"Blu-ray support a last minute switch, Microsoft says..."
- Thread starter The GameMaster
- Start date
Ok out of curiosity this is something I'd like to know, if anyone has any insights.
Costs:
Single layer HD-DVD < Single layer Blu-Ray
Dual-Layer HD-DVD ??? Single layer Blu-Ray
I remember reading that dual-layering the ROMs raises their expense by quite a bit. Since I don't have an article link or anything other than memory to go on right now though, wondering if there is verification of this. If the 'greater storage' version of HD-DVD costs more than the 5GB reduced storage capacity single Blu-Ray, I think that's at least a facet that should be added to the discussion.
I have no in-built preference one format vs the other, save that blu-ray has a cool name and that I will (apparently) be owning a blu-ray player sometime in the not-too-distant future. On those grounds alone of course, good news for blu-ray translates to good news of convenience for me.
MS and Intel made some strong points for HD-DVD here, to be sure - but I feel it has as much to do with the timeline they're looking to push their digital-home initiatives as anythign else, because surely the vast majority of their issues with Blu-ray will be soon overcome.
Costs:
Single layer HD-DVD < Single layer Blu-Ray
Dual-Layer HD-DVD ??? Single layer Blu-Ray
I remember reading that dual-layering the ROMs raises their expense by quite a bit. Since I don't have an article link or anything other than memory to go on right now though, wondering if there is verification of this. If the 'greater storage' version of HD-DVD costs more than the 5GB reduced storage capacity single Blu-Ray, I think that's at least a facet that should be added to the discussion.
I have no in-built preference one format vs the other, save that blu-ray has a cool name and that I will (apparently) be owning a blu-ray player sometime in the not-too-distant future. On those grounds alone of course, good news for blu-ray translates to good news of convenience for me.
MS and Intel made some strong points for HD-DVD here, to be sure - but I feel it has as much to do with the timeline they're looking to push their digital-home initiatives as anythign else, because surely the vast majority of their issues with Blu-ray will be soon overcome.
The consistant point I am finding in the article is that while certain technologies are in the work, HD DVD is closer to production in the real world for these advancements.Titanio said:MS FUD at workIf you read the whole thread you'd see there is DVD/BD hybrid media in the works, it has been publically demonstrated in fact, and it furthermore part of the spec. Read my post above.
Case in point, JVD is saying it will be in the BD spec. This IT show was of last week, so this is not yet even set in stone. So as it currently stands it is not happening--only promises. BDA is indicating it will, but with the uncertainty of the market and how things have developed one should not count their eggs before they have hatched.
So yet it is in the works -- the very issue Wintel is hitting home on. HD DVD is further in development on a number of issues. And while they made a technical error in regards to whether we will ever see one (we see it... now will we see it in the market?). On the other hand it is not currently part of the spec--something that would concern a multibillion dollar company.
Why has it not been part of the spec? The BDA knows it is important to many market players, so why the hold out? Is it political or is this a last minute development and is not as advanced? Have they demonstrated it can be realistically--and financially--realistic to push into the market?
c0_re said:
Neither camp has shown diddly-squat when it comes to the mass production of these things though. I've little doubt HD-DVD would be less expensive, in the short term anyway. The whole overall point on hybrids, though, amongst some of the others made, seems flaky to me. There are reasons for MS's choice which aren't listed here, and they're far more strategic than many of these.
Titanio said:
Of course there are other reasons, but Microshaft doens't need any more reasons the ones they listed are real enough.
FACT: HDDVD is less complex
FACT: HDDVD is much closer to current DVD disk archecture technology
FACT: I'ts Cheaper to Mass produce(read upgrade presses) at current DVD press facilities
MfA said:
I think you read my post wrong thats exaclty what I'm trying to say
Last edited by a moderator:
heheDave Baumann said:
I actually was a little afraid to read when I saw myself quoted by You.Thought I'd be accused of trolling or some other bad behaviour... must be the traumas from school times or something
I quess I look at it mainly from my own perspective, I know I wouldn't buy some inferior hybrid discs because I know the full HD version would be available eventually.
Do I understand it correct, that there would be at least three different discs from a movie at retail:
the standard DVD,
the hybrid DVD + HD-DVD
the HD-DVD
If I yet had no HD player, saw these three discs on the shelf,
the DVD having all the extras plus full quality DVD sound and pic,
the hybrid disc with less extras than the standard DVD and possibly a little inferior sound and picture, and a higher price than DVD.
the HD-DVD which is the best in quality and extras, most expensive, but which I wouldn't be able to view yet.
I'd buy the standard DVD in 99% of the movies and jsut buy the film again when I buy a HD-DVD player. I wouldn't be replacing my complete collection anyway, just the best films, and I wouldn't be replacing them all at once, but over years (as likely the HD-DVD versions will also be released over years too, not all at once).
