Next-generation DVD Authoring: Why Blu-ray Disc is better than HD DVD.

[das_uberdog]

Amid the next round of hype on HD DVD v. BD, here's a discussion I posted on my blog last month that might be of interest to you.

In the coming months there will be contentious debate about which format is better, HD DVD or Blu-ray Disc (BD). There are some clear technical advantages BD has over HD DVD such as higher capacity (50GB for BD v. 30GB for HD DVD) and higher data rates (50mbps for BD v. 31mbps for HD DVD.) These are no small factors when you consider the file sizes and data throughput required to display 1080p HD video.

Both formats have had a rough start, but as more players start rolling out, and authoring and production work flows start to settle, the formats will be on more even ground for true comparisons, not based on first-generation players and problematic software issues.

The marketing machines are already kicking into high gear and the winner and of this format battle may be determined by hype, not technical merit. That's coming from the consumer's perspective, but which format could prove best from the perspective of next-generation DVD authors?

Once again I have to give the nod to Blu-ray Disc. There are basic technology aspects as stated above, but from an authoring standpoint, there are advantages to working with BD over HD DVD. Granted there are not currently a lot of authoring tools available. With the exception of Sonic Solutions, there are not any HD DVD/BD authoring applications on the market as of July 2006. That's bound to change in the next 6-12 months, but for now, most HD DVD and BD titles are being hand jammed, a process more akin to software development than DVD authoring. When fully implemented authoring programs do become available, it will soon become clear why BD is better.

So why is Blu-ray Disc better? First, as a basis for comparison, I'll give a brief synopsis for authoring HD DVD. There are two modes for authoring HD DVD: standard content authoring and advanced content authoring (iHD.) Standard content authoring is an improvement over current DVD-Video authoring, with more robust and capable menus than are currently available. Menu navigation for standard content authoring, however, is very similar to DVD-Video. The real magic happens with advanced content authoring, also know as iHD. This unleashes a whole bunch of possibilities like animated pop-up menus, uninterrupted playback while accessing these menus, picture-in-picture and integrated networking among other things. It's pretty exciting to think about what you could actually do with it. The drawback with iHD is that it is coding intensive, requiring knowledge of XML, UML, XPATH, Javascript and DHTML.

Similarly, BD has two authoring modes, High Definition Movie Mode (HDMV) and Blu-ray Disc Java (BD-J). Here is where differences start to emerge. HDMV is the basic authoring mode, sort of the BD equivalent of standard content authoring for HD DVD. The difference is that, in this basic mode, BD authors will be able to create animated pop-up menus with uninterrupted playback and other features that would have to be coded in iHD. Blu-ray Disc also allows an author to superimpose HD video over the HD movie, a feat that HD DVD can't currently substantiate. So, when the applications become more available, BD authors will be able to achieve these sophisticated features without having to write a line of code.

Then there is BD-J, a coding intesive method which further extends the capabilities to include networking and 32-bit graphics (as opposed to 8-bit graphics in HDMV,) and has all the power of Java. BD-J is developed using Java 2 Platform Micro Edition (J2ME,) "the most ubiquitous application platform for mobile devices across the globe." This is the same platform used for interactive TV and a growing list of web-connected multimedia devices. Can you say 'interoperability' everybody? Could your Blu-ray Disc player push content to your cell phone, Palm Pilot or iPod? It is certainly now within the realm of possibility. To be fair, iHD could probably do this too, but not in its native language and not without a yet to be developed translator.

So when you remove the fractious elements (Sony, Toshiba, Micrsosoft) from the debate and compare the two technologies on technical merit alone, Blu-ray Disc has clear advantages over HD DVD. And from a DVD authoring perspective, BD is a much more accessible format when it comes to interactivity. But time will tell which format prevails, if the technology succeeds at all, and as we've seen in past format battles, the better technology does not always win when fought in the public forum where perception counts more than facts.

[hmurchison]

Your thesis statement is "Blu-Ray discs authoring is better than HD DVD"

Sadly you're supporting information does not back your thesis as well as you are probably hoping.

Java is a bytecode language and any authoring tool is going to have to support compiling and debugging. Clever authoring application may be able to shield the author from the complexities but low rent apps probably will not take the time and effort.

iHD is based on industry standards as well. ECMAscript(J-script) and XML with a method timing syntax. The same tools web programmers use to build sites and features with javascript and XML will apply here. The timing syntax syncronizes the ECMA and XML data to picture. iHD only contains roughly 200 methods and 250 properties

BD-Java, which is based off of GEM the chosen format for OCAP and Cable/Satellite providers, has approximately 900 or so Java classes and even more methods which must run in a Virtual Machine. This allows a degree of interoperability with GEM authoring tools and broadcast video with GEM based Interactivity.

iHD should be far more compact and lend itself nicely to streaming media as well as physical medium and while it does not offer the interoperability with GEM the question is if GEM hasn't exactly lit the world on fire was it the best choice for Blu-Ray. Incidentally both Disney and Apple voted for iHD.

iHD has Pip with dual decoded streams long before the BDA bolted it in to BD-Java. iHD network access allows for addressable content from persitant storage synced with the video which isn't affected by the 30Mbps Mux cap. BD-Java I believe has something similar, point being these aren't really signifanct limitation that can't be worked around.

