You know both the Blu-Ray and HD-DVD formats may fail.

[DarthRaevyn]

Even thought both boast more storage space than DVD's and have a lot of support from major companies both formats may still fail. The failure may be due to the reasons being that neither format currently is not necessary for movies, video-games, or music. I suspect within 3-5 years we will slowly be seeing the necessity for larger storage spaces. However that's 3-5 years and in 5 years new next-gen consoles will be released. The benefits of these formats would be useful for the next next generation.

That and I'm pretty happy with DVD's. The transition from VHS to DVD was quite necessary and in fact was a major leap.

1. DVD's did not require rewinding
2. Picture quality was extremely superior to VHS
3. Cheaper
4. Held much more space
5. Conveniently small and easy to store.

The only reason I see to get either HD-DVD or Blu-Ray is more storage space. However with the recent development of hard-drives and newer formats both HD-DVD and BR's future look bleak. Hard-drives with some few terabytes are hitting the market around 2007-2008.

In terms of gaming the most advanced and gigantic game out right now such as World of Warcraft, Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, Half-Life 2 only reach a maximum of 5GB. As of right now there aren't any games that require that much space. Maybe in the next 5 years which is when HD-DVD and BR should have been pushed. It's too early.

[thunderhawk]

Not if they put more HD content on the market. And they will.
Within the coming years, the HD market will explode. Look for yourself.

And yes, DVD did have more advantages over VHS then BD will over DVD... It was smaller, the picture quality was better and they didn't require rewinding.
BD now, offers better picture quality and more space. BUT BD offers HD and DVD doesn't.

However...

Despite DVD's better quality, VHS is still widely used in home recording of television programs, due to the large installed base and the lower cost of VHS recorders. The commercial success of DVD recording and re-writing has been hindered by a number of factors including:-

* A reputation for being temperamental and occasionally unreliable.
* Shorter recording time: 2 hours on a single-layer disc (up to 4 or 6 hours with higher compression) versus 3 (NTSC) or 5 (PAL/SECAM) hours (up to 15 hours using PAL EP) on a VHS tape. Dual layer recorders and media have not yet become commonplace.
* Buyers are wary of another format war amongst the five formats (-R, +R, -RW, +RW, -RAM).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VHS

I really hope the above 3 factors won't go up for Blu-ray Disc...

[DarthRaevyn]

Yeah the HD era is coming, but isn't here yet. Most homes still have a standard television. Very few people actually understand HD and its various resolutions. I feel bad for the consumer because the average joe will go into Best Buy and ask the employees for the "best" HDTV there. The moron employee will try and sell them the most expensive HDTV there is which may not be the best.

The VHS some 25 years out on the market. The DVD came out 10 years ago. People have hundreds of DVD's and players. Are they ready to shell out in the beginning a thousand dollars plus hundreds more to replace their DVD collection and DVD player? Is the quality/storages space that much of a change to warrant a purchase?

In 5 years when HDTV's become insanely popular and it becomes widespread in the United States is when we will need a new format. 5 years from now when the next-generation of consoles come out.

[thunderhawk]

Good question.

It'll probably continue. It happened in history, why not in future?

[Sony_Blue-Ray]

The format needs to come out. The early adopters are what set the pace of new formats. If BD gets embraced by the early adopters you will see prices slowely fall making it more affordable in years to come. And with this type of storage capability it opens up new posibility's in terms of depth of game. Giving game developers this type of space today to work with will only bring huge changes tomorow in the way games look, feal and play.

Bring it on Blue-Ray Im ready!

[marzetta7]

Originally Posted by DarthRaevyn

Yeah the HD era is coming, but isn't here yet. Most homes still have a standard television. Very few people actually understand HD and its various resolutions. I feel bad for the consumer because the average joe will go into Best Buy and ask the employees for the "best" HDTV there. The moron employee will try and sell them the most expensive HDTV there is which may not be the best.

The VHS some 25 years out on the market. The DVD came out 10 years ago. People have hundreds of DVD's and players. Are they ready to shell out in the beginning a thousand dollars plus hundreds more to replace their DVD collection and DVD player? Is the quality/storages space that much of a change to warrant a purchase?

In 5 years when HDTV's become insanely popular and it becomes widespread in the United States is when we will need a new format. 5 years from now when the next-generation of consoles come out.

Oh, it is indeed here. And it will be in full marketing hype come June. Any delay in early HD adoption will be more cause for the Blu-ray format to be the victor in this format war with HD DVD. I say this because, regardless, if standalone HD DVD and Blu-ray players sell slowly, the PS3 with a built-in Blu-ray drive will sell fast most assuredly, making Blu-ray the de facto standard by Blu-ray drive placement into homes alone (6 million by March 2007).

Furthermore, consumers will not need to shell out hundreds more to replace their DVD collection as Blu-ray drives are backward compatible, and in most instances will upconvert the resolution of standard DVDs to 1080P/1080i. Also, considering that the Digital Television Transition Act of 2005 will spell the end of analog for those older TV sets by 2008...

http://www.benton.org/index.php?q=node/446

I think a lot of consumers will decide to just buy a new TV than run out and buy a digital converter box, especially since by 2008 HDTVs (LCDs or Plasmas) ought to be a whole lot cheaper.

