One of major grief/complaint over HDM player is its slow loading speed. We all know that disc loading speed of current HDM players is unbearably slow compared to DVD. Someone blames Linux, or slow CPU, or optical mechanism or disc type recognition speed.

So let's talk about this problem.
Are you satisfied with current speed? Why is it so slow? How to improve the slow speed of boot up and loading to playing speed? Is it possible to build HDM player on RTOS like vxWork instead of Linux? Aside from boot up time, why is so long delay for loading to play disc? Will fast and expensive CPU solve the problem? Is slow loading speed inescapable fate of HDM disc technology?
Anyone to show us some perspective on this problem?
.

I hear this a bunch but have never witnessed it on my A2. It doesnt feel any slower to load than our old DVD player.

The more advanced content, the more loading time.

Of course would I want it to go quicker, but its worth the wait comparing to watch SD.

PS3 is very fast and responsive

PS3 is very fast and responsive

Yes its fast, but it depends on the disc aswell.

HD-DVD discs on my PC do load even faster than I know it from DVDs. It's near real-time.

It is a combination of things IMO. The CPU matters a lot, but the reason it matters is how Java is compiled Just In Time. Non-Java discs load much faster because there is no compilation needed. Either the code is interpreted or pre-compiled. The reason the PS3 is fast is it has a ridiculously fast CPU compared to stand-alone players.

Linux has nothing to do with it. Linux is the basis for dozens of embedded devices which perform just fine. If Linux is the problem, it is just a very bad implementation.

Ted

I don't see what the big deal is. Sure loading times are a bit slow, so what? Why do people such a problem with this?
J

PS3 = 10-20 seconds loading time depending upon the disc. BD+ and BD-J discs takes longer time to load.

HD-A2 = 15-27 seconds depending upon the featuring of advanced contents.

Part of the problem too is if the player is backward compatible with everything then it has to check the disk a bunch of different ways with different laser pickups. Imagine a dual format player where you put in a CD. Depending on the algorithm it uses to determine the disc type, it might have to do something like

Is it a Blu-Ray disc? - Nope
Is it an HD DVD? - Nope
Is it a DVD? - Nope
Is it a SACD? - Nope
Is it DVD-Audio? - Nope
Is it a CD? - YES, start playing
For all we know, these first-gen HDM players may assume that we're playing mostly DVDs (since DVD has such a huge installed base). If that's the case, it will have to first look at the disc with a red laser, then when that fails, use the blue laser, and that will take time before it can even start reading data. I'm sure we can assume the PS3 is first checking for BD, however, since it uses BD for gaming, and that along with the processing power probably accounts for some of its speed.

The A3 seemed to take 30-60 seconds just to eject. Outrageously bad.

PS3 is very fast and responsive

I would assume that is because it has a tremendous amount of horsepower under the hood. I am still debating getting the PS3 as my Blu Ray player, but I'm not sold on it's looks. Also, lacking analog outs is a turn off. The upside is I can also play games! Decisions, decisions.

Depend on the disc really I've got a A1 and PS3 80GB.
The A1 take 60-120 seconds to load and start playing. My method now is.
Hit open, go find the movie I want to watch, put in player, hit close, get food and/or use restroom. Then come back and enjoy a movie.
I plan on getting an A35 at some point yo replace the A1. Then put the A1 in a closet or another room as the backup.

The PS3 loads most movies within DVD time. The only thing I don't like about the PS3 is it plays the movies like File in that each title has a Play symbol show as if it were playing from a playlist.
I may get a stand alone BD player when every thing is all said and done for specs and such. Plus id like a player with multi channel analog outs. But I may just upgrade the Amplifer to a yamaha RX series. I've got the 5790 now which is great and works for a bedroom but the idea of a 11.2 systems sound pretty sweet along with mutiple HDMI ins. So cool must buy

I would assume that is because it has a tremendous amount of horsepower under the hood. I am still debating getting the PS3 as my Blu Ray player, but I'm not sold on it's looks. Also, lacking analog outs is a turn off. The upside is I can also play games! Decisions, decisions.

I ended up with the Panasonic BD30: not as fast as the PS3 but much faster than my BDP-S1

I returned the PS3 because of HDMI audio issue with a Sharp LC45GX6U and no analog audio: panny works fine and fits in my rack

The loading time on my A30 doesn't bother me nearly as much as having to wait for the whole machine to boot up just to open disc tray and remove a movie (mainly when I'm running late for work in the morning and need to get the disc to the mailbox quickly ;) )

With that said, I had been using the 360 add-on for a year before I got my A30 and was spoiled with quick load/reaction times of the 360

Depending on the algorithm it uses to determine the disc type, it might have to do something like

Is it a Blu-Ray disc? - Nope
Is it an HD DVD? - Nope
Is it a DVD? - Nope
Is it a SACD? - Nope
Is it DVD-Audio? - Nope
Is it a CD? - YES, start playing
F

I really hope the algorithm in question is smarter than that, like directly checking the kind of disc (I'm sure there's some kind of "header" somewhere on the disc with the proper info...) that is inserted, instead of "asking" for it...

The loading time on my A30 doesn't bother me nearly as much as having to wait for the whole machine to boot up just to open disc tray and remove a movie (mainly when I'm running late for work in the morning and need to get the disc to the mailbox quickly ;) )


Boot time and tray opening is indeed the most annoying for me as well. When I press "open" on the remote, I wait a good 5-7 sec sometimes before I see the tray open. I'm still at fw 1.3 btw, I don't know if 2.0 improves things in that area, but the 1080p/24 jaggies issue keep me from upgrading...

The A3 seemed to take 30-60 seconds just to eject. Outrageously bad.

And another 30+ to load the disc. That really put a damper on HD DVD for me, especially after having great response time from my PS3, which I bought exclusively for Blu-ray.

Boot time (at least on my A3) is horrible. It's even worse that I have it hidden away and I have no way of knowing if it's booting or not. I don't know how many times I've hit the "Watch A Movie" button on my harmony, and a minute later the thing still isn't up so I realize that it didn't actually turn on.

Should have at least given a "Please Wait" message while it's booting up so I know it's actually on.

Load time once it's booted is not that bad though...

I really hate when I forget to eject the disc before I turn it off....there goes another 30-45 seconds just to get the disc out.

I have never had a disc loading time problem on my PS3. I had read this was an problem before hand so I was pleasantly surprised. I guess it maybe for some other players but it seemed like such a no-brainer to get the PS3 as my Blu-ray player anyway (and that was the reason I bought it; gaming is a very distant second).

My annoyance is not the disc load time, it is all the lame title sequences and previews most of which try to disable the functions to skip them. This is annoying on SD DVD's too. Planet Earth is lame this way. We have to see at least part of that BBC HD title screen like 3 times before getting to the content. These studios should learn to get over themselves.

The games are just as bad and even harder to avoid. Some of these games have 3 or 4 different companies that each want an animated title sequence and it gets extremely old very fast on repeated uses.

The A3 seemed to take 30-60 seconds just to eject. Outrageously bad.

What do you expect? You know how reluctant anything HD is to admit defeat. ;)

I would assume that is because it has a tremendous amount of horsepower under the hood. I am still debating getting the PS3 as my Blu Ray player, but I'm not sold on it's looks. Also, lacking analog outs is a turn off. The upside is I can also play games! Decisions, decisions.

If you sit with a PS3 and compare it to a stand alone, you will find that its advantages FAR outway its negatives.

