:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/03/business/media/03disc.html?pagewanted=print

 

[racquetman]

Paramount is seeing the writing on the wall, writing that says PS3:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/03/business/media/03disc.html?pagewanted=print

If you remember, Samsung, a member of the Blu-ray group, announced that they were going to make a player that could read both Blu-ray and HD-DVD content. Does that mean that they saw the writing on the wall in favor of HD-DVD .

 

[abarry126]

I was only referring to the mention in the article, by the Paramount spokesperson, that the PS3 is a key advantage. I think there are similarities in Paramount's and Samsung's moves. I believe both are aimed at putting pressure on HD-DVD and Blu-Ray to compromise. But I do think this means more to the Blu-Ray side because the format that has the most content and market penetration will win. The PS3 will garantee the market penetration side of the equation, and the content side has now tipped in Blu-Ray's favor. I'll bet similar announcements from Universal and Warner Bros are not far off.