I'd also like to add that, in terms of Blu-ray, not only will you be getting more storage space, and better picture quality, but you'll also be getting better durability than current DVDs and better interactive features.

Also, in 5 years, when the next gaming consoles come out, I bet you'll see better hardware of course, but you'll also see a faster Blu-ray drive as that is the beauty of the Blu-ray format, it is a format with future technology kept in mind. It is progressive.

[hmurchison]

I'd also like to add that, in terms of Blu-ray, not only will you be getting more storage space, and better picture quality,

I concur with the statement about more storage but how do we quantify the better picture quality statement? Isn't that a factor of the CODEC and encoding process? With both platforms standardized on MPEG2, VC-1 and AVC/h.264 I don't see where a qualitative platform improvement is really all that likely.

[zombie]

It remains to be seen if the studios supporting Blu-ray will use it's extra capacity to it's full potential. With Blu-ray there's no excuse for mediocre transfers of any movie.

[phloyd]

I don't expect picture quality to be a factor in the comparisons.

The key points in my view are:

1) Recordability

2) Capacity

3) Player and movie costs

4) Studio support

5) PS3 boosting customer count for Bluray

and to a lesser extent player performance/bugs/issues.

The first two are the biggest factors for me though that is possibly not typical.

I am getting to the point though where the arguments are tired and I just want the bluray toys and what others do is of little concern

If I can get some number of released movies and record my own fair use recordings to disc I will be happy.

[AV_Integrated]

While it is possible it will fail, I really don't think that it will.

WHY?

Well, HD audio formats such as DVD-A and SACD tend to require better speakers to take advantage of the sound quality. This jump in quality is often marginal to many people who are happy with their sound and don't have the technical expertise and equipment for the best possible sound where quality will be noticed.

While, the same could be said for HD video discs, the absolute reality is that more and more people ARE buying a ton of HD displays that are 1080p native. They are buying HD cable and satellite. They are buying upconverting DVD players to get the most of those DVD discs.

The key will be whether or not HD disc formats and players can reach a price point where they become an obvious choice for the average joe to purchase instead of a DVD player. I think the early adopters may drive some of it, but this is definitely where PS3 puts a ton of these next generation players into millions (and millions) of homes.

Obviously, PS3 playback quality will have to be a wait and see thing BEFORE we start making judgements on it. But, the install base is almost a guarantee. It will be more about displays needing to catch up with the player instead of the player needing to catch up with the displays.

But, it won't be a short road. DVD was NOT a short road. It will take years for HD discs to really cut into DVD sales in any serious level and it will require a LOT more HD displays to be sold for it to happen. But, people SEE the quality. They see the display look like a photograph. They understand the quality almost immediately that HD discs deliver.

In my opinion, it was not HD cable or satellite that has been pushing HD displays to this point, but DVD technology. HD disc technology takes it to the next level of quality and will push more people into getting HD displays.

No guarantees though - these aren't taxes or death we're talkin' about.

[hmurchison]

I'm a gadget freak who hasn't purchases a lot of gadgets since my son was born a few years back.

Now it's time to reup and I'm looking forward to updating my things. In cases like this format war I'd love for the people to decide rather than some studio telling me they don't want my business.

I'll have both formats so whichever sticks will remain in my rack.

[marzetta7]

Originally Posted by hmurchison

I concur with the statement about more storage but how do we quantify the better picture quality statement? Isn't that a factor of the CODEC and encoding process? With both platforms standardized on MPEG2, VC-1 and AVC/h.264 I don't see where a qualitative platform improvement is really all that likely.

Well considering that output of current HD DVD players are only 1080i, I think it goes without saying when Blu-ray players will be outputting 1080P.

[hmurchison]

but the source material is 1080p so any proper deinterlacing television will reconstruct the image just fine.

[Shadowself]

Originally Posted by hmurchison

but the source material is 1080p so any proper deinterlacing television will reconstruct the image just fine.

that the movies will be recorded onto the HD-DVD disks in 1080p yet each and every announce HD-DVD player will only output the imagery at 1080i at best?

Sounds rather foolish and inconsistent to me.

[hmurchison]

Not even Sony's top of the line SXRD 1080p HDTV sets accept a 1080p input.

As long as the content on the disc is 1080p the Sony will de-interlace back to progressive picture before display.

The BDA marketing 1080p as though there's a plethora of 1080p input sets on the market is just that....marketing.

[AV_Integrated]

There are a number of ways that BD can potentially look better on the output, and 1080p is one of them.

The additional storage space on DL Blu-ray movies allows for a lower encoding rate, regardless of CODEC and allows for the optimal CODEC to be used at all times, not just the one that makes the movie fit. This potentially will allow for increased video quality.

As well, the transfer rate for Blu-ray is higher than that of HD-DVD, which also allows for higher encoding rates for both video and audio with a pipeline that can actually handle the data that is being sent over it.

Those are the three things that could - potentially - give Blu-ray a better image quality overall.