I think that if I'm authoring a title I dont' really want to deal with a bytecode format. It's the equivalent of using a WYSIWYG HTML authoring tool that generates a bunch of code you don't understand. The code of iHD should be far more legible from a design standpoint IMO.

Speaking of cell phones. What format do you think will be more popular. The one with 944 classes and 1000 methods that must fit in a Virtual Machine or the one using standard Javascript and XML with some timing syntax tossed in? Who has a growing share of Smartphone OS with Mobile 5 as the OS. Microsoft and you can bet that iHD figures prominently into their future plans and Managed Copy will allow for mobile version of content to be purchased.

BD-Java in my opinion will do the job but I have a sneaking suspicion that it was chosen for the wrong reasons. A forward looking format is iHD...Java is good for the here and now but I don't see it having huge success in portables and HTPC.

I'm looking forward to seeing if Apple can support both platform with their next DVD Studio Pro version. Both formats will offer interactivity that blows customers away but iHD is clearly the more efficient of the to formats.

[phloyd]

I don't want Microsoft code in my cell phone. Having an unstable PC is bad enough

[Dave]

Originally Posted by das_uberdog

So when you remove the fractious elements (Sony, Toshiba, Micrsosoft) from the debate and compare the two technologies on technical merit alone, Blu-ray Disc has clear advantages over HD DVD. And from a DVD authoring perspective, BD is a much more accessible format when it comes to interactivity. But time will tell which format prevails, if the technology succeeds at all, and as we've seen in past format battles, the better technology does not always win when fought in the public forum where perception counts more than facts.

Very well said. I hope Blu-Ray wins because i want something stable. If HD DVD wins in a 2-3 years we will need another format because HD DVD is not big improvement over those DVD wich had the shortest lifespan
HD DVD already is outdated since new HD movies and content barely fit on HD DVD disc and have lack of speed...

[JTK]

Originally Posted by Dave

Very well said. I hope Blu-Ray wins because i want something stable. If HD DVD wins in a 2-3 years we will need another format because HD DVD is not big improvement over those DVD wich had the shortest lifespan

Valid concerns, at least on paper, although people seem to forget something: Format evolve.

Compare DVD now to where it was a decade ago.

HD DVD already is outdated since new HD movies and content barely fit on HD DVD disc and have lack of speed...

Totally not true.

Do you have any kinds of concrete or specific examples to back these statements up with? What are you talking about?

[Psiweaver]

Dave just kind of rambles. I think though that HD DVD will have problems more so as a data backup solution than as a content provider solution.

[hmurchison]

Originally Posted by Psiweaver

Dave just kind of rambles. I think though that HD DVD will have problems more so as a data backup solution than as a content provider solution.

Data backup solutions are going to be primarily HDD (hard disc drive) based. Apple's going to have a snapshot backup system built right into the OS. Vista has a new version of System Restore for snapshots.

I doubt either format becomes a big seller for backups beyond a few consumers.

Hey I think Kudos are in order for Dave. That had to the be the most sane post I've seen him make. We've tamed the guy somewhat

We'll see who masters the Interactive Layer stuff best. I must admit though in my field of IT Networking and Storage "Java free" is the new buzzword. Management of storage and servers is rapidly going to Web based front ends. iHD is about as close as you can get to Ajax which is the hot thing right now.

[Blu-rayrules]

Originally Posted by Dave

HD DVD already is outdated since new HD movies and content barely fit on HD DVD disc and have lack of speed...

I disagree. HD-DVD can and will probably move on to 45 GB Triple Layer Discs....If they are given enough time.

[marzetta7]

Originally Posted by JTK

Valid concerns, at least on paper, although people seem to forget something: Format evolve.

Compare DVD now to where it was a decade ago.

All the more reason to go Blu-ray.

Totally not true.

Do you have any kinds of concrete or specific examples to back these statements up with? What are you talking about?

I believe what he is referring to are the HD DVD movies that were already approaching and hitting 27GB, coming awfully close to the already HD DVD maximum--that has been mentioned and referenced quite often on this forum in other threads. As for the whole speed thing, this is also a valid concern, as Blu-ray is faster.

[Psiweaver]

I like java quite a bit. HTML is annoying sometimes to code in. While Java has a lot more things to run i find it easier to program for.

[hmurchison]

HD DVD "hitting the limits" BS stems from Meliisa Perensens article comparing the size of the movies. Funny thing is no one cared to point out how titles like Doom and Serenity looked great yet used such little space. Further inspection of the larger movies shows us they have more extras which of course take up more space.