1) Its fast
2) can work as a media center
3) can download game demos and trailers
4) can customize the backgroud
5) has a slide show feature(which is very nicely implemented)
6) Has wifi for downloads and firmware updates
7) can play PS3 games
8) is upgradeable
9) will usually maintain its resale value better than stand alones

Negatives
1) cannot output optical audio and HDMI audio at once
2) RF remote work arounds... not that good
3) No analog out
4) louder than stand alones(though not that loud)

Disk transfer rate 50mbs
Cell multicore 'super computer architecture'.

Load times of java discs over 15 seconds.

Why do you call that 'fast' ?

If you sit with a PS3 and compare it to a stand alone, you will find that its advantages FAR outway its negatives.
......
Negatives
1) cannot output optical and HDMI at once
2) RF remote work arounds... not that good
3) No analog out
4) louder than stand alones(though not that loud)


5) No DTS MA support (yet)

^ Ha! Are people still seriously waiting for the PS3 to do DTS-HD Master Audio?!?

The loading time on my A30 doesn't bother me nearly as much as having to wait for the whole machine to boot up just to open disc tray and remove a movie (mainly when I'm running late for work in the morning and need to get the disc to the mailbox quickly ;) )


I agree.
There are two issues.

1. Slow boot time
2. Slow disc load time

Out of my 3 players, these are my observations:
This includes navigating/dealing with previews(FF advancing)

Boot time:
A20 - about 30-40 seconds boot time before I can open the disc tray
BD-P1200 - about 30-40 seconds boot time before I can open the disc tray
BD30 - about 15-20 seconds before I can open the disc tray


Disc load time:
A20 - 20-30 seconds on Uni and WB discs. Longer on other studio titles
BD-P1200 - 20-30 seconds on WB and other studio titles. Any Disney or Fox with BDJ or BD+ can take about 1:30 seconds to load

BD30 - 20 seconds to load WB and other studio titles. Any Disney or Fox with BDJ or BD+ can take about 30-40 seconds to load.

PS3 is very fast and responsive

So is the XBOX 360 with HD-DVD. My first players were the BD-P1000 and the HD-A2. They were both so slow and frustrating, and lots of freezing, jamming etc. When I got rid of those and got the PS3 and the XBOX all my problems went away. I have had not one problem playing a disc on either game system and they load fast. I have Netflix 8 at a time and I watch 2 or more HD/BD movies a day.

From my experience I think it is all about the CPU. The XBOX and PS3 have many times the power of a stand alone.

Buying that BD-P1000 wast a huge mistake, the worst CE device I have ever owned, and I could have had a PS3 for less, which I ended up getting anyway.

As for the IR integration for PS3, I picked up Nyko BluWave remote and programmed my USB UIRT with it and it works fine. Only cost like $15

Long before my wife and I are settled in to watch the movie, the player is booted up, loaded, and paused.

I hear this a bunch but have never witnessed it on my A2. It doesnt feel any slower to load than our old DVD player.

The worst aspect that most folks are attributing to "slow disk loading" comes from the extremely long boot-up times. But even after the power-up sequence, the time to load an HD DVD or BD is very slow compared to DVDs on a DVD player (even the simplest variety of HD DVD/BD with no horrible Disney-esque Java weirdness).

I remember when I first got a DVD player and couldn't believe how bloody long it took to load a CD, and even longer for a DVD. CD players start playing CDs with one second of hitting play, often practically immediately. DVD players loading a CD take whole seconds! Like 5 or 6!

It's just the consumer's expectations that better technology should lead to faster performance.

If I had any spare time and could remember, I would go home tonight and time the load times of CD, DVD and HD DVD players with the various media types they support, just for SH!+s and giggles. But I probably won't. Any college students looking to avoid homework tonight around here? :D

shinksma

Boot time and tray opening is indeed the most annoying for me as well. When I press "open" on the remote, I wait a good 5-7 sec sometimes before I see the tray open. I'm still at fw 1.3 btw, I don't know if 2.0 improves things in that area, but the 1080p/24 jaggies issue keep me from upgrading...

Luckly no tray opening in PS3.

I only has PS3 not other HDM player. Not problem with the loading time. Actually compare to loading time, im more annoyed those DVD that force you to watch 10 mins trailers before the main menu pop up, yeah you can hit NEXT but.. come on...

Disk transfer rate 50mbs
Cell multicore 'super computer architecture'.

Load times of java discs over 15 seconds.

Why do you call that 'fast' ?

I haven't found a BD yet that loads in less than a few seconds (5-6 at most) on my PS3. What are some of the Java titles which you have seen which take this long?

Thanks,
Ted

I haven't found a BD yet that loads in less than a few seconds (5-6 at most) on my PS3. What are some of the Java titles which you have seen which take this long?

Thanks,
Ted
Try any of the POTC titles or F4 ROTSS.
I believe Ratatoulie is also a slow loader.

Try any of the POTC titles or F4 ROTSS.
I believe Ratatoulie is also a slow loader.

Hmmm, I have all of those movies. None of them seem to take that long to load. Are you including the boot time for the PS3, or that lairs dice game on the disc?

Try any of the POTC titles or F4 ROTSS.
I believe Ratatoulie is also a slow loader.

I tried POTC:3 with a stop-watch. Not sure which load-time you were speaking of. Time to first preview from screen going blank after insert was 5.51 seconds. About 10 seconds total from insert to first preview. Time from end of DisneyParks ad to Menu Language selection was 5.07 seconds. This is on my 40GB PS3, purchased early January 2008.

Ted

^ Ha! Are people still seriously waiting for the PS3 to do DTS-HD Master Audio?!?Of course, why not? I'm hoping with a firmware update sometime this year, my PS3 will do internal decoding of DTS-HD MA and output the audio as PCM over HDMI. The just announced BDP-S550 will do internal decoding of DTS-HD MA and output over analog, so I fully expect them to add that processing to the PS3 as well. There's no reason for them not to. It would be yet another feature checkbox to lure people into the PS3. :cool:

In a rank ordering of issues with my Blu-Rap player (Sony BDP-S1), this is not in the top 10.

Of course, why not? I'm hoping with a firmware update sometime this year, my PS3 will do internal decoding of DTS-HD MA and output the audio as PCM over HDMI. The just announced BDP-S550 will do internal decoding of DTS-HD MA and output over analog, so I fully expect them to add that processing to the PS3 as well. There's no reason for them not to. It would be yet another feature checkbox to lure people into the PS3. :cool:

Maybe they don't want the PS3 to be competition for their stand alone sales?

THe Xbox 360 HD DVD add on and the PS3 were both much faster than any Blu-ry or HD DVD standalone player so far.

My HD XA2 (and HD XA1) got much much faster with more optimized firmware, so the disc checking got smarter as time went on. If I remember right, from the OOTB original firmware to the latest , it got to be about 20 second faster to play a HD DVD an even faster to play a CD or DVD. The last firmware for the HD XA1 made bootup tolerable, even though it had a robust Intel CPU.

The PS3 and Xbox360 were designed to start faster as consoles and they had a bunch of extra CPU power to do those disc checks and other things. But since they were using common optical drives as set top units, no reason that BD set tops cannot reach that performance soon as the SoC gets more optimized as the drive performance is not the bottleneck.

The new BD-Live Sony's coming this year should be much faster than previous BD players as Sony can take advantage of its PS3 Blu-ray experience to optimize some interactions with the optical drive.