That's all I got to say for my defence Mr Baumann, can I go home now
Last edited by a moderator:
c0_re said:
Sure, but not MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH more.
rabidrabbit said:hehe
Thought I'd be accused of trolling or some other bad behaviour... must be the traumas from school times or something
I quess I look at it mainly from my own perspective, I know I wouldn't buy some inferior hybrid discs because I know the full HD version would be available eventually.
Do I understand it correct, that there would be at least three different discs from a movie at retail:
the standard DVD,
the hybrid DVD + HD-DVD
the HD-DVD
If I yet had no HD player, saw these three discs on the shelf,
the DVD having all the extras plus full quality DVD sound and pic,
the hybrid disc with less extras than the standard DVD and possibly a little inferior sound and picture
and the HD-DVD which is the best in quality and extras, but which I wouldn't be able to view.
I'd buy the standard DVD in 99% of the movies and jsut buy the film again when I buy a HD-DVD player. I wouldn't be replacing my complete collection anyway, just the best films, and I wouldn't be replacing them all at once, but over years (as likely the HD-DVD versions will also be released over years too, not all at once).
That's all I got to say for my defence Mr Baumann, can I go home now
Current DVD(DVD9) tech would be just fine for High def movies, MPEG2 crap compression is whats gobbling up all that space.
Acert93 said:
It is certainly an assertion that the article, or indeed Microsoft, makes. Is it one that is necessarily factual, or a PR manouvre? Aren't you ignoring the fact that Microsoft would not really want Blu-ray to have an easy success? I don't think this can be ignored.
What's that got to do with HD-DVD hybrid discs? Would I be able to view a non MPEG2 content with my current DVD player that support only the "common DVD9 standard"c0_re said:
rabidrabbit said:
I'm not sure I see why the hybrid disks necessacarily need be inferior. If disks come with dual layer HD on one side and DVD on the other, given the trends we saw with DVD all you need to necessarily miss out on is the print on one side of the disk...
Everything MS says is from MS's business perspective. Of course MS wants to push forward initiatives that support their platforms, consumers, and innovations (read: products they have developed and would like to see become a standard).onanie said:
Alas, Wintel are not the first to raise many of these points.
These points may be COMPLETELY invalid from a market position. My main point has been this points are interesting and give us another corperate perspective on the debate. Frequently this is all we get:
BD is bigger than HD DVD. BD > HD DVD.
What these articles show is that there is a lot more at stake and more at issue. What is true of the technology? Time will tell. What is best for the consumer? I don't know. What format will win? Do a search on the forum, I have stated a few times I think BD has the best chance of success.
But as far as we know Wintel can be simply drawing up the most important talking points to FORCE Toshiba and Sony back to the negotiating table. There is a lot at stake, and size is NOT the only factor. Companies are backing the formats based on what is best for them in their market.
rabidrabbit said:
No I’m just saying that, a hybrid HDDVD disk wouldn't be "inferior" in quality there's plenty of space available on these disks and part of the new standard for HighDef DVD is different compressions technologies, not just MPEG2 which is ancient and horribly inefficient.
I mean I havn't bougten a single DVD since lord of the rings SE came out, there a waste of money becuse I have a HDTV(going on 5 years) and 480p is crap when I have a High def Tivo and can download high def movies online for free. Why would I pay 15-20$ for a 480p movie? thats just stupid
Oh, ok then. I'd completely forgotten two side dual layer discs were even possible.
I was wrong, wish I could rewind time and make those previous posts of mine not happen.....
...still, is it realistic to expect it to happen. Why are there no movies with one two side two layer DVD's now instead of movies with two dual layer discs.... consumers didn't want them because more is better (and because the discs didn't look as nice as those with printed pretty pics on them)
I was wrong, wish I could rewind time and make those previous posts of mine not happen.....
...still, is it realistic to expect it to happen. Why are there no movies with one two side two layer DVD's now instead of movies with two dual layer discs.... consumers didn't want them because more is better (and because the discs didn't look as nice as those with printed pretty pics on them)
Last edited by a moderator:
If the DVD/HD hybrid disc costs significantly more than the straight HD-DVD version though, there is something to be said for putting those dollars of difference towards the purchase of an HD-DVD player. That decision of course dependent on the rate of purchase for the given consumer; less movies purchased per year being more condusive to a 'wait for players prices to drop' approach.
Last edited by a moderator:
Here's where I think you are misunderstanding the hybrid aspect.rabidrabbit said:hehe
If I yet had no HD player, saw these three discs on the shelf,
the DVD having all the extras plus full quality DVD sound and pic,
the hybrid disc with less extras than the standard DVD and possibly a little inferior sound and picture, and a higher price than DVD.
the HD-DVD which is the best in quality and extras, most expensive, but which I wouldn't be able to view yet.
One side of the disc has the full DVD (no loss of picture/sound/features) and the other side of the disc has the full HD-DVD.
"If" the HD-DVD format was it you're more than likely to only see hybrid disc on the market as there is no need for the other two (DVD and HD-DVD), the hybrid covers both users.
Tom Crews
Similar threads