Next up you have 25GB devoted to the Blu-Ray version of "Rumore Has It" and only 15GB devoted towward the HD DVD version and High Def Digest says it still looks more film like with "better detail".

Who are we to believe here? Well I think the "Correct" info is right in front of peoples faces. MPEG2 simply isn't efficient enough and it shows. VC-1 and AVC are very efficient and should improve. HD DVD even has a more efficient Interactive Layer format.

But......it is human nature to want the larger datarate or storage capacity. The only problem with HD DVD vs Blu-Ray is that if your can't go deeper than "it's bigger" or "it's faster" then you haven't really proven its value.

Java is a wonderful language. Although for Interactive Layers I"m not sure it was the most efficient choice.

[phloyd]

The strongest criticism for HD DVD is the datarate off the disc.

Each extra language or high bitrate audio or IME type feature added eats away at the badnwidth for video.

Run time is not relevant to this.

One of the 'proofs' people have presented for this is that 16:9 movies so far do not have lossless soundtracks where some 2.35:1 movies do. The 2.35:1 movies need less data for video content as the black bars do not need to be encoded.

Perhaps a coincidence but perhaps not.

[hmurchison]

The issue of bandwidth has been so overblown. HD DVD has a maximum Mux datarate of 30Mbps Blu-Ray is a about 50Mbps I believe.

If your video on HD DVD avg 12Mbps that leaves you with 18Mbps for all other data. The Pip features aren't full size so they likey take 1-2Mbps. iHD doesn't take up a buch of space either so what you're really talking about lossless audio. TrueHD 5.1 would likely take about 15Mbps

On AVS there are a few people crying for lossless audio on "all" tracks. That's just silly. The only soundtrack that should be lossless is the native language soundtrack. Everything else should be Dolby Digital +

Plus the limitations of either format become moot when say in a few years HD players with built in HDD for persistent stores are available that. Then you can simply download (perhaps for a fee) the lossless tracks you want and this doesn't affect the 30/50. The design of both players allows external data to by synced to the disc data.

The content on disc should be geared towards

1. Great video
2. Great interactivity
3. Great audio

Consumer don't a rip about audio. They buy plasmas with cheapo lifestyle speakers. The sooner people wake up to this reality the better. Both formats have the ability to "Turbocharge" the format through external data. We should be focused on that and not stuffing the discs full of stuff most people won't use.

[theknub]

Originally Posted by hmurchison

The content on disc should be geared towards

1. Great video
2. Great interactivity
3. Great audio

come on now. i agree tons of people are stupid by buying a 5k panel and then sticking it with 300 dollar HTB. so yes, there are plenty of idiots in the world when it comes to this. however, if you are telling me that you would rather have some game (or whatever interactive feature) vs lossless audio or multiple lossless audio tracks, then i think you're nuts. personally, i don't give a rip about some of the interactivity. yeah, it's cool that you can do this or that. personally, i want to enjoy my movie in full HD. so cram as much audio and video with greater bitrates onto that disc as possible and forget the rest. honestly, i don't explore many of the extra features on discs except for deleted scenes now and again.

i also question this idea of downloading audio tracks. is this just an idea of yours or is it some rumor or stated implementation. i haven't read, heard, or anything further to support this? after all, if it was in the spec, wouldn't all players be required to do this or have the capability if it is a future option? after all, i'd hate to purchase a player this year and find out next that i can have better audio if i buy a new player. frankly, i'd be pissed.

[Knight-Errant]

For me, extra material should be just that; extra.

A great main feature should be in place.

[hmurchison]

Originally Posted by theknub

i also question this idea of downloading audio tracks. is this just an idea of yours or is it some rumor or stated implementation. i haven't read, heard, or anything further to support this? after all, if it was in the spec, wouldn't all players be required to do this or have the capability if it is a future option? after all, i'd hate to purchase a player this year and find out next that i can have better audio if i buy a new player. frankly, i'd be pissed.

Don't get me wrong. I'd love to see the native language track in lossless if need be but I don't need lossless dubbed tracks. Waste of space.

Yeah most people don't know about the conditional code features of both formats. They both support persistent stores which today are larger amounts of RAM but tomorrow will be small Hard Disc Drives in which to store content that is downloadable. HD DVD requires an ethernet connection so every player will be able to connect and download. I've read some stuff on this from the PDF specs on the formats and Amir has spoken on this for HD DVD. No one hypes it because it's a feature that will become more popular once the infrastructure is ready. Every player should be able to do this but an Ethernet port seems to be the way to get access.

[theknub]

did not know that. thanks for the info

[Dave]

Originally Posted by Blu-rayrules

I disagree. HD-DVD can and will probably move on to 45 GB Triple Layer Discs....If they are given enough time.

I hope this is true. If HD DVD moves to 45GB discs, there are no 100GB BDs at that time and those 45GBs are at half the BD50 price i may buy some HD DVDs