Blu-ray/HD-DVD format war discussion thread.......

[Aylmar]

Originally Posted by Synovia

The entire world will need to be rewired with fiber before this sort of stuff is even a possibility. It'll happen, but 10 years is about as soon as you can hope.

There is a ton of dark fiber in the US right now. The issue is the last mile, not the backbones and general network routes. Of course, you probably already knew this, but your statement above doesn't make that clear.

[Synovia]

Originally Posted by Aylmar

There is a ton of dark fiber in the US right now. The issue is the last mile, not the backbones and general network routes. Of course, you probably already knew this, but your statement above doesn't make that clear.

Right, but the last mile is exactly the problem, and its going to be a long time before 1) all that stuff is replaced, and 2) large percentages of people can afford extremely fast internet, and have large HDTVs. We're still at well less than 50% HDTV adoption rate, and your average internet user is still looking at less than 1.5mbps. We need 30mbps internet everywhere before this is even remotely feasible.


I'm not going to pay for Broadcast quality HD when Blu-Ray is SOOOO much nicer looking and sounding.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Aylmar

There is a ton of dark fiber in the US right now. The issue is the last mile, not the backbones and general network routes. Of course, you probably already knew this, but your statement above doesn't make that clear.

I'm sure you know this as well, but that's no different than the problems we have with current internet connections. DSL and cable internet speeds can vary wildly based on distance from central offices, number of users in an area, etc. The time that EF27 speaks of where people get the high and consistant speeds needed to send HD through to a large number of homes is still in the 10+ year future.

[Synovia]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

cable internet speeds can vary wildly based on distance from central offices, number of users in an area, etc.

My cable connection (6mbps IIRC) bogs down during peak times, and I get maybe 10% of my bandwith at max. Thats with users doing typical downloading/surfing/etc.

Think about how much bandwith we'll actually need when a large percentage of users are downloading 30gb files.

[Aylmar]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

I'm sure you know this as well, but that's no different than the problems we have with current internet connections. DSL and cable internet speeds can vary wildly based on distance from central offices, number of users in an area, etc. The time that EF27 speaks of where people get the high and consistant speeds needed to send HD through to a large number of homes is still in the 10+ year future.

Of course. I've heard from friends that have it that FiOS doesn't have that level of variance, though. DOCSIS 3.0 is coming, too, which should ease some of the congestion issues for the cable companies. MPEG-4 needs what, 2Mbs to give you damn good video quality on a stream? I just don't think it's as far away as you think. I'm not saying tomorrow or even next year, but 10+ years is an eternity in the Internet/broadband space.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by Synovia

I'm not going to pay for Broadcast quality HD when Blu-Ray is SOOOO much nicer looking and sounding.

You should realize that you are probably in the minority here. DVDs are currently outselling HD media by almost 2 orders of magnitude (if the article is correct). The general public is happy enough with DVD quality that they haven't jumped to HD yet. Now imagine the choices are Blu-Ray, or DVD quality movies on demand. With a decent selection, that will put a dent in HD media sales. Broadcast HD will give a small quality increase over DVD, and full HD (ala Blu-Ray) will give an even smaller quality increase.

Serving Blu-Ray quality over the internet is going to be a long way off, but serving DVD quality isn't nearly as far...and will be good enough for most of the viewing public.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by BrianD

Serving Blu-Ray quality over the internet is going to be a long way off, but serving DVD quality isn't nearly as far...and will be good enough for most of the viewing public.

I don't think anyone disagrees with that. With that said, the distance between DVD and HD sales should close pretty rapidly. In Japan, where the format war has been all but over for a year, Blu-ray player sales now account for over 25% of all media player sales in the past month. That's a sharp rise from the 6% of all sales that BR players had in October of 2007. Similar jumps are predicted over the rest of 2008 now that the format war is finally resolved here in the U.S. The only reason that HD media hasn't seen similar growth in the U.S. is because of the format war. There's still going to be plenty of people that use DVD's or download, but there's going to be a pretty large surge in BR players as well, especially with the PS3 carrying a BR player.

[Synovia]

Originally Posted by Aylmar

Of course. I've heard from friends that have it that FiOS doesn't have that level of variance, though. DOCSIS 3.0 is coming, too, which should ease some of the congestion issues for the cable companies. MPEG-4 needs what, 2Mbs to give you damn good video quality on a stream? I just don't think it's as far away as you think. I'm not saying tomorrow or even next year, but 10+ years is an eternity in the Internet/broadband space.