Maybe they don't want the PS3 to be competition for their stand alone sales? As soon as the can , Sony executives would rather have people buy dedicated Sony Blu-ray players instead of the more expensive to build PS3s. You want PS3 owners to be buying games for the royalties . If you buy a PS3 only as a BD player you don't buy games. Sony will make more money off you in that case if you buy a dedicated BD player thats less expensive to produce than a PS3.

But since the gaming and CE divisions at Sony are stove piped, there's some competition between them.

As soon as the can , Sony executives would rather have people buy dedicated Sony Blu-ray players instead of the more expensive to build PS3s. You want PS3 owners to be buying games for the royalties . If you buy a PS3 only as a BD player you don't buy games. Sony will make more money off you in that case if you buy a dedicated BD player thats less expensive to produce than a PS3..

This my be true now, but when Sony was trying to win the "war" they wanted as many PS3s sold as possible, even if they were just going to be BD players.

Ted

I don't see what the big deal is. Sure loading times are a bit slow, so what? Why do people such a problem with this?
J

because people don't want to wait to long for anything.
in all honesty standalone players are too slow.
im sure that issue will be dealt with down the road.

I think the load times on PS3 are just fine. Everything seems to load up promptly for me.

As for the A3 though, awful. Awful awful awful. I don't miss it.

Maybe they don't want the PS3 to be competition for their stand alone sales?By this time next year year the Sony standalones with features comparable to the PS3 will probably be moving lower in price than the cheapest PS3, so that's going to be a moot point. At that stage the PS3 will return to being "mostly" a game console, although some people will probably seek it out at the higher price to gain the media streaming and gaming features in addition to BD movie playback.

The new Pioneers coming out later this year are said to have a GOAL of improving the loading times to less than 10 seconds.

Long before my wife and I are settled in to watch the movie, the player is booted up, loaded, and paused.

and I'd be willing to bet which one of you paused it waiting for the other!:p

I used a stop watch on my Sony BDP-S300 when it was on firmware 2.30 or so. On a cold start with the Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer disc already in the player, it took 3 mins 15 seconds from pushing the power button to get to the point of showing the copyright warning notice. Approximately 50 seconds of that was the player getting to the point of showing the Blu-ray logo at all, and the rest was specific to that disc.

I tried it again after I put the newest firmware on and it came in at, if I remember correctly, 2 mins 50 seconds, for the same test. An improvement, yes, but hardly "let's throw a parade!" worthy.

I'd submit that either result is really unacceptable for a $500 player.

I do wonder why Sony hasn't started switching their standalones over to CELL-based processors, as I was certainly under the understanding that moving CELL beyond console gaming was part of the plan. Maybe that's yet to come.

Maybe they don't want the PS3 to be competition for their stand alone sales?

I wondered about that too when they added 1080p24 output, DVD upconversion and advanced audio decoding... but now that BD is the only game in town, maybe they don't have to make the PS3 shine quite so much as a BD player. Time will tell I suppose.

My Sharp hp20 takes 15 to 25 seconds not to bad

If you sit with a PS3 and compare it to a stand alone, you will find that its advantages FAR outway its negatives.

1) Its fast
2) can work as a media center
3) can download game demos and trailers
4) can customize the backgroud
5) has a slide show feature(which is very nicely implemented)
6) Has wifi for downloads and firmware updates
7) can play PS3 games
8) is upgradeable
9) will usually maintain its resale value better than stand alones

Negatives
1) cannot output optical and HDMI at once
2) RF remote work arounds... not that good
3) No analog out
4) louder than stand alones(though not that loud)

Well that completely rules out the PS3 for me then. I need optical output for my 5.1 system and HDMI for my TV. (Despite being HDMI 1.3 it can only pass through stereo for some weird reason.)

Well that completely rules out the PS3 for me then. I need optical output for my 5.1 system and HDMI for my TV. (Despite being HDMI 1.3 it can only pass through stereo for some weird reason.)
I'm pretty sure it can do this, as that's how I've had it from day 1. HDMI for video, and optical to my receiver. Perhaps he meant can't output audio on both HDMI and optical at the same time? I suppose there might be reasons you'd want both outputs simultaneously, but I can't think of a (normal) situation...

He also mentions having a loud PS3 - there have been reports both ways. Mine is the quietest of all my components - silent up to about 3 inches away.

I'm pretty sure it can do this, as that's how I've had it from day 1. HDMI for video, and optical to my receiver. Perhaps he meant can't output audio on both HDMI and optical at the same time? I suppose there might be reasons you'd want both outputs simultaneously, but I can't think of a (normal) situation...

He also mentions having a loud PS3 - there have been reports both ways. Mine is the quietest of all my components - silent up to about 3 inches away.

I'm totally confused. If it can't output HDMI and optical at the same time then how do you get both video from your TV AND audio from a seperate sound system? :confused:

How about stop/resume playback ?

I'm totally confused. If it can't output HDMI and optical at the same time then how do you get both video from your TV AND audio from a seperate sound system? :confused:
Well, that's what I mean - you select in the PS3 system menu what you want to output for video (HDMI, component, composite [don't remember exact choices here...]) and then for audio (HDMI, optical, RCA, whatever)

I think what the OP was saying was that you can't have audio output through HDMI *AND* audio output through optical at the same time. (Which IS true.)

See what I'm trying to say?

Well, that's what I mean - you select in the PS3 system menu what you want to output for video (HDMI, component, composite [don't remember exact choices here...]) and then for audio (HDMI, optical, RCA, whatever)

I think what the OP was saying was that you can't have audio output through HDMI *AND* audio output through optical at the same time. (Which IS true.)

See what I'm trying to say?

Oh, OK. He should have made that clearer, lol! That's not much of a negative though is it? I mean would you use both? I always turn down the audio on my TV when the audio is going through the seperate speaker system because I get a slight echoing, I'm guessing because I've got an LCD HDTV so it's got an 8ms (6ms in Game Mode) response time.

How about stop/resume playback ?

Works fine on non-Java discs in my experience.

Ted

Oh, OK. He should have made that clearer, lol! That's not much of a negative though is it? I mean would you use both? I always turn down the audio on my TV when the audio is going through the seperate speaker system because I get a slight echoing, I'm guessing because I've got an LCD HDTV so it's got an 8ms (6ms in Game Mode) response time.
Yes, I should have said "for audio"

The reason I consider it a negative, is because I have set up my GFs parents Home Theater. All of his components go through an HDMI switch, that outputs to two TVs(one in the kitchen the other in the living room). The living room uses optical for audio, and the kitchen uses passthrough HDMI.

So we cant use the PS3 for the kitchen.

Its also annoying when you move the PS3 around. IE from the living room to bedroom. I guess the best solution would be to buy an HDMI AVR... but still its a little annoying for now.

Maybe they don't want the PS3 to be competition for their stand alone sales?

Why would Sony want to sell a $250 stand alone blu-ray player when they can sell you a $500 media center/gaming machine?

Well that completely rules out the PS3 for me then. I need optical output for my 5.1 system and HDMI for my TV. (Despite being HDMI 1.3 it can only pass through stereo for some weird reason.)

It can't output AUDIO via hdmi and optical at once. It most certainly CAN output audio via optical while outputting video via hdmi.

you won't have any problems with it.

Is slow loading speed inescapable fate of HDM disc technology?Well considering the PS3 is much faster than early generation Blu-ray players I don't think "disc technology" has anything to do with it.

Well considering the PS3 is much faster than early generation Blu-ray players I don't think "disc technology" has anything to do with it. Exactly.

