Blu-ray versus HD DVD

[Triv1um]

Entertainment giants are battling for domination of the next generation of DVDs but an outright win is an unlikely outcome, reports Kate Bulkley.

Via TheAge.com.au (http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2007/05/26/1179601725599.html)

If it was a Hollywood movie it would be a remake of Alien v Predator. On one side is the giant Sony corporation, which is backing the Blu-ray high definition DVD format by building it into its PlayStation 3 games consoles. Facing it across the global battlefield is Toshiba, backed by Microsoft and Intel, promoting the rival (and incompatible) HD DVD format.

The stakes are very high indeed for both companies. Yet Sony, the pre-fight favourite because it has the best-selling games console franchise in the world and the backing of seven Hollywood studios (basically all of the big ones except Universal Pictures), which have made their movies available on Blu-ray, is nowhere near delivering the early knockout blow it was hoping for.

Instead, early defections from the Blu-ray camp and lagging sales of PS3 consoles have blurred the picture of which format will win. Samsung broke ranks with Blu-ray last month by announcing it will make players that play both HD formats, following a similar move by LG. In addition, most analysts acknowledge that the PC manufacturers will play a key role in the format war - and having Microsoft and Intel behind HD DVD is significant. Neither of these Toshiba allies has shown signs of switching camps so far.

Meanwhile, PS3 sales in Britain, the European market where PS3 has had its most successful launch, were 165,000 in week one but fell to 28,000 in the second week, a trend that has been echoed in other markets as well.

Sony took a big gamble bundling the Blu-ray player with the PS3, resulting in delayed release and higher prices for the consoles. Ken Kutaragi, the "father of the PlayStation", recently paid the price and resigned as chairman and chief executive of the Sony Computer Entertainment unit.

With the sales of PS3 lagging, the new machines may not be the cornerstone of a recovery at Sony, with videogame-related losses for Sony's year ending in March expected to amount to $US2 billion ($2.4 billion) - twice the original expectations.

Sony has a lot riding on the success of the PS3, especially after it was wrong-footed in the music player market by Apple's iPod. It certainly doesn't want to have another Betamax or MiniDisc story, either. For Sony, the PS3 and Blu-ray are part of an important corporate move to regain its pre-eminence in the consumer electronics business.

[acn010]

if porn on a normal dvd lasts 6 hours of play......... blue ray or hddvd will last 48 hours of full length, high definition,side aquirting porn action!!!
just imagine how technology is advancing :)
i want blueray to win

[F9zDark]

Really, there should never be these format wars, as I have said before, format wars only hurt the consumer.

Betamax may have lost the battle against VHS, but it WAS A BETTER format...

I am hopeful that BR will win, but people en mass are stupid.

[ICE]

Really, there should never be these format wars, as I have said before, format wars only hurt the consumer.

Betamax may have lost the battle against VHS, but it WAS A BETTER format...

I am hopeful that BR will win, but people en mass are stupid.

yep format wars suck perty hard. people hardly ever make the "right" choice ..

i really dont think that we will see a "winner" until more people have HD. i mean theres no real reason for the majority to give up the cheaper dvd for hddvd or br just yet. once hd becomes standard we'll see who "wins"

my money is on br. betamax flopped hard so i dont think sony would try again unless they had good reason... i hope lol.

[Shadowblind]

people en mass are stupid.

Yeah, no kidding. Seems alot like Blu-ray. I guess thats fitting.

[pibs]

I could care less about the format wars but as a consumer i would rather get myself a hd-dvd player since its less expensive, BR is a bit hard on the wallet since the cheapest ones are about 400usd while a decent hd-dvd player is about half of that. as for the whole ps3 BR id say sure ps3 is a great entertainment system, but for those who are willing to shell out 600 and u still have to buy the hdmi cables i believe

[ketchup]

This BR vs. HD DVD is getting a bit stupid. There seems to be both advantages/diadvantages to both and It's a bit like the "my dads bigger than your dad" argument. Both camps are acting like spoilt brats. Really I don't care who's wins in the end.

