300 on blu-ray stomps it's hdd counterpart

dobyblue · 08-19-2007, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Super XP

HD DVD Disc Capacity.
Single sided single layer 15GB HD resolution 4hrs.
Single sided dual layer 30GB HD resolution 8hrs.
Single sided triple layer 45GB HD resolution 12hrs (under development).
Double sided single layer 30GB HD resolution 8hrs.
Double sided dual layer 60GB HD resolution 16hrs.
Double sided triple layer 90GB HD resolution 24hrs (under development).

So, at 60GB & 90GB HD DVD is closing the gap on capacity. I really think 30GB & at the most 45GB is overkill IMO. HD DVD movies look amazing @ 15GB anyway.

Yeah I can't wait to see a 4 hour 1080p movie come out on one of those HD15 discs.

What do you think the quality will be like?
a) shite
b) downright awful
c) bloody embarrassing
d) a complete mess
e) all of the above

Lee Stewart · 08-19-2007, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dobyblue

I've already responded - managed copy means nothing to me, interactivity is a moot point in about 2 months and the hybrid disc does not seem to be an advantage either. Previous formats have already shown how useless the "hybrid disc" is in terms of attracting consumers - hybrid SACD, DualDisc.

Keep 'em coming bud.

The only advantages of HD DVD in my eyes are no region coding (which is #1 advantage to me), price of hardware and Universal movies.

It's a moot point for those that buy a 1.1 player, when they become available. The same cannot be said about those who purchased a 1.0 player never knowing about it's limitation.

Wonder if there will be an increase in the price of a 1.1 player?

dobyblue · 08-19-2007, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lee Stewart

Wonder if there will be an increase in the price of a 1.1 player?

Highly unlikely based on the difference in components to version 1.0 players vs. the decreased cost of Blu-ray technology such as the diodes, etc.

mswoods1 · 08-19-2007, 07:34 PM

This thread is probably the worst thread I've ever seen on this forum.

Lee Stewart · 08-19-2007, 07:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dobyblue

Highly unlikely based on the difference in components to version 1.0 players vs. the decreased cost of Blu-ray technology such as the diodes, etc.

But SIGMA has the BDA over a barrel. They need that SIGMA 8634 Rev.C SoC - "it's just business" is always the answer when you rape a customer. It's only money you know.

Super XP · 08-19-2007, 11:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dobyblue

Yeah I can't wait to see a 4 hour 1080p movie come out on one of those HD15 discs.

What do you think the quality will be like?
a) shite
b) downright awful
c) bloody embarrassing
d) a complete mess
e) all of the above

You really have no clue ey? LOL, HD DVD's with 15GB look better or equal to 25GB Blu-Ray's LOL, so I wouldn't go there with your 4hrs 1080p bull.

Chris Gerhard · 08-20-2007, 02:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PFC5

DtHD is a MANDATED spec on HD DVD players, not an option. The option with DtHD is that the mandate is only for 2.0 channels, but EVERY HD DVD player has 5.1 channel support. They have exceeded the spec for this.

DTS-HD MA is an OPTIONAL decoder in HD DVD. Therefore it is NOT incomplete for not having an option now is it? Would you say a car is incomplete if it didn't have EVERY POSSIBLE option? Using this same analogy. Is a 2nd party after market device that doesn't work in YOUR particular car mean that your car is an incomplete spec? Of course not.

I do not believe that I have ever said that BD was an incomplete spec because it didn't have ANY HD audio decoding as mandatory. I have said it is ridiculous to not have them though. They could have and should have made them mandatory also. They didn't include them because they were not available to use, but because they either a) Didn't want the extremely high initial prices of BD players to go even higher, b) They excluded them because they wanted to get people to replace their current working receivers with new receivers that could decode them, or c) A combination of A & B. My feeling is that it was C, but mostly to sell the new HD audio decoding receivers. I bet they were drooling over that one.

NEITHER format could have intelligently made the DTS-HD MA decoders mandatory because DTS has long had a track record of being late to the party and missing their own deadlines for releasing completed codecs when they say they will be completed.