Its clear the disc or the optical drive assembly is not the issue, since 18 month old, built 24 month ago PS3s are faster than most/all Blu-ray standalones.

As SoC silicon gets more optimized and cheaper and memory prices etc. continue to fall, its clear that Blu-ray standalones will get better at this and other performance issues in the near future.

Heck , eventually Sony could just put the guts of a PS3 into another form factor as a fast BD player, if it came to that or PS3 prices will eventually fall.

Why would Sony want to sell a $250 stand alone blu-ray player when they can sell you a $500 media center/gaming machine?
.... because some people will not spend that much?:p

It seems that prime causes of slow disc loading speed of HDM are slow CPU speed and long Java start up time. If then, it will take quite some money to shorten disc loading time of HDM SA player to that is similar to PS/3.

CPU is quite expensive part and it is not utilized much while playing the HD movie itself. Most of HD stream decoding work is done by dedicated hardware codec in the player. So expensive/fast CPU is not good option for player designer.

I suggest that HDM player should implement function similar to "maximum power saving" mode of PC. In this mode, player will save all contents of RAM (with Java subsystem initialized properly) to internal flash memory and turn off. On power up, the content of saved RAM will be restored from flash memory avoiding long boot time and Java initialization time.

This will cut boot time /disc loading time and shut-down time of player considerably.

+1. Nailed it.

The Sharp BD players start up really fast and 1 sec loading has been stated design goal for BD players this year.

As more resources are directed to Blu-ray player design and as COGS fall, more performance at lower cost will come in time.

There is a lot of work going on the improve loading times. Faster CPUs help, but biggest improvement is being able to quickly decode lots of PNG images which are needed for navigation. So there will be faster loading times and smoother navigation while lowering costs. The new higher-performance SoCs lower the BOM cost of the players significantly while drive costs are also going down.

There is a lot of work going on the improve loading times. Faster CPUs help, but biggest improvement is being able to quickly decode lots of PNG images which are needed for navigation. So there will be faster loading times and smoother navigation while lowering costs. The new higher-performance SoCs lower the BOM cost of the players significantly while drive costs are also going down.
Is that PNG decoding the most significant bottleneck?

Is that the cause of the brutally slow loading times when loading up a B-J menu now on most players beside the PS3 ?

I asked a question a while ago. This does pertain to the thread:

Originally Posted by Lee Stewart
For Any Insider . . .

If the SoC and the GPU (general processing unit) were all one component - a Super SoC - would the startup/load time be more like a DVD player then current HDM players?

Reply by Andy Pennell:

Startup time (for HD DVD) is determined by a combination of factors:

OS boot time
Disc type detection
Player initialization
AV startup

Take the A1 for example: it has a slow OS boot time (Linux), slow disc type detection (Gen 1 drive), medium player init (fast CPU, old codebase) and good AV startup characteristics (hardware-assisted).

Take the Xbox: OS is already booted, disc detection is average (Gen 2 drive), medium player init (fast CPU, newer codebase) and medium AV startup (as there is no hardware assist). Probably the best of the current devices overall.

Take a theoretical SuperSOC: unknown OS boot time, unknown disc type detection, medium player init (average CPU, newest codebase), hardware-assisted AV startup.

So a SuperSOC has the potential to have a fast startup, but it's still determined to a great extent on the OS boot time and the disc detection. The devil is in the details.
__________________
Andy Pennell - Software Developer, HD DVD Team, Microsoft Corp. And proud of it.

Is that PNG decoding the most significant bottleneck?

Is that the cause of the brutally slow loading times when loading up a B-J menu now on most players beside the PS3 ?

Many studio's create their BD-J application image assets in one of 2 very large PNG images which contain several smaller actual images in the large image. They do this so they can "cut" up the large image once its decoded into graphics memory and quickly blit it onscreen. The problem with this is that it requires quite a bit of CPU to decompress these large PNGs. PNG uses standard DEFLATE (like zip) copmression, but its still very CPU intensive.

I've heard rumors of some SoC vendors creating hardware PNG decoders...

I've heard rumors of some SoC vendors creating hardware PNG decoders...That's why the latest generation of players load much faster, along with moving to more powerful CPUs.

I asked a question a while ago. This does pertain to the thread:The goal for HDTV SoCs is <5 second bootup time (power on to a program being displayed), so any techniques done there could be applied to BD players.

The goal for HDTV SoCs is <5 second bootup time (power on to a program being displayed), so any techniques done there could be applied to BD players.

Yes - I assumed that would be the case. So anything on the horizon on a SuperSoC?

Many studio's create their BD-J application image assets in one of 2 very large PNG images which contain several smaller actual images in the large image. They do this so they can "cut" up the large image once its decoded into graphics memory and quickly blit it onscreen. The problem with this is that it requires quite a bit of CPU to decompress these large PNGs. PNG uses standard DEFLATE (like zip) copmression, but its still very CPU intensive.

I've heard rumors of some SoC vendors creating hardware PNG decoders...
Why don't they use BMP format?

Yeah, BMP picture file is bigger, but faster to decode than PNG. Even for very big image like 1920*1080 image, PNG image size is about 2-3 MB and BMP image is about 5-6 MB. Generally for large bitmap image, BMP image size is about 2-3 times size of PNG image. It takes just 3-4 MB more disc space than PNG. It is only a small speck on large Blu-ray disc space. Blu-ray player takes less than a second to read image file of such size from Blu-ray disc.

BMP image is much simpler to decode than PNG image. In fact, player CPU don't have to decode BMP image file at all. Player firmware (operation system) like WinCE or Linux uses BMP image format as internal image format. So CPU only need to copy bitmap (bitblt) without any decoding procedure.

By using BMP image format for Blu-ray disc menu/UI image resource file, CPU usage for decoding them is reduced significantly. Why don't take advantage of vast storage capacity and fast transfer rate of Blu-ray disc to compensate slow CPU?
.

My Sharp BR player sometimes takes FOREVER. I thought "Live Free or Die Hard" wasn't even going to load, it took several minutes to even get to the FBI warnings. One time Ratatouille took near 10 minutes, and this was when I was showing some friends my set-up, for the first time ever. They kept laughing every time the little rat loading disc thing kept coming up, over and over. But in the end, they were blown-away by the picture quality.

Yes - I assumed that would be the case. So anything on the horizon on a SuperSoC?There is more than one way to skin a cat, so to speak. :) The people designing the SoCs and firmware also want the BD players to be as fast as DVD players. That is where the primary focus is now.

Many studio's create their BD-J application image assets in one of 2 very large PNG images which contain several smaller actual images in the large image. They do this so they can "cut" up the large image once its decoded into graphics memory and quickly blit it onscreen. The problem with this is that it requires quite a bit of CPU to decompress these large PNGs. PNG uses standard DEFLATE (like zip) copmression, but its still very CPU intensive.

I've heard rumors of some SoC vendors creating hardware PNG decoders... Thanks for this and kjacks explanations. I was missing that piece of the puzzle in my understanding of the situation.

Seems to me that the situation is very solvable as material costs naturally decline and the software and SoC solutions gets more refined.

you don't have to pay to license png. that's why it is used.

Not only slow player but also the movie studios are to blame partly for slow disc loading. Studio should understand its customer and and their player. Studio doesn't care much about slow loading speed and throws pretty but slow eye-candy resources in menu screen and heavy Java code to its movie disc.
All these eye-candy item slows disc loading. Studio must stick to less pretty but fast menu screen. Studio must test loading speed of their disc on slow standalone player of average owner, not on blazing fast PS/3. Most customer don't care about fancy eye-candy in menu, but fast and functional menu interface. At least, there should be an option so that user can choose simple and fast menu instead of pretty and slow menu. Movie studio/player manufacturer should provide such "alternate menu" for slow player.