I'm not even sure it's going to be that relevant.
1./ Who wants to spend all their money changing their DVD collection into a high def version, (I know people did with normal DVD from video but they took their time and waited until the DVD's were cheap - normally).
2./ High definition is not really mainstream yet, (as we can see from our HD TV sets. Long time to go before a majority of programs are rather than the very very few at the mo.). By this time some other smart A"%& company will have something even better the either BR or HDDVD.
3./ Lastly I think that video on demand will almost remove the need for home video libaries in the not so distant future making both formats a niech market item.

Of course I'm probably wrong, but I do agree with most people that these format wars don't help anybody and it only came about due to corporate greed.

P.S. I have no intention of buying any form of HD optical disk. Looks like I'm heading for a hard disk storage system instead, (with backup, just in case)

[Tesseract]

I think that this battle will be different from Betamax vs. VHS because it's being fought on two separate fronts: Video AND Data.

It's really the first time that a media format was designed from the ground up with data storage in mind as well, and t'be honest, I think Blu-Ray has more to offer there.

Blu-Ray can record HDTV streams in real time... Not sure whether HD-DVD can do that, but it's worth noting either way. Even if HD-DVD can claim that as well, we run into the much touted capacity argument, and I think this is where Blu-Ray pulls far ahead. 25GB on a single layer, with lab tests experimenting on quad-layer discs for 100GB of storage.

[Triv1um]

yeah I personally feel quite strongly about this one, I thing it sucks that people have to somewhat "gamble" there money on the one that's going to come out best.

I personally think that sucks.

[jonezybaby]

I could care less about the format wars but as a consumer i would rather get myself a hd-dvd player since its less expensive, BR is a bit hard on the wallet since the cheapest ones are about 400usd while a decent hd-dvd player is about half of that. as for the whole ps3 BR id say sure ps3 is a great entertainment system, but for those who are willing to shell out 600 and u still have to buy the hdmi cables i believe

depends were u buy the system from? i know alot of places that sell the systems with a free HDMI cable!!

[F9zDark]

Yeah, no kidding. Seems alot like Blu-ray. I guess thats fitting.

And how is Blu-Ray stupid? Its a better format, period!

The people en mass are stupid quip refers to how people, while in large groups, become very uneducated and make poor choices. This will be the reason Blu-Ray might lose later.

Personally I'd rather shell out 800 bucks and get what I know is the best of the best than 200 bucks and get some mediocre shit.

[ketchup]

And how is Blu-Ray stupid? Its a better format, period!

In your EXPERT opinion? Expertise gained from where? The internet? What authority are you on this matter?:mad: Throwing your opinion about doesn't make you right, (or necessarily wrong either).


The people en mass are stupid quip refers to how people, while in large groups, become very uneducated and make poor choices. This will be the reason Blu-Ray might lose later.

Including yourself maybe? How do you lose your education by the way? Kinda hard to do. Make poor choices, sure.


Personally I'd rather shell out 800 bucks and get what I know is the best of the best than 200 bucks and get some mediocre shit.

IYO, of course it's your money.

Do I smell burning?

[Cloudhunter]

I personally think BR is better. The increased data capacity just sends it ahead of the rest.

Of course, we also have to look at it in terms of 360 vs. PS3.

PS3 includes playing functions built in, whereas you need to buy an adapter for the 360.

Cloudy

[F9zDark]

In your EXPERT opinion? Expertise gained from where? The internet? What authority are you on this matter?:mad: Throwing your opinion about doesn't make you right, (or necessarily wrong either).

The data capacity alone of Blu-Ray makes it a better format.


Including yourself maybe? How do you lose your education by the way? Kinda hard to do. Make poor choices, sure.

I haven't lost my education, but as history and society will tell you, on numerous, numerous accounts, humans in groups are far more unintelligent than the individual. Hell look at mainstream religion for proof of this fact!

Lets look at computers for instance. Back in the late 80s early 90s you could buy a computer that had at most 512kb HDD. Now we can buy computers with 1tb HDD. Why is that? Because:

-Human beings and computer applications are becoming increasingly space hungry.
-Computers haven't really had to deal with 'format wars' per se; just pure advancement for the better of everyone.

Blu-Ray supports more data per disc than HD-DVD, which will make it an immediate winner within computer circles. Blu-Ray is necessary for the betterment of optical media...