Of course what I was indicating is that the HD DVD players decode the optional DtHD 5.1, I am not even aware of any discs with DtHD 2.0 and not 5.1. I would gladly have paid a higher price for my Blu-ray player if no HD DVD format existed. I wouldn't have had to buy an HD DVD player to have access to Universal software and I would have been dollars ahead. The format war has cost me money and limited my software selection and has resulted in nobody I know in real life owning a player and no software to watch owned by the people I know. You are one of the guys that see this format war as great, it is your right, and unless it ends and you see how much better things can be, you won't be able to know how far out in the ozone that opinion truly is.

Chris

dobyblue · 08-20-2007, 05:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Super XP

You really have no clue ey? LOL, HD DVD's with 15GB look better or equal to 25GB Blu-Ray's LOL, so I wouldn't go there with your 4hrs 1080p bull.

I didn't, you did.

Try and remember what you typed, it makes the debate have so much more coherence.

MikeRox · 08-20-2007, 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lee Stewart

Wonder if there will be an increase in the price of a 1.1 player?

Lets have a quick check...

Cheapest 1.0 Stand Alone BD player... $480?
Cheapest 1.1 Stand Alone BD player... $2000

Yep, I'd say they cost more

if you want one anytime soon at least.

electrictroy · 08-20-2007, 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Super XP

HD DVD Disc Capacity.
Single sided single layer 15GB HD resolution 4hrs.
Single sided dual layer 30GB HD resolution 8hrs.
Single sided triple layer 45GB HD resolution 12hrs (under development).

As long as you are discussing "triple layers", then I think it's only fair that I mention this:

1L Bluray == 25 gig
2L Bluray == 50 gig
3L Bluray == 75 gig (standard) or 100 gig (developed by TDK; 33.3 gigs per layer). That amount of space runs circles around HD-DVD.

By the way, where do you get your "hours" figure? There's no limit to how many hours a compressed digital video can be. For example, I've seen HD stored on two CDs (1.4 gig)..... which equates to 20+ hours on a HD-15 disc. The length of time all depends on how good the encoder is.

Lee Stewart · 08-20-2007, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by electrictroy

As long as you are discussing "triple layers", then I think it's only fair that I mention this:

1L Bluray == 25 gig
2L Bluray == 50 gig
3L Bluray == 75 gig (standard) or 100 gig (developed by TDK; 33.3 gigs per layer). That amount of space runs circles around HD-DVD.

By the way, where do you get your "hours" figure? There's no limit to how many hours a compressed digital video can be. For example, I've seen HD stored on two CDs (1.4 gig)..... which equates to 20+ hours on a HD-15 disc. The length of time all depends on how good the encoder is.

About 2/3's down the page there is a chart of hours per disc per compression system:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc

mshulman · 08-20-2007, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by electrictroy

As long as you are discussing "triple layers", then I think it's only fair that I mention this:

1L Bluray == 25 gig
2L Bluray == 50 gig
3L Bluray == 75 gig (standard) or 100 gig (developed by TDK; 33.3 gigs per layer). That amount of space runs circles around HD-DVD.

By the way, where do you get your "hours" figure? There's no limit to how many hours a compressed digital video can be. For example, I've seen HD stored on two CDs (1.4 gig)..... which equates to 20+ hours on a HD-15 disc. The length of time all depends on how good the encoder is.

I don't think we'll see triple layer discs on ANY players. I don't think the existing players are at all compatible with them, and I hardly see them making the mistake of forcing EVERYONE to buy new players.

Lee Stewart · 08-20-2007, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mshulman

I don't think we'll see triple layer discs on ANY players. I don't think the existing players are at all compatible with them, and I hardly see them making the mistake of forcing EVERYONE to buy new players.

Agree 100%

The TL disc only exists in a lab. It is not a product that one can buy. Let's stick to the facts and end the speculation please.

**PFC5** · 08-20-2007, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dobyblue

PS3, Panasonic DMP-BD10, Sony BDP-S1, Pioneer BDP-HD1, Pioneer BDP-HD94, Sharp BD-HP1; that sure sounds like most of the players to me.
The Blu-ray players that decode AND output TrueHD account for about 95% of the players. The players that CANNOT output TrueHD for HD DVD account for 50% of the players. (360 add-on)

Well I have asked around Panasonic Canada through some of the higher ups and still can't seem to find any information about HD DVD being supported. We will continue to support BLu-ray and DVD-Audio. I wish we would support SACD as well on players because then I would buy direct from the Mississauga office where I can get anything for cost, but until that day I'll stick with the PS3 and probably soon will buy an Oppo 890 to get DVD-Audio through HDMI and perhaps will use that for SACD as well to get DSD natively. In the meantime I'll keep using the PS3 for SACD and my Pioneer Elite DV-45a analogs for DVD-Audio.