The player itself should have enough stock/default resources in firmware so that simple basic menu can be constructed and displayed fast without loading much resources from the disc. Instead of PNG format, BMP format should be used for Image resource loaded from disc. BTW, BMP format also don't need to pay license fee.

My Sharp BR player sometimes takes FOREVER. I thought "Live Free or Die Hard" wasn't even going to load, it took several minutes to even get to the FBI warnings. One time Ratatouille took near 10 minutes, and this was when I was showing some friends my set-up, for the first time ever. They kept laughing every time the little rat loading disc thing kept coming up, over and over. But in the end, they were blown-away by the picture quality.

Yeah. That can be very embarrassing when you're hosting.:o

I think these issues should have been dealt with in the early stages of development.

Not only slow player but also the movie studios are to blame partly for slow disc loading. Studio should understand its customer and and their player. Studio doesn't care much about slow loading speed and throws pretty but slow eye-candy resources in menu screen and heavy Java code to its movie disc.
All these eye-candy item slows disc loading. Studio must stick to less pretty but fast menu screen. Studio must test loading speed of their disc on slow standalone player of average owner, not on blazing fast PS/3. Most customer don't care about fancy eye-candy in menu, but fast and functional menu interface. At least, there should be an option so that user can choose simple and fast menu instead of pretty and slow menu. Movie studio/player manufacturer should provide such "alternate menu" for slow player.

The player itself should have enough stock/default resources in firmware so that simple basic menu can be constructed and displayed fast without loading much resources from the disc. Instead of PNG format, BMP format should be used for Image resource loaded from disc. BTW, BMP format also don't need to pay license fee.Studios are figuring PS3 as the reference platform and assuming most hardware will soon catch up. Not enough older BD hardware owners to worry about and they can always buy newer faster players if it bothers them.

No way the creative folks are going to be limited to what profile 1.0 first generation BD hardware can do.

My Sharp BR player sometimes takes FOREVER. I thought "Live Free or Die Hard" wasn't even going to load, it took several minutes to even get to the FBI warnings. One time Ratatouille took near 10 minutes, and this was when I was showing some friends my set-up, for the first time ever. They kept laughing every time the little rat loading disc thing kept coming up, over and over. But in the end, they were blown-away by the picture quality.

Ratatouille has a disclaimer that it may take a long time to load. The even sadder thing is that it will only get worse for most current players as the discs get more complex.:(

I have the PS3. I haven't noticed any slow loading or performance yet.

. Studio must stick to less pretty but fast menu screen. Studio must test loading speed of their disc on slow standalone player of average owner, not on blazing fast PS/3. .

The average owner HAS A PS3, so why should they bother testing on substandard players?

The average owner HAS A PS3, so why should they bother testing on substandard players?
I meant weighted average. For each owner, multiply number of times he played Blu-ray movie disc on his player and sum them up. :).

Cell CPU in PS3 is clocked around 3-4GHz. MIPS/Arm9 CPU in most standalone Blu-ray player is clocked at 200MHz-300MHz. PS3 CPU is very very expensive to be used as CPU of standalone BR player and so powerful that it can decode two HD video stream in software. PS3 CPU is at least 10 times or more as powerful as embedded CPU of SoC in standalone player.

Average standalone player will never have CPU that rivals Cell CPU of PS/3 in foreseeable future. PS3 will remain as BR player with fastest / shortest disc loading time in the world for long long time to come, maybe till end of life of BR disc. We will NEVER see standalone player that can load disc as fast as PS/3 does after 5 years from now. :(
That is why movie studio should not take PS3 as average BR player.

The average owner HAS A PS3, so why should they bother testing on substandard players?

Mainstream adoption requires standalones. With 10 million PS3's out there, look at the pathetic HDM sales and marketshare. The more BD comes a "PS3 format", the more likely that it fails.

Cell CPU in PS3 is clocked around 3-4GHz. MIPS/Arm9 CPU in most standalone Blu-ray player is clocked at 200MHz-300MHz. PS3 CPU is very very expensive to be used as CPU of standalone BR player and so powerful that it can decode two HD video stream in software. PS3 CPU is at least 10 times or more as powerful as embedded CPU of SoC in standalone player.

Average standalone player will never have CPU that rivals Cell CPU of PS/3 in foreseeable future. PS3 will remain as BR player with fastest / shortest disc loading time in the world for long long time to come, maybe till end of life of BR disc. We will NEVER see standalone player that can load disc as fast as PS/3 does after 5 years from now.
That is why movie studio should not take PS3 as average BR player.Hmm. Makes sense.

Seems likely the PS3 will remain the fastest Blu-ray player in startup and interactivity menu operations, and the best dedicated players can do is catch up in optimizing those operations the PS3 can do by brute force.

So besides form factor and ergonomics and cost , (maybe DTS-MA bit stream etc) its likely the PS3 will still be the fastest Blu-ray solution for its lifetime.

I thought the Sharp was supposed to be one of the fastest players. But 10 minutes to load some discs does not sound good at all :(

I thought the Sharp was supposed to be one of the fastest players. But 10 minutes to load some discs does not sound good at all :(

The slowest title on the Sharp for me so far is Superbad, takes over a minute to load.

The slowest title on the Sharp for me so far is Superbad, takes over a minute to load.
Yes but they were saying that "Ratoille" or something took 10 minutes - any title that takes 10 minutes (or even one minute) can't be good. It should take a few seconds at the most.

please stay on topic

posts removed

I think we can all agree that to be ready for prime time (mass consumption), an HDM stand alone player will need to be under $149 and load discs in less than 30 seconds (maybe less that 15).

That is still at least 12-24 months out for Blu-ray.

It seems that prime causes of slow disc loading speed of HDM are slow CPU speed and long Java start up time. If then, it will take quite some money to shorten disc loading time of HDM SA player to that is similar to PS/3.

CPU is quite expensive part and it is not utilized much while playing the HD movie itself. Most of HD stream decoding work is done by dedicated hardware codec in the player. So expensive/fast CPU is not good option for player designer.

I suggest that HDM player should implement function similar to "maximum power saving" mode of PC. In this mode, player will save all contents of RAM (with Java subsystem initialized properly) to internal flash memory and turn off. On power up, the content of saved RAM will be restored from flash memory avoiding long boot time and Java initialization time.

This will cut boot time /disc loading time and shut-down time of player considerably.

Not gonna happen, because that's how people break encryption on things like BD+ these days:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,332368,00.html

I'm still expecting someone to try this with a PS3 or a standalone.

I think we can all agree that to be ready for prime time (mass consumption), an HDM stand alone player will need to be under $149 and load discs in less than 30 seconds (maybe less that 15).

That is still at least 12-24 months out for Blu-ray.

Sigh. I remember when the "Magic price" point for mass adoption was $299. And when HDDVD hit that and it went no where... the "Magic price" point was $199. Now that HDDVD has failed with player prices starting at $150 or less(Before the warner announcement)... somehow thats the magic number for HDM?

I dont understand the "BluRay should follow HDDVDs path" HDDVDs path lead it straight to its grave.

Have you ever heard the saying slow and Steady wins the race. Prices should come down naturally as the market dictates. Dropping the prices artificially to meet some "Magic Mass adoption" number isnt the way to go.