[Shadowblind]

I personally think BR is better. The increased data capacity just sends it ahead of the rest.

Of course, we also have to look at it in terms of 360 vs. PS3.

PS3 includes playing functions built in, whereas you need to buy an adapter for the 360.

Cloudy

Do we need better storage capacity? As far as I can tell(or care, for that matter.), even DVDs hold all they need to.

So far I;ve heard no gimmicks, no bribes or anything to make HD-DVD win. I don't support Blu-Ray because they fight dirty, not because Sony made it.



PS3 includes playing functions built in, whereas you need to buy an adapter for the 360.
Hence, $600.


Cloudy
Sorry, lol, I've just always wondered why people do that :p

[F9zDark]

Do we need better storage capacity? As far as I can tell(or care, for that matter.), even DVDs hold all they need to.

So far I;ve heard no gimmicks, no bribes or anything to make HD-DVD win. I don't support Blu-Ray because they fight dirty, not because Sony made it.

DVDs hold all they need to; NOW. The same argument was used when CDs first hit the PC scene. Floppy disks held everything anyone ever needed; look how that turned out...

And how does Blu-Ray fight dirty? Entertain me.

In fact, this is a ludicrous claim. Microsoft, the major supporter of HD-DVD hasn't ever played it fair. The whole Netscape VS IE back in the mid 90s is a perfect example of this.

So by your own reckoning I suppose you wouldn't support HD-DVD either, had you the foggiest idea of how Microshit conducts business.

[ketchup]

Originally posted byF9zDark
The data capacity alone of Blu-Ray makes it a better format.

Well IF Sony optimise it.
At the moment the dual layer isn't perfected so they are limited to 25Gb.... "At the moment." The compression technique is less compact than that used in HD DVD so the Blue Ray discs need more space to hold the same amount of data.......BUT, that could change if, (possible big IF) Sony license the VC-1 codec from, yes you guessed it, Microsoft, (of course, if Microsoft will be willing to license its' VC-1 codec to Sony in the first place).

So, not so straight forward as Blue Ray holds more BITS than HD DVD therefore it's better is it?

Plus Blue Ray is a thinner disc - easier to break possibly? It also has an expensive coating and how will this cope with scratches? Maybe better than normal but when scratched how easy is it to attempt a repair?

So I would say that Blue-Ray has the potential to be the best format, but isn't yet.



Blu-Ray supports more data per disc than HD-DVD, which will make it an immediate winner within computer circles. Blu-Ray is necessary for the betterment of optical media...

Not the case at the moment as just explained.

10 layer optical discs have been in development for a while now and won't be to long in coming to the market as working prototypes exist already. So I guess that neither Blue Ray or HD DVD will be used for computer storage for too long, only for movies. So Blue Ray for the betterment of optical storage? Maybe not so advanced after all. Also how about the optical light cube with 3D data storage? Will make Blue Ray look like a floppy disc in comparison.

By the way I'll explain now that I AM NOT AN EXPERT, but I also don't claim to KNOW as a fact the situation as some people do. The waters are far to muddy for that in corporate business where big money rides on success or failure. I won't be a mouth piece for these companies either while they battle it out.


posted byF9zDark in response to Shadowblind.
So by your own reckoning I suppose you wouldn't support HD-DVD either, had you the foggiest idea of how Microshit conducts business.
I agree with you in that both camps fight dirty and with such high stakes involved I'm not surprised. But your comment almost suggests that Microsoft virtually owns HD DVD which it certainly doesn't. It may back that format but won't be affected too much if Blue Ray becomes dominant either.

You are obviously very enthusiastic about PS3 and please continue to be so. I like it too. But calm down with the soapbox bit. Do you have shares in Sony or something?

[irongiant]

Well IF Sony optimise it.
At the moment the dual layer isn't perfected so they are limited to 25Gb.... "At the moment." The compression technique is less compact than that used in HD DVD so the Blue Ray discs need more space to hold the same amount of data.......BUT, that could change if, (possible big IF) Sony license the VC-1 codec from, yes you guessed it, Microsoft, (of course, if Microsoft will be willing to license its' VC-1 codec to Sony in the first place).