I forgot about the Sharp player as I have never seen anyone selling it and I have not heard of anyone owning it yet. SO that would put the count at 9 adding the Sharp and counting for PS3. Does that Sharp decode DtHD? Even still that puts the count at 55% NOT "nearly all" BD players.

If you want to count unreleased players, you can add the 3 Samsung BD players to the other two Samsung BD players that cannot decode ANY HD audio. Add the Sony S300 which also does not decode DtHD. Add in the LG player which IS released and can not decode DtHD either. That new Pioneer isn't released yet is it?

So now the count would be 13 BD players and 6 that CAN decode the HD audio if you count the unreleased Pioneer & the 3 unreleased Samsungs models. It again puts the percentage back down to LESS than HALF of the BD players can decode HD audio (6/13=46.15%)

What I highlighted in blue proves the adage. "Figures don't lie, but liars figure". You are mixing model counts with model sales to try to deflect that you made an erroneous statement. That is BS and YOU know it. I thought you would just say it is a little exaggeration and be done with this, but then you try this. You just lost some credibility here, but you can recover by just admitting the error. I think you are better than that to try that one.

I didn't count the addon as a player because it is not a full player. BD fans are so quick to not count it when it suits them, but want to count it when they can use it to improperly favor BD.

I was wrong that counting the addon would put the HD DVD players count at 6/7 HD DVD players DO decode HD audio. I really thought we were talking about standalone players but I did include the PS3 in the totals since it is the most popular BD player (by about 90% of all sold).

**PFC5** · 08-20-2007, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dobyblue

That's total crap. Many of the DD+ tracks on HD DVD have been 1.5 Mbps from BOTH Warner and Paramount.

They could have used TrueHD on both formats for any release and the Blu-ray players would all be able to decode the 640 DD track from within the TrueHD track if they didn't have TrueHD decoders, just like they did with the Nine Inch Nails Blu-ray and Legends of Jazz.

Also the releases with TrueHD on Warner that only got DD on blu-ray could have easily been released with TrueHD just like Legends of Jazz and NIN were.

Name some Warner movie titles with DD+ on HD DVD that are using the 1.5Mbps bitrate please. I never heard of ONE that used that bitrate on the DD+ soundtracks on HD DVD. I already said that Paramounts were now at 1.5Mbps, but some earlier ones were at 640kbps, so that is moot.

08-19-2007, 07:34 PM	#484
mswoods1 Say whaaaaaat? Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Albuquerque, NM Posts: 1,372	This thread is probably the worst thread I've ever seen on this forum. __________________ Panasonic PT-AX200U Projector 118" 1.78:1 Carada Projector Screen Toshiba A35 HD DVD Player Pioneer BDP-51FD Blu-ray Player Sony PS3 Xbox 360 TiVoHD (w/750 GB hard drive) Denon AVR-2309CI Ascend Acoustics Sierra-1 Center Ascend Acoustics Sierra-1 Mains Polk FXi A6's (surrounds) BIC Acoustech H-100 subwoofer Tri-Traps and Acoustic Panels by GIK Acoustics HD DVD: 104 Blu-ray: 126 DVD: ∞

Similar Threads to 300 on blu-ray stomps it's hdd counterpart
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
The Beginner's Guide to HDTV	mswoods1	The High Definition Lounge	19	04-28-2008 02:03 PM
What are all the differences between HD DVD and Blu Ray? Huh?	mswoods1	High Definition Media	75	01-17-2008 04:44 PM
Blu ray vs hd dvd blu ray a winner	lcjjm	Blu-Ray Players	56	12-18-2007 05:48 PM
Getting a hd dvd on blu ray	oleviarules	The High Definition Lounge	10	11-27-2007 07:51 PM
Use of blu ray drive equipped computers to record HDTV.	eddiem	High Definition Receivers, Recorders, Players, Tivos	0	05-23-2007 04:21 PM