I agree having low prices is important to having mass adoption. However, I disagree that the prices should be there "Right now"

Hmm. Makes sense.

Seems likely the PS3 will remain the fastest Blu-ray player in startup and interactivity menu operations, and the best dedicated players can do is catch up in optimizing those operations the PS3 can do by brute force.

So besides form factor and ergonomics and cost , (maybe DTS-MA bit stream etc) its likely the PS3 will still be the fastest Blu-ray solution for its lifetime. Not saying the PS3 will remain over time the best Blu-ray player or even the most value one, but for pure Blu-ray playback and BD-J and interactivity etc. it probably never will be beat.

Other BD players will have better audio options, DVD upconversion, analog audio out, codec support and may get fast enough at BD playback boot up and BD-J so that are a better value than the PS3.

But as long as the PS3 can use the cell CPU to work Blu-ray playback , its raw horsepower should make it the best Blu-ray only playback device out there. Since LPCM doesn't depend on the DACs in the playback device when passed over HDMI to a AVR, and most Blu-ray discs are using that for the main soundtrack, it seems that the PS3 will remain a good option fr a while.

Add in the fact it the most numerous BD platform, and the default reference design that all software must work on, it may be a good choice for a while.

Sigh. I remember when the "Magic price" point for mass adoption was $299. And when HDDVD hit that and it went no where... the "Magic price" point was $199. Now that HDDVD has failed with player prices starting at $150 or less(Before the warner announcement)... somehow thats the magic number for HDM?

I dont understand the "BluRay should follow HDDVDs path" HDDVDs path lead it straight to its grave.

Have you ever heard the saying slow and Steady wins the race. Prices should come down naturally as the market dictates. Dropping the prices artificially to meet some "Magic Mass adoption" number isnt the way to go.

I agree having low prices is important to having mass adoption. However, I disagree that the prices should be there "Right now"
Doesn't matter what Toshiba was able to achieve alone with HD DVD hardware sales during the format war.

If Blu-ray is going to break out in the mass market it needs to get player prices down to mass adoption price points. $399 is not it.

$249 might approach it, if consumers get extra value and perceive they are only spending $199 (like free movies included).

This will be a make or break season for Blu-ray. It has to break out of a PS3 dominated niche so retailers continue shelf allocations and for it to start to displace DVD.

As this thread is discussing, hardware needs to be more responsive and boot up and loading needs to get near DVD levels, or at least to consumer acceptable levels.

I think we can all agree that to be ready for prime time (mass consumption), an HDM stand alone player will need to be under $149 and load discs in less than 30 seconds (maybe less that 15).

That is still at least 12-24 months out for Blu-ray.
I agree. Someone else said something similar but I think if players had a setting for "1. fast load with more basic menus (Loads in a couple of seconds" or "2. Slow load with better looking menus (loads in upto 10 minutes on some machines/discs :)), then the users would have a choice when playing back their discs.

But I also think it would be better if all new players could load/play all titles in under 5 seconds (even with the better looking menus/or any other stuff that they load at startup)

Mainstream adoption requires standalones..

Why?


There are 45 Million PS2s in the US alone. The US Census data lists 110M households in the US. If the PS3 sells anywhere near what the PS2 did, it will ASSURE Blu-Ray adoption.


J6P is not who you think he is. J6P doesn't care if his DVD-Player looks "right" in a rackmount. J6P plays video games.

But I also think it would be better if all new players could load/play all titles in under 5 seconds (even with the better looking menus/or any other stuff that they load at startup)

All players WOULD be able to load in under 5 seconds (like the PS3) if people would stop buying these under-specced and under powered stand alones.

All players WOULD be able to load in under 5 seconds (like the PS3) if people would stop buying these under-specced and under powered stand alones.
You mean people should only buy the PS3? Are there any other current Blu-ray stand-alones (in the UK) that load all discs in under 5 seconds?

You mean people should only buy the PS3? Are there any other current Blu-ray stand-alones (in the UK) that load all discs in under 5 seconds?

I didn't think even the PS3 could load all discs in under 5 seconds. I thought Pirates took 30sec - 1 min to load.

Doesn't matter what Toshiba was able to achieve alone with HD DVD hardware sales during the format war.

If Blu-ray is going to break out in the mass market it needs to get player prices down to mass adoption price points. $399 is not it.

$249 might approach it, if consumers get extra value and perceive they are only spending $199 (like free movies included).

This will be a make or break season for Blu-ray. It has to break out of a PS3 dominated niche so retailers continue shelf allocations and for it to start to displace DVD.

As this thread is discussing, hardware needs to be more responsive and boot up and loading needs to get near DVD levels, or at least to consumer acceptable levels.

I disagree that BD needs a heavy price cut right away. Premium products need a higher price to be seen as a premium product. Doesnt make sense?

Its similar to a loaded camry vs a lexus ES. Why is the ES more expensive than a loaded camry which has similar features? Because the Lexus is a premium car, that commands a premium tag(yes, I know the camry sells more than the ES, but if the ES slowly lowered its price to camry levels... you would see more people choosing the ES)

I think one of the stigmas that ailed HD DVD was that in the eyes of many it was considered "A cheap alternative to blu ray".... or "Plain DVDs in HD", instead of being "High Definition Discs"

Something like BD, has a high price, because it is a more expensive premium product. And they want people to see it that way. As the price drops, more people will adopt it... because Hey That premium product is now in a range that I wouldnt mind paying. And when prices are equal, more people will choose the product with the "Premium stigma".

The last thing you want is people thinking "that product is a cheap product that I dont care to upgrade to". Its okay to have people say "Thats too much for me to upgrade right now", when the price gets to their level... they are more likely to upgrade.

Heavily cutting the prices now may give it a shot in the arm, but I think losing the "Premium product" Stigma will hurt BD in the long run.

Sigh. I remember when the "Magic price" point for mass adoption was $299. And when HDDVD hit that and it went no where... the "Magic price" point was $199. Now that HDDVD has failed with player prices starting at $150 or less(Before the warner announcement)... somehow thats the magic number for HDM?...I agree having low prices is important to having mass adoption. However, I disagree that the prices should be there "Right now"

Wow, where did that come from? Who said Blu-ray prices have to be low "right now"? What's wrong with waiting 2 years? That is what Sony has said all along. We are in the early adoptor stage and will be for a while. They need to recoup all those development and Studio acquisition costs with high players prices now.

btw, I remember when HD DVD prices were $98 and they sold 60,000 units in 1 day. All along people have said $149 is the magic price point because that is where SD DVD players started to take off. I bought my first DVD player for $149 at the end of 1998. The next year sales of players increased 4x to over 4 million per year, even though there was not a lot of content and they were completely incompatible with VHS.

Wow, where did that come from? Who said Blu-ray prices have to be low "right now"? What's wrong with waiting 2 years? That is what Sony has said all along. We are in the early adoptor stage and will be for a while. They need to recoup all those development and Studio acquisition costs with high players prices now.

btw, I remember when HD DVD prices were $98 and they sold 60,000 units in 1 day. All along people have said $149 is the magic price point because that is where SD DVD players started to take off. I bought my first DVD player for $149 at the end of 1998. The next year sales of players increased 4x to over 4 million per year, even though there was not a lot of content and they were completely incompatible with VHS.
I think you and he are saying the same thing, read his post again.

I disagree that BD needs a heavy price cut right away. Premium products need a higher price to be seen as a premium product. Doesnt make sense?