Pirates of The Caribbean 2 is the best looking High Definition movie released on either format. Go read the reviews, in fact here's a bit of the review from thedigitalbits:

"I going to say this right now up front: Disney's Dead Man's Chest on Blu-ray delivers the best looking 1080p video I've seen yet on any HD format. Nearly the entire 50GB of Disc One is devoted to the film data alone, giving the AVC compression plenty of room to breathe. The clarity and detail visible in the imagery here is sublime, with not a hint of artifacting or other unwanted defects. The colors are rich and accurate, with contrast that reveals deep and detailed shadows as well as bright-lit scenes. The audio quality is also outstanding in both standard Dolby Digital 5.1, as well as Uncompressed 48 kHz/24-bit PCM 5.1 surround. From the soft creaking of wooden-hulled ships rolling in the ocean tides to the rumbling screech of the Kraken tearing those same ships in half, the audio here is a sonic delight. Dead Man's Chest is easily THE demo disc to best show off what Blu-ray is capable of. Who says you don't need 50GB?"

[ketchup]

Thanks for that Irongiant but what does that say really?

50Gb for the movie alone! Not quite there are extras on disc 1 too. Also uncompressed English audio file, (huge data eater - better though? you could argue that) as well as compressed versions. Again the disc uses AVC coding, (or basically MPEG4). This is not as compact as VC-1. Would a HD DVD need so much space for the same feature set and quality? Probably not. Would it need more than One HD DVD's worth of storage? Possibly, I don't know.

Sony was trying to make a statement with that movie as to how great BlueRay is. It's obviously working on some people.

Basically what I'm trying to say is just because BlueRay is included in my PS3 hardware I am not suddenly going to be blinded into saying it's superior to HDDVD when it may not be. I suggest that it is better but I won't promote this view as fact. When that happens you get the effect that F9zDark was talking about earlier in this thread when groups start to lose their individual ability to think and as a whole make dumb choices.

I will play devils advocate to any fanboy, just for my own pleasure! ;)

[F9zDark]

To give you some insight, I have been rooting for Blu-Ray since I first got wind of it. (which if I recall, the first news blurb I read on the invention of Blu-Ray was in '04).

I don't see why the two camps couldn't just join each other and make one format. Format wars only hurt the consumer in the end. (Imagine all those poor souls who bought into Betamax and later could not buy any more movies for it)

Considering that save a few technical differences both formats are almost identical...

[Shadowblind]

Now who ever said I supported HD-DVD? For me, I think the format wars are slightly silly.

Sony forces PS3 users to buy a Blu-Ray player. If thats not dirty, I dont know what is. As far as I'm concerned, I don't NEED an HD-DVD player on my 360. Thats why I don't have one on it.

BTW, no one answered me as to why people quote they're names at the end of they're post. Do they think they'll forget it?

[Zin0099]

personally i like the thought of Blu-ray being in ps3 because if sony loses in the format wars they still can use the blu ray for games

xbox360= $400+$200 for HD DVD=$600
PS3=$600 and can use the Blu-Ray for games plus movies

xbox360=$600 and can't use 360 games on HD DVD

think what sony can use for Blu ray
-games
-multiple classic PSone and ps2 games
-firmware
-music
-movies
-Photos
-wall paper for ps3 background
(I mean sticking all above in one disc)

like

FF7
FF7 AC
FF7 Dirge of cerberus
FF7 last order
all the trailers for FF7 series
and extras

think about it blu-ray for games is awesome

don't come and tell me i'm wrong this is just my opinion

[F9zDark]

Now who ever said I supported HD-DVD? For me, I think the format wars are slightly silly.

Sony forces PS3 users to buy a Blu-Ray player. If thats not dirty, I dont know what is. As far as I'm concerned, I don't NEED an HD-DVD player on my 360. Thats why I don't have one on it.

BTW, no one answered me as to why people quote they're names at the end of they're post. Do they think they'll forget it?

So I suppose Sony was playing it dirty by using a DVD drive in the PS2 as well then? Seriously man you need to pick your battles. Blu-Ray goes hand in hand with Sony's 3.0 mentality and when Xbox360 games either:

1)Lacking features due to DVD's limited capacity
2)Start coming in 2 to 3 DVD packages

You will totally understand Sony's reasoning for going with Blu-Ray.