Cable didn't have that variability 5-10 years ago. Then node populations wen't up. Its GREAT for FIOS users right now because their pipes are all empty, and no one else is in the way.


And no, the SOUND for blu-ray takes up more than 2Mbs on most disks. HD-DVD peaked at 30mbps and blu-ray can go up to 54Mbps. Disks with video rates in the 40s are here.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by Vinatieri for Prez

As stated, a basic set top box will do all of this. But we're still talking several years out.

Blu-Ray will have its day for now, but its death is already on the horizon.

With this logic, CDs would be dead now with the advent of iTunes. There's always going to be a market for physical media - even if the equivalent of "iTunes for HD movies" appears in the next 2-3 years. Plus, there are people out there that have hundreds of DVDs in their collection, there's no conceivable future where you can store 100 HD DVDs on one box.

I think the only real competition for Blu-Ray disks would be the Amazon idea for HD discussed above. You buy a "license" for a movie on a player, then you can redownload and watch the movie whenever you like. Even then, it's a bit of a pain to redownload every time you want to watch it. With the price of Blu Ray movies going down, it's less of an issue (already dropped to $19.99 for some titles at retail stores). The option may end up being:

1. Buying a new Blu-Ray DVD for $15-25
OR
2. Buying an HD license online for $10-15.

Even given these options (4-5 years before they are even setup), I doubt a ton of people flock to option 2 because of the hassel/network/equipment required to handle it. Personally, I would gladly pay an extra $10 to have a hard-copy Blu Ray disk I could play on my PC or different TVs than just a license for one box I always have to watch it on. You'd end up being without most of your movie library if you travel/go to a friend's.

[Synovia]

Originally Posted by BrianD

You should realize that you are probably in the minority here. DVDs are currently outselling HD media by almost 2 orders of magnitude (if the article is correct). The general public is happy enough with DVD quality that they haven't jumped to HD yet.

The same could be said of VHS->DVD ten years ago.

I felt the same way 2 or 3 months ago when I bought a PS3 (bought it because my DVD player broke). Popped in a copy of Ratatouille on BD, thought it looked great, then tried to watch a movie on DVD and just went HOLY CRAP, THIS LOOKS AWFUL.

[Synovia]

Originally Posted by BrianD

With a decent selection, that will put a dent in HD media sales. Broadcast HD will give a small quality increase over DVD, and full HD (ala Blu-Ray) will give an even smaller quality increase.

DVD quality on-demand already IS available to the public. Its not cutting into DVD sales any.

"Broadcast HD will give a small quality increase over DVD"

Have you ever seen HD content?

[Daimyo]

Originally Posted by Arles

Even given these options (4-5 years before they are even setup), I doubt a ton of people flock to option 2 because of the hassel/network/equipment required to handle it. Personally, I would gladly pay an extra $10 to have a hard-copy Blu Ray disk I could play on my PC or different TVs than just a license for one box I always have to watch it on. You'd end up being without most of your movie library if you travel/go to a friend's.

Amazon Unbox isn't tied to a single device. You can have the content on two different devices at any given time and when you delete it from one device the license it used is freed up. Currently it only allows PCs and Tivos as viewing devices, but that's not a flaw in the model. if anyone can duplicate that model with Hi-def content and open it up to more devices it ould be huge. Netflix seems to be doing something similar with LG I don't think its HD either.

[Synovia]

Originally Posted by Arles

1. Buying a new Blu-Ray DVD for $15-25
OR
2. Buying an HD license online for $10-15..

As to these prices, I haven't paid over about $10 for a DVD in years. CDs are more expensive than DVDs. I have no question that in a couple years, blu-ray disks will be just as cheap. Its just simple economy of scale.

[Aylmar]

Originally Posted by Synovia

And no, the SOUND for blu-ray takes up more than 2Mbs on most disks. HD-DVD peaked at 30mbps and blu-ray can go up to 54Mbps. Disks with video rates in the 40s are here.