Its similar to a loaded camry vs a lexus ES. Why is the ES more expensive than a loaded camry which has similar features? Because the Lexus is a premium car, that commands a premium tag(yes, I know the camry sells more than the ES, but if the ES slowly lowered its price to camry levels... you would see more people choosing the ES)

I think one of the stigmas that ailed HD DVD was that in the eyes of many it was considered "A cheap alternative to blu ray".... or "Plain DVDs in HD", instead of being "High Definition Discs"

Something like BD, has a high price, because it is a more expensive premium product. And they want people to see it that way. As the price drops, more people will adopt it... because Hey That premium product is now in a range that I wouldnt mind paying. And when prices are equal, more people will choose the product with the "Premium stigma".

The last thing you want is people thinking "that product is a cheap product that I dont care to upgrade to". Its okay to have people say "Thats too much for me to upgrade right now", when the price gets to their level... they are more likely to upgrade.

Heavily cutting the prices now may give it a shot in the arm, but I think losing the "Premium product" Stigma will hurt BD in the long run.Blu-ray will never be mainstream as a premium product.

That is not what it is being positioned as, a premium product complementary to DVD. If it is we are all in trouble.

But that is not its market positioning. Its being marketing as a more modern successor technology to the older DVD format. It being positoned as a HD complement to your HDTV.

HD DVD failed to gain consumer mind share because of its competition and the format war and Toshiba's overall lack of resources, among other things.

Most consumers though both formats too expensive for most of last year.

I think one of the stigmas that ailed HD DVD was that in the eyes of many it was considered "A cheap alternative to blu ray".... or "Plain DVDs in HD", instead of being "High Definition Discs"
Most consumers did not put that much thought into HD DVD and were not exposed to the sub $199 price points for very long. The HD A2 Wal-Mart blowout pre black Friday was a one time event and prices crept up again in November and mid December and retail support was lukewarm.

Blu-ray will be different situation when BD standalones reach those lower price points later this year.

I'm confused, the thread title says this thread is about loading speeds of discs.

...As this thread is discussing, hardware needs to be more responsive and boot up and loading needs to get near DVD levels, or at least to consumer acceptable levels. I was trying ....

Blu-ray will never be mainstream as a premium product.

That is not what it is being positioned as, a premium product complementary to DVD. If it is we are all in trouble.

But that is not its market positioning. Its being marketing as a more modern successor technology to the older DVD format. It being positoned as a HD complement to your HDTV.

HD DVD failed to gain consumer mind share because of its competition and the format war and Toshiba's overall lack of resources, among other things.

Most consumers though both formats too expensive for most of last year.


Most consumers did not put that much thought into HD DVD and were not exposed to the sub $199 price points for very long. The HD A2 Wal-Mart blowout pre black Friday was a one time event and prices crept up again in November and mid December and retail support was lukewarm.

Blu-ray will be different situation when BD standalones reach those lower price points later this year.

I am not saying that prices shouldnt come down. I am saying that it should go down at a normal rate. Artificially lowering prices for no real reason isnt good.

If you Slash prices too quickly, people will start to second guess their purchases. Blu Ray will also loose that Premium product feel, in which case people wont care to want one. A gradual(but fairly brisk) adoption rate is a good thing.

Lets say you slash prices now to near DVD player prices and no one buys, then what? Gradually getting people to buy in is the way to go.

Finally, yes players need to be faster. THe DMP BD10AK seemed decently quick to me playing POTC3

Why?


There are 45 Million PS2s in the US alone. The US Census data lists 110M households in the US. If the PS3 sells anywhere near what the PS2 did, it will ASSURE Blu-Ray adoption.


J6P is not who you think he is. J6P doesn't care if his DVD-Player looks "right" in a rackmount. J6P plays video games.

+1 and if you like rackmont players you don't care about the price

I am not saying that prices shouldnt come down. I am saying that it should go down at a normal rate. Artificially lowering prices for no real reason isnt good.

If you Slash prices too quickly, people will start to second guess their purchases. Blu Ray will also loose that Premium product feel, in which case people wont care to want one. A gradual(but fairly brisk) adoption rate is a good thing.

Lets say you slash prices now to near DVD player prices and no one buys, then what? Gradually getting people to buy in is the way to go.

Finally, yes players need to be faster. THe DMP BD10AK seemed decently quick to me playing POTC3

If nobody bought HD players at near DVD player prices then I think the global economy would be in serious trouble, not just HDM, lol!

Why?


There are 45 Million PS2s in the US alone. The US Census data lists 110M households in the US. If the PS3 sells anywhere near what the PS2 did, it will ASSURE Blu-Ray adoption.


J6P is not who you think he is. J6P doesn't care if his DVD-Player looks "right" in a rackmount. J6P plays video games.

Wrong. For some reason you think those 45 million PS2's are used to play DVD's. I'd say 1/20th of them are or less.

All players WOULD be able to load in under 5 seconds (like the PS3) if people would stop buying these under-specced and under powered stand alones.

PS3 doesn't decode or bitstream all lossless formats. No buy.

I am not saying that prices shouldnt come down. I am saying that it should go down at a normal rate. Artificially lowering prices for no real reason isnt good.

If you Slash prices too quickly, people will start to second guess their purchases. Blu Ray will also loose that Premium product feel, in which case people wont care to want one. A gradual(but fairly brisk) adoption rate is a good thing.

Lets say you slash prices now to near DVD player prices and no one buys, then what? Gradually getting people to buy in is the way to go.

Finally, yes players need to be faster. THe DMP BD10AK seemed decently quick to me playing POTC3 OK

We agree here.

I don't see much of a hurry nor likelihood that Blu-ray prices will fall below the $399 MSRP $349 MAP and street pricing, the new Sony BD-Live standalone will have by its summer debut, until after August.

So BD-Live capable pricing will stay at $349 until the holiday sales season picks up in late August or September. So if you are an early adopter and want a PS3 or Sony BDP-S350 before Black Friday expect to pay $349-$399 and maybe get some movies.

After August, we will get Bonus View players cheaper than that under $299 MRP and hopefully $249 street. If market forces kick in and consumers demand it and opinion leaders like Bill Hunt influence things a bit, maybe BD-Live players become dominate.

Gotta get within spittin distance of $249 or less for mass market consumers to buy in this fall. But there is no reason for prices to fall before those consumers start their normal buying cycle in the Sep-Dec sales period.

Depending on how much competition there is and where retailers find the sales volume to profit sweet spot, we could see prices below $249 and maybe even $199 by the end of the year.

If the BD players drive things like Monster cable sales and BD disc sales or HDTV bundles for retailers, effective prices could be even less by the holiday season.

Real question is the price of BD-Live capable versus Bonus View players.

Gotta get within spittin distance of $249 or less for mass market consumers to buy in this fall. But there is no reason for prices to fall before those consumers start their normal buying cycle in the Sep-Dec sales period.

Depending on how much competition there is and where retailers find the sales volume to profit sweet spot, we could see prices below $249 and maybe even $199 by the end of the year.



I still say the sweet spot is $149 or less AND load times of less than a minute. If BR gets the rep of having 2+ minute load times, many consumers will be turned off.

OK

We agree here.

I don't see much of a hurry nor likelihood that Blu-ray prices will fall below the $399 MSRP $349 MAP and street pricing, the new Sony BD-Live standalone will have by its summer debut, until after August.