[hmurchison]

1080p really means nothing. Any 1080p set is going to have an upscaler and de-interlacer. The di-interlacer that performs to spec will recreate the progressive signal from the interlaced input. Both formats store data in a progressive format but both must be scaled to match the inputs of today's HDTV anyways.

Both AVC and VC-1 look great at under 20MBps rates. MPEG2 struggles a bit more at this datarate. I really don't see any efficiency pertaining to Blu Rays size or increased datarate because the AVC and VC-1 codecs are rather comfy at the current rates.

Don't just take my word for it.

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/art...rticle_id=1414

relevant quote

Performing a similar controlled and fair test using the new high-definition discs will be equally daunting, which is why you won't likely see many. Of particular interest this time around is the decision by Sony Pictures Home Entertainment to use DVD-type MPEG-2 video encoding in early Blu-ray discs — especially since they raised the issue at a recent press event. While Sony plans to use MPEG-2 for Blu-ray — albeit at bit rates several times higher than used on DVDs — HD DVD's backers will be relying primarily on the newer AVC codec (a.k.a. H.264 or MPEG-4 Part 10) or the Microsoft VC-1 codec. While any of the three codecs can be used with either disc system, Sony claimed that their high-bit rate MPEG-2 encoding produces more artifact-free video than the others, at least for now.

Sony indeed showed a remarkably clean — but not absolutely artifact-free — MPEG-2 encoding of some movie excerpts, including one from A Knight's Tale. But the company did not demonstrate Sony's MPEG-2 encoding against AVC or VC-1. The company merely showed a table of results from a Japanese test in which viewers were shown MPEG-2 and AVC at various bit rates. At a very high bit rate of 24 megabits per second (Mbps), Sony said, 100% of the viewers found the MPEG-2 high-def video quality "acceptable," against 70% who found AVC acceptable. At a more realistic bit rate of 20 Mbps, MPEG-2's edge shrank to just 5% (60% vs. 55% who found AVC acceptable). That's a small difference that might easily be accounted for by a host of factors known to influence visual-codec tests (such as the choice of program material). The scary part is that even 60% "acceptability" is below what I was hoping either of the new systems would provide, assuming these are scientifically valid results.

I think its fair to look at these tests with a bit of skepticism but I tend to agree that at 24Mpbs MPEG2 is going to be damn near transparent. AVC and VC-1 will beat MPEG2 under 20Mbps and I expect then to continue to be optimized to the point where they are equivalent to MPEG2 20Mbps + at roughly 14-16Mbps.

Blu Ray of course has the same benefits but I think it's important to highlight that there will be a far larger difference between movies because of their mastering than there will be from the players.

I expect little to no qualitative differences between the platforms regarding movie playback. Blu Ray could have the advantage for hirez audio though because of the increased throughput.

[EISDEN]

Originally Posted by DarthRaevyn

Even thought both boast more storage space than DVD's and have a lot of support from major companies both formats may still fail. The failure may be due to the reasons being that neither format currently is not necessary for movies, video-games, or music. I suspect within 3-5 years we will slowly be seeing the necessity for larger storage spaces. However that's 3-5 years and in 5 years new next-gen consoles will be released. The benefits of these formats would be useful for the next next generation.

That and I'm pretty happy with DVD's. The transition from VHS to DVD was quite necessary and in fact was a major leap.

1. DVD's did not require rewinding
2. Picture quality was extremely superior to VHS
3. Cheaper
4. Held much more space
5. Conveniently small and easy to store.

The only reason I see to get either HD-DVD or Blu-Ray is more storage space. However with the recent development of hard-drives and newer formats both HD-DVD and BR's future look bleak. Hard-drives with some few terabytes are hitting the market around 2007-2008.

In terms of gaming the most advanced and gigantic game out right now such as World of Warcraft, Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, Half-Life 2 only reach a maximum of 5GB. As of right now there aren't any games that require that much space. Maybe in the next 5 years which is when HD-DVD and BR should have been pushed. It's too early.

no

[coby]

regarding the VHS to DVD (im happy with DVD article)

have you seriously compared true HD with DVD quality.

DVD quality looks like VHS when you compare it to true HD on a good plasma.

It dead set looks like you peerin through a window. DVDs are not even close to HD. wht they do have is a non ghosted, clear picture with added benefits that go with a digital and non tape format. skip chapters etc.

when looking at games you putting the cart before the horse in that what is the point o making a game of 25gb if you need 5 dvds to hold the data on.

With larger capaitys more detail such as 3d rendering etc will be able to be employed.

the future is HD, and once you have seen it compared t a normal DVD youll buy a blue ray player and the Movie content.

[theknub]

coby,
i agree on the whole with you. the problem is that most people really don't know the difference until you compare side by side. in which case, you have to have a BR player to compare. for me, it is like watching hbo and then flipping it to hbohd. yeah, the hbohd signal isn't the best, but it is light years better than standard hbo. that is the comparison i like to make when comparing dvd to some high def dvd format. the only exception is that the end product of a high def dvd format is even more dramatic than my comparison.