You know as well as I do that data stream rates for the actual media are not relevant to this discussion. No one is talking about a world where a Blu-Ray player is running on one side of the network and you're watching the uncompressed Blu-Ray stream it provides over the Internet. It doesn't make sense and would only be desired by a very tiny portion of the market. If you want streams, that data stream is going to have to compressed at the source and then decompressed or converted back by some type of device inside your home. Will it be full Blu-Ray at that point? No. Will anyone other than really devoted audio and video guys care (because it WILL still be some type of HD - maybe even 1080p)? No. If they do, they download the full blown disk image. Let's say the channel bonding in DOCSIS 3 gives you a 20Mbs connection. Now we're talking pick a movie, go eat dinner, watch the movie in all it's glory when you are done. Two years down the road, it's even faster. Just my opinion, of course, but we haven't really reached a huge plateau in the ability to keep speeds going up...

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by Synovia

The same could be said of VHS->DVD ten years ago.

It isn't the same comparison. The difference between VHS and DVD was much greater than the difference between DVD and HD. Also, VHS quality degraded each time it was watched while DVDs don't degrade with each viewing.

Originally Posted by Synovia

DVD quality on-demand already IS available to the public. Its not cutting into DVD sales any.

"Broadcast HD will give a small quality increase over DVD"

Have you ever seen HD content?

Of course I've seen HD content, and I love it. I would much prefer HD to DVD. However, upscaled DVD is not bad. Even on my 92" projected screen, I thoroughly enjoy upscaled DVDs, and on a side by side comparison, the difference between DVD and HD is noticeable, but not huge. I'm in the process of ripping all my DVDs to a PC for viewing on the projector. A streaming DVD service would give me the same solution without all the storage hassles. A set-top box that could handle streaming media would take the complexity out for normal movie-watchers too.

Also keep in mind that we here tend to be more technically savvy than the general public. HD penetration in American households is still small, and plenty of people still watch movies in a TV/room configuration where quality differences are even less noticeable.

Having said all of that, people still like to own things. That is going to be a tough thing to overcome.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Arles

1. Buying a new Blu-Ray DVD for $15-25
OR
2. Buying an HD license online for $10-15.

It's all about when, where and how you buy. I'm averaging around $13 per disc on my Blu-ray collection right now, and that's either right at, or just shy of, three dozen movies.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by BrianD

Having said all of that, people still like to own things. That is going to be a tough thing to overcome.

Yep, that sums it up in a nutshell.

[Synovia]

Originally Posted by BrianD

It isn't the same comparison. The difference between VHS and DVD was much greater than the difference between DVD and HD.

And that I thoroughly disagree with.


Have you seen any of the early adopter DVDs? They're no better in quality than good VHS tapes. Worse than some VHS. The difference in DVD and HD is astounding. They're not even comparable. The colors are better, the sound is better, the picture is more clear, etc.



I took my PS3 over to my parents house (they watch movies on a 46" Sammy 1080p lcd). They had been watching upscaled DVDs. My MOM's immediate responce to blu-ray (ratatouille) was "holy crap"

Her initial responce to DVD was nowhere near as dramatic.

[Synovia]

Originally Posted by Aylmar

No one is talking about a world where a Blu-Ray player is running on one side of the network and you're watching the uncompressed Blu-Ray stream it provides over the Internet. It doesn't make sense and would only be desired by a very tiny portion of the market. If you want streams, that data stream is going to have to compressed at the source and then decompressed or converted back by some type of device inside your home.

The problem is, Blu-Ray, and HD-DVD already ARE compressed, most with VC-1, which is a very efficient compression codec. If you start compressing more, you start losing more quality, seeing more artifacts, etc.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by Synovia

And that I thoroughly disagree with.

If you can't agree with that, we probably aren't going to agree on anything.

Have you seen any of the early adopter DVDs? They're no better in quality than good VHS tapes. Worse than some VHS. The difference in DVD and HD is astounding. They're not even comparable. The colors are better, the sound is better, the picture is more clear, etc.

I was an early adopter of DVDs back before half of the movie studios were allowing their movies to be put on DVDs. There were some poor quality DVD transfers, but the vast majority of early DVDs weren't even close to VHS. And once again I am going to claim that you are in the minority with this opinion. I don't think I've ever heard anyone try to claim that the incremental difference between DVD and HD was greater than that between VHS and DVD.

I took my PS3 over to my parents house (they watch movies on a 46" Sammy 1080p lcd). They had been watching upscaled DVDs. My MOM's immediate responce to blu-ray (ratatouille) was "holy crap"

Her initial responce to DVD was nowhere near as dramatic.