The fact Microsoft hasn't made HD-DVD a prerequisite for gaming is surprising, since IT IS something they would do, but then it means either they don't think HD-DVD will win or they haven't opted to do it.

Because frankly I wouldn't put it past Microshit to release a 200 dollar device and then FORCE it on people.

If you don't want blu-ray don't buy a PS3, plain and simple.

[Triv1um]

I think Blu-ray will come out winner just because it is soon going to be a PC format, like normal DVDs.

Once we get writable blu-ray disks and its common in PC's it will take off the actual disk format and the movie format ;)

[F9zDark]

I think Blu-ray will come out winner just because it is soon going to be a PC format, like normal DVDs.

Once we get writable blu-ray disks and its common in PC's it will take off the actual disk format and the movie format ;)

They got them already, but its rather pricey. But yeah, that will play a large role in who wins: which group can get writables and rewritables out the quickest. So far Blu-Ray is winning in that department, as I haven't heard of HD-DVD burners yet.

[Shadowblind]

So I suppose Sony was playing it dirty by using a DVD drive in the PS2 as well then? Seriously man you need to pick your battles.

Im sorry, I didn't know Sony made the DVD player and DVDs.

In fact, quite interestingly, I don't think they did.

I don't see why they just don't take the $550 blu-ray drive out and just sell the $50 PS3 alone.

[F9zDark]

They didn't make DVDs initially, but after they abandoned MMCD they joined with Toshiba and others making what would later be known as DVDs.

Sony didn't need to put a DVD drive into the PS2. They could have used CDs for all PS2 launch titles easily. But they didn't and why look at that, PS2 is still going strong to this day, 6 years later...

As I said, if you don't want/don't like BR don't buy it. I am glad Sony put Blu-Ray into the PS3; when I buy an HDTV I'll have the movies to go with it.

[ketchup]

Well personal choices are what it's all about I guess.

I understand why Sony put the BluRay, (I'll try to spell it how they do from now on) in t the PS3. It does make sense in many ways. The only place it fails is in its' added cost to the whole system.

Not having a HD-DVD in the Xbox360 was a surprise to me too. I'm not sure it's the end of the world though in terms of game content as some might suggest. Again compression techniques improve all the time and what's a bit of SW upgrade to a 360, (or PS3 for that matter)?

As far as I was aware there are HD-DVD players going into PC's very shortly too, (I understand this is the case, but I'll check around to be sure a bit later).

Either way enjoythe games whatever platform and also the HD movies. Been watching them on my 40" true HD TV and they do look very good:thumbup:

[F9zDark]

Do you own a PS3 or 360 or both? Just curious.

[irongiant]

Thanks for that Irongiant but what does that say really?;)

It quite plainly says that the extra storage space provided by Blu Ray can provide fantastic quality sound and picture.


50Gb for the movie alone! Not quite there are extras on disc 1 too. Also uncompressed English audio file, (huge data eater - better though? you could argue that) as well as compressed versions. Again the disc uses AVC coding, (or basically MPEG4). This is not as compact as VC-1. Would a HD DVD need so much space for the same feature set and quality? Probably not. Would it need more than One HD DVD's worth of storage? Possibly, I don't know.;)

I'll happily take the opinions of people that are paid to review movies anyday thanks. I own the movie myself and can also concur, the picture quality is astounding and better than anything i've seen so far on HD DVD. If HD DVD can do better then what are they waiting for?


Sony was trying to make a statement with that movie as to how great BlueRay is. It's obviously working on some people.;)

It's a Disney film and nothing to do with Sony, working on some people what's that supposed to mean? That review was done by an independant and respected website and the conclusion they've come to is clear.


Basically what I'm trying to say is just because BlueRay is included in my PS3 hardware I am not suddenly going to be blinded into saying it's superior to HDDVD when it may not be. I suggest that it is better but I won't promote this view as fact. When that happens you get the effect that F9zDark was talking about earlier in this thread when groups start to lose their individual ability to think and as a whole make dumb choices.