Isn't Ratatouille widely considered one of the best Blu-Ray discs available? You don't consider it disingenuous to talk about a bad early DVD transfer and a great Blu-Ray offering? If you went pack to your parent's house with a DVD of Ratatouille on DVD and told them you put the Blu-Ray in, do you think they would realize that you really didn't?

[Arles]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

It's all about when, where and how you buy. I'm averaging around $13 per disc on my Blu-ray collection right now, and that's either right at, or just shy of, three dozen movies.

yeah, the amazon deals are great. I was more talking about the "grab and go" retail price. And, in the 2-3 years it takes the download option to fully manifest in HD, I bet the Blu-Ray retail store price is often in the $15-25 range. At that point, it's a tough sell to have a download-only option make any real dent in Blu-Ray sales when the difference is only $5-10. Just like with iTunes to CDs, giving up the physical media isn't always worth the reduced price to people - and the comparison from iTunes to CDs with download to Blu-Ray is a much tougher case as the storage requirements are so much more intense.

Also the VCR-DVD to DVD-HD argument seems somewhat irrelevant. People want "the best they can afford". So, when Blu Ray players are in the $150-200 range and Blu Ray disks are in the $20 range, most people will start moving to it. It will be like HDTVs. There was much more of a difference between black-and-white to color than CRT to LCD/Plasma/DLP, yet a lot people are making the switch to HDTV as the prices go down. The same will happen with Blu Ray.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Blu-ray sales reportedly heavy after HD-DVD announcement........

http://www.t3.com/news/blu-ray-playe...en-fold?=35296

Blu-ray player sales up seven-fold

Play.com big-boss-man tells T3 that new Blu-ray punters have sky-rocketed, since the end of the format war.

Those cagey folk who refused to hedge their bets in Hi-Def Match showdown sure didn't waste much time once Toshiba closed the door on HD-DVD, this week.

Play's Stuart Rowe informs us that on VHD (Victory in Hi-Def) Day this Tuesday, the company sold more Blu-ray players than in the previous week combined.

"There was a seven fold increase in Blu-ray player sales, on that day alone." said the Chief Operating Officer.

"People have been waiting a long time to move into the Hi-Def era and now they have the confidence that this is going to be the format.

"Our cheapest player (The Samsung BD-P1400/XEU) is now £199 and you'd expect the prices to come down further as Sony try and build the brand. It's all great news for the consumer."

Play was among the first to react to Toshiba's white flag on Tuesday by knocking £40 off their cheapest HD-DVD player, making it just £79.99 - the first of what Stuart is predicting will be a slew of bargain basement offers.

"There's going to be a lot of great deals out there in the coming weeks. HD-DVD player prices will fall in line with DVD players with people now buying them more as great DVD players with the capacity for upscaling."

Don't expect to be finding too many HD-DVD flicks on the clearance stock shelves just yet however...

"There are no real plans for us to slash prices on the disks," says Stuart. "A lot of people have the players and collectors will keep buying them for the time being."

[cartman]

Originally Posted by Arles

Also the VCR-DVD to DVD-HD argument seems somewhat irrelevant. People want "the best they can afford". So, when Blu Ray players are in the $150-200 range and Blu Ray disks are in the $20 range, most people will start moving to it. It will be like HDTVs. There was much more of a difference between black-and-white to color than CRT to LCD/Plasma/DLP, yet a lot people are making the switch to HDTV as the prices go down. The same will happen with Blu Ray.

The big difference I see is that folks went out and bought DVD versions of the movies they had on VHS. I just don't see that happening with this generation of players, esp. since DVDs upscale on the players. Most people aren't going to buy a Blu-Ray version of a title that they already have on DVD.

[Kodos]

We can look forward to George Lucas releasing 70 slightly different versions of Star Wars on Blu Ray now...

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by cartman

The big difference I see is that folks went out and bought DVD versions of the movies they had on VHS. I just don't see that happening with this generation of players, esp. since DVDs upscale on the players. Most people aren't going to buy a Blu-Ray version of a title that they already have on DVD.

Most people continued to buy/use VHS for a few years after the introduction of DVD. It's no different. There are going to be some people that jump right in and some people that continue to use DVD's for some time. The adoption rate will continue to improve as HDTV's increase in number in households.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Most people continued to buy/use VHS for a few years after the introduction of DVD. It's no different. There are going to be some people that jump right in and some people that continue to use DVD's for some time. The adoption rate will continue to improve as HDTV's increase in number in households.

Tapes degrade the more they are played. Discs do not. You couldn't play a VHS tape in a DVD player, but you can play a DVD in a Blu-Ray player, with a likely better picture than your existing DVD player. It is an incredibly different scenario.

I'm not discussing adoption rate, I'm discussing library conversion. For people with a significant investment in DVD titles, they simply aren't going to re-buy everything in Blu-Ray, as was eventually the case from VHS to DVD.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by cartman

Tapes degrade the more they are played. Discs do not. You couldn't play a VHS tape in a DVD player, but you can play a DVD in a Blu-Ray player, with a likely better picture than your existing DVD player. It is an incredibly different scenario.

I'm not discussing adoption rate, I'm discussing library conversion. For people with a significant investment in DVD titles, they simply aren't going to re-buy everything in Blu-Ray, as was eventually the case from VHS to DVD.

I personally didn't rebuy any of my old VHS movies. I just copied them onto DVD's. I think your response to this would be that people won't copy DVD's onto BR discs and I'd certainly agree with that. But I'll be buying all future releases on BR. With the constant sales on Amazon, it's not all that expensive to do.

[Synovia]

Originally Posted by cartman

The big difference I see is that folks went out and bought DVD versions of the movies they had on VHS. I just don't see that happening with this generation of players, esp. since DVDs upscale on the players.

Upscaling doesn't do ANYTHING. ANY HDTV will upscale any content you put on it. Moving the upscaling to the player may lead to minor increases in quality, but its still 480i content, and you can't change that.

Take a look at the Fifth Element. Its widely considered a reference quality DVD. Upscaled it looks good. Now slap in the blu-ray (standard quality, not even that high). The differences are drastic.

[Synovia]

damnit, the VC-1 file got taken down...let me see if I can find another


http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...lement&page=12

That thread has good stuff. You can see clear difference in a 10 year old film in a reference quality DVD, and a decent blu-ray

[cartman]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Blu-ray sales reportedly heavy after HD-DVD announcement........

http://www.t3.com/news/blu-ray-playe...en-fold?=35296

Again, they seem to be stuck in "ratios". From the article, it said there was a seven-fold increase in the number of players. From 10,000 to 70,000 is impressive. From 100 to 700, not so much. When are they going to start releasing true numbers, instead of ratios and percentages?

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Interesting article about the players in the HD format war and their motivations. Article goes pretty in-depth discussing how Microsoft actually pushed Toshiba to continue with the format when Toshiba was ready to shut down HD-DVD in 2005. Also discusses that Microsoft, not Toshiba, was the agressive marketer with the intent to slow down the adoption of Blu-ray as the standard format.

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/0...ath-of-hd-dvd/

Another article from 2 years ago detailing the Sony suspicion that MS had alterior motives in supporting HD-DVD.

http://www.businessweek.com/technolo...9074_tc024.htm

[Daimyo]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Interesting article about the players in the HD format war and their motivations. Article goes pretty in-depth discussing how Microsoft actually pushed Toshiba to continue with the format when Toshiba was ready to shut down HD-DVD in 2005. Also discusses that Microsoft, not Toshiba, was the agressive marketer with the intent to slow down the adoption of Blu-ray as the standard format.

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/0...ath-of-hd-dvd/

Wow... talk about a biased article (and it doesn't even bother to list sources). I almost stopped reading at this

None of these efforts hid the reality that Microsoft wanted to simply duplicate in media what it had done to the PC desktop: copy existing technology, add proprietary hooks, and then sit back and tax the industry with software fees without adding any value.

(my bold)

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Daimyo

Wow... talk about a biased article (and it doesn't even bother to list sources). I almost stopped reading at this

(my bold)

You want to explain what part of that comment isn't accurate? That's Microsoft's MO perfectly stated. It's a very profitable MO, I might add.

[Fidatelo]

I think it's pretty hard to argue that MS has not added any value to the PC desktop...

[Daimyo]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

You want to explain what part of that comment isn't accurate? That's Microsoft's MO perfectly stated. It's a very profitable MO, I might add.

If you believe that Microsoft has not added any value in the desktop market then we simply lack any common ground for a rational discussion and it would simply be a waste of time to try to have one. *shurg*

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

I think it's pretty hard to argue that MS has not added any value to the PC desktop...

Well, if the quibble is using the word 'any' rather than 'much', I'll agree with that. Either way, Microsoft and internally-developed innovative products just don't go together.