Taking it a little too far there.. dumb choices? You want Playstation games and HD movies then buying a PS3 is not a dumb choice.

[ketchup]

To F9zDark I have both PS3 and Xbox360, but I haven't a HD-DVD add on. I'm in no hurry to jump on the HD optical disc bandwagon at the moment, if at all. I got the xbox because I couldn't wait till the PS3 finally got released here in Europe. Maybe I had too much spare cash? I don't know. I was expecting a lot more exclusive games for the PS3 than maybe the xbox would get but they look like they are going to be fairly even at the moment, (if I negate the Jap games which I can't really get into at all). I start to ramble....

re- irongiant
I won't bother with quotes as I'm sure you know what you wrote.

Review said BOTH compressed and non-compressed audio was great in effect. So do you need both? Wasted space?
"Whole 50Gb used for the movie leaving plenty of space to breath". How can that be? All space used but plenty of room? Used because it could be or had to be due to poorer compression techniques?
Are you sure that they are paid to review? Anyway I've heard many reviewers say a film is rubbish only to watch it myself and it hasn't been half as bad as they make out. All reviewers tend to exaggerate even the slightest differences because it would get very boring to read "they are very much similar in reality" every time. Generally always try to understand where the reviewer is coming from and any possible bias, (I'm NOT saying there is ANY bias in that particular article!).

As an aside, many people have crap hearing, speaker systems, eyesight or any combination of the three. So for them even if there was a big difference in quality between HD formats many would never see or hear it. Many audiophiles get carried away with "perfect" sound reproduction but by the time they can afford the really good stuff their hearing is already degrading. Rambling again, sorry.......

HD-DVD waiting for? Who knows, maybe a bus. They certainly don't have the best movie studio support.

Sony have a lot to do with the releases coming out on their format at the moment. They are trying to make sure that they can showcase the very best aspects of a BluRay disc. Very naive if you think otherwise, (quick look on the net and you'll see many references to Sony and that particular release). Anyway it's the movie and its' coding that make the overall experience, BluRay is just the carrier not the data itself. VC-1 is more compact and will use less space than the MPEG4 currently in use on the BluRay discs and will therefore use less space. Not necessarily losing quality. BluRay may yet use VC-1 coding in the future so could cram even more features onto one disc.
Try not to mistake the media with the medium, (NOT saying you did) but I would like to see the same movie on both formats made to the best of the respective camps ability to make a true comparison. For the films that are on both formats I'm not certain that they have been equally exploited to their maximum for good comparisons to be made directly. Early BluRay discs slightly over compensated for colour but who cares. Just turn down the colour on your TV set and it's sorted.

My last comment was not meant to be personal, merely using F9zDark's remark to re-enforce his earlier posted view attacking the HD-DVD hinting at it as a choice for dumb people in effect, in reverse to balance out the equation a bit. Of course if you want Playstation 3 games and HD movies then of course PS3 is certainly NOT a dumb choice. If I ever buy a HD movie soon I'm sure it will be on BluRay format too, (more selection and I already have a player).

This whole thread seemed to start by virtually attacking the HD-DVD format seemingly only because it's not in the PS3. This forum is most definitely the not the most unbiased in that respect and I just wanted to balance some of that probable bias.

[F9zDark]

In respect to the biases around here, its very difficult to be unbiased, when you have people who don't even own a PS3, bashing it to hell here in the PS3 forums.

Now, don't get me wrong, anyone can post anywhere they wish, but its always the usual suspects, inciting flame wars over and over. Since those individuals hardly listen to reason, the only intelligent way to deal with them is to become just as unreasonable, and then its a matter of who's the last man standing.

[ketchup]

Here's a useful link to help explain some of the "initial" problems with BluRay as against HD-DVD.

http://reviews.cnet.com/5420-6449_7-0.html?forumID=104&messageID=2394338&threadID=220381

Blu-Ray has improved as suggested it would in this article but it gives an insight into the background and still current issues.

To me I guess that I wouldn't really notice any significant difference between formats when viewing, except maybe the menu speed. One day I'm sure I'll watch a optical disc recorded HD movie. So far all recorded onto my hard disc recorder from TV.

Enjoy the read :)