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by Daimyo

If you believe that Microsoft has not added any value in the desktop market then we simply lack any common ground for a rational discussion and it would simply be a waste of time to try to have one. *shurg*

Welcome to the club.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

Welcome to the club.

Please, do rattle off the expansive list of innovative products that Microsoft has designed in-house without cannabalizing other companies ideas/products.

[Daimyo]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Please, do rattle off the expansive list of innovative products that Microsoft has designed in-house without cannabalizing other companies ideas/products.

That's not the point you made earlier. Sure Microsoft takes ideas from other companies. Guess what? Every successful company does that.

How many companies has Oracle purchased in the last year? 43? 44? Symantec? EMC? They all do it. Do you really want a world where one company innovates and then no one else builds on that? You want every company to build everything from scratch? That's just not realistic or productive.

The point is that Microsoft does add value. They add a ton of value and that's why they've been so successful.

What operating system(s) do you use most? What office productivity software do you use most?

[cartman]

MS has licensed tons of technology, but instead of licensing and sitting on it, they have improved and expanded the technology in-house. Numerous examples exist of them purchasing a small, niche company and bringing the product into the mainstream. To name a few:

Flight Simulator
SQL Server
FrontPage
PowerPoint
Access
DirectX
IE
Intellimice
Natural Keyboards
Visual Basic/C++

These were improved and expanded by the in-house developers at Microsoft. It's just smart business if it is cheaper to buy a company that has already started developing a concept you are interested in versus starting your own initiative completely from scratch.

[Arles]

This "true innovation" vs "making practical products from other ideas" argument is always a lost cause. There's very few instances of true innovation in any major company - mostly because they lack the time/desire to really focus on "pie in the sky" ideas. Just look at the Playstation. Everyone thinks it was some brain-child of Kuturagi. When, in essence, the original playstation started as a CD-ROM add-on for the Super Nintendo. Nintendo backed out on Sony after most of the dev work was done, so Sony went ahead and finished up the Add-on as the PS1. Was that true innovation by Sony? Or was that similar to what Gates did with QDOS to DOS?

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Looks like Profile 2.0 Blu-ray players should be plentiful by June 2008. Sony announces their first 2.0-ready player..........

http://www.homemediamagazine.com/new...ticle_ID=12178

Panasonic also plans on a May release for their first 2.0 player.

[cartman]

So Blu-Ray finally gets the some of the features HD-DVD had since launch.

[Aylmar]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Looks like Profile 2.0 Blu-ray players should be plentiful by June 2008. Sony announces their first 2.0-ready player..........

http://www.homemediamagazine.com/new...ticle_ID=12178

Panasonic also plans on a May release for their first 2.0 player.

Isn't the PS3 a technically 2.0 ready player? It meets all the requirements, right? Or did you mean first stand-alone?

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Aylmar

Isn't the PS3 a technically 2.0 ready player? It meets all the requirements, right? Or did you mean first stand-alone?

Yes, I meant the first stand-alone 2.0 ready players. You are correct that the PS3 is fully upgradable to 2.0.

[Synovia]

Originally Posted by cartman

So Blu-Ray finally gets the some of the features HD-DVD had since launch.

Yeah, those same features that nobody (outside fanboys on either side) gives a shit about. Nobody cares that a movie can connect to the internet. They want to watch the movie.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by Synovia

Yeah, those same features that nobody (outside fanboys on either side) gives a shit about. Nobody cares that a movie can connect to the internet. They want to watch the movie.

So why even bother adding it to the 2.0 spec and announcing it then?

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by cartman

So why even bother adding it to the 2.0 spec and announcing it then?

To satisfy the very small group of video geeks who do care. It's a good feature......it's just one that very few consumers will actual use or even care about. As Synovia said, it's a great argument point for a fanboy catfight, but it's not all that relevant in the grand scheme of things.

[Daimyo]

Kind of like all that additional storage BR has (compared to HDDVD) that movies don't need?

[Synovia]

Originally Posted by Daimyo

Kind of like all that additional storage BR has (compared to HDDVD) that movies don't need?

I remember people saying that same stuff about DVD, and it not being needed.

I've got several movies on BD50 disks, that are 35+GB, and they all look great. .. better than any of the HD-DVD stuff I've seen.


That extra space is being used for a reason. Could the movie be compressed to 25gb? Sure, but why would you want it to be??