So BD-Live capable pricing will stay at $349 until the holiday sales season picks up in late August or September. So if you are an early adopter and want a PS3 or Sony BDP-S350 before Black Friday expect to pay $349-$399 and maybe get some movies.

After August, we will get Bonus View players cheaper than that under $299 MRP and hopefully $249 street. If market forces kick in and consumers demand it and opinion leaders like Bill Hunt influence things a bit, maybe BD-Live players become dominate.

Gotta get within spittin distance of $249 or less for mass market consumers to buy in this fall. But there is no reason for prices to fall before those consumers start their normal buying cycle in the Sep-Dec sales period.

Depending on how much competition there is and where retailers find the sales volume to profit sweet spot, we could see prices below $249 and maybe even $199 by the end of the year.

If the BD players drive things like Monster cable sales and BD disc sales or HDTV bundles for retailers, effective prices could be even less by the holiday season.

Real question is the price of BD-Live capable versus Bonus View players.


Kosty: What do you think a Denon 2.0 player will sell for. I may buy a Panasonic BD50 but would prefer a Denon to go with my new 4308AVR.

It doesn't matter whether Blu-ray will remain premium product or not, or how fast the price will come down. If premium player will load disc fast (< 10 sec) and budget player loads disc slow ( ~30 sec), it iwould be acceptable, too.

But PS/3 is not and should not remain the fastest / flagship BR player among all the BR players. There should be more expensive AND faster standalone BR player than PS/3. But in foreseeable future, even top class flagship BR player from high-end premium brand (like Denon) that is much more expensive than PS/3 will remain much slower in disc loading/unloading (like one ~ few minutes) and BD-J interactivity speed than cheaper PS/3.

The only viable option is to use fast and expensive CPU in high-end BR player, CPU like Cell CPU of PS/3 or CPU with equivalent processing power like Intel Core2 CPU used in latest PC/Mac . This not only means that you should pay much more expensive price for fast disc loading time, but also more power consumption (150-200 Watt), hot heat dissipation and bigger fan noise and bulky size. These are big disadvantage both in high-end A/V gear market and in consumer market.

We want to see standalone player which is priced similar to PS/3, and as fast as PS/3 in disc loading and interactivity, but more quiet, cooler, and compact, less power hungry, eay to use, with better audio/video quality than PS/3.
.

Love the PS3. :D Speed is no issue.

Denon or someone should just license the PS3 and put it in a rectangular box so some of the HT Grognards can go for it and see what a wonderful device it really is.

Sony PSX-III?

I'm confused, the thread title says this thread is about loading speeds of discs.

Well, that's why I dropped by!

I'm just catching up on the thread and based on it, and comments from other sources, I'm finding it hard to believe that the startup/load time is that big an issue. Have we become that impatient that unless we can start to watch a DVD within 3 seconds of loading it, we label the product "unacceptable"?

I've been living with a Tosh A3 and, yes, for the most part from the time I turn it on, and a disc loads and is ready to view maybe a minute has passed. I've never once thought of dumping it because of that. I'm amazed that some people have.

Ever see that pizza commercial where the guy says, "They are delivering the pizza in 30 minutes. You thinking what I'm thinking (hint,hint, nudge, nudge, know what I mean, know what I mean???)" The gal nods her head with a sly smile then says, "What are we going to do for the other 28 minutes?"

Fast isn't always better.

I'd rather wait a minute to be able to watch an HD movie, rather than see an SD one in 3 seconds.

...I'd rather wait a minute to be able to watch an HD movie, rather than see an SD one in 3 seconds.

Many blu-ray owners are reporting 5 - 10 minute load times for BD-java discs. Disney's Rat movie has a disclaimer that it may take more than two minutes to load (and on many players does).

If you can go to the bathroom and get a drink and still find the disc loading, then that is not being "impatient". The masses will never buy players like that.

Many blu-ray owners are reporting 5 - 10 minute load times for BD-java discs. Disney's Rat movie has a disclaimer that it may take more than two minutes to load (and on many players does).

If you can go to the bathroom and get a drink and still find the disc loading, then that is not being "impatient". The masses will never buy players like that.

My slowest player by far is the A30 and while Toshiba is out of the picture now the other thing that I feel will stop the mass consumer more than anything else is FLASH updates. When I first got my A30 it played about 1 hour on the fisrt movie I attempted to watch and crashed with the all too common 408..... message. If you think 1 minute will tick people off, just try making them do a 45 minute FLASH update.

So, can we add to the list of things that need to be finished before mass adoption is players that work out of the box with standards established so FLASHING of the OS is something no home user will never need to do. Especially when IMO, most home users will NOT want to run network cables to their TV's (despite 2.0 players). How many of your sisters and brothers, aunts and uncles have FLASHED their PC bios? This is something that should NOT EVER be needed as a home J6P mass adoption type owner.

On the Panny BD30 the load times vary from 10-15 seconds to 30 seconds +, but rarely is the load time bothersome. The only one that had me wondering if the disc was going to play was 30 Days Of Night. I guess all the features on this disc caused the reading time to be much longer than anything I had yet encountered: it probably took about 45-50 seconds for the movie to start.

On the Panny BD30 the load times vary from 10-15 seconds to 30 seconds +, but rarely is the load time bothersome. The only one that had me wondering if the disc was going to play was 30 Days Of Night. I guess all the features on this disc caused the reading time to be much longer than anything I had yet encountered: it probably took about 45-50 seconds for the movie to start.
Some of the standalone players are so slow that they introduce usability problems. The first time I played with an HD-A1 at a BB I tried opening the tray. It took so long that I thought that somehow they had the tray locked shut. I left and later looked back to see that the tray had actually opened. There is fast and there is slow and there is sooo slow that the player does not have in the the expected manner. There was not much precedent for DVD players that take 40 seconds to start-up. Consumers are used to new stuff being better than the old stuff -- and that almost always means faster rather than slower. That is one of the reasons that we upgrade. Sure you eventually get used to the sluggishness of the HD player, but for me there is always that low level of frustration that takes away from the otherwise great experience of watching HD movies.

Originally Posted by tqlla
I am not saying that prices shouldnt come down. I am saying that it should go down at a normal rate. Artificially lowering prices for no real reason isnt good.

If you Slash prices too quickly, people will start to second guess their purchases. Blu Ray will also loose that Premium product feel, in which case people wont care to want one. A gradual(but fairly brisk) adoption rate is a good thing.

Lets say you slash prices now to near DVD player prices and no one buys, then what? Gradually getting people to buy in is the way to go.

Finally, yes players need to be faster. THe DMP BD10AK seemed decently quick to me playing POTC3 Couple other thoughts.

Consumers have a short memory and are not as involved in this as you think.

Pretty much , most consumers don't remember pricing from one month ot the next, they may remember trends and threshold points, but that's about it.

Post purchase 90 days, if prices drop on a new technology, thats too far after a purchase to get upset about.

No one is going to slash prices on Blu-ray players to what HD DVD ended up at overnight. Especially in normally slower DVD hardware sales season from now until late August.

Toshiba dropped HD DVD prices , as a strategy, they had economy of scale, HD DVD optical units were cheaper than Blu-ray and the technology was closer to DVD, and they had an incentive to do so to increase the size of the hardware base over the holiday season. Even they the prices crept up to $249 after the Wal-Mart HD A2 sale, until after CES.

NO reason at all to sell Blu-ray hardware under $299 until the holiday season as first adopter demand for standalones is not met yet, new model premiums still can be had, mass market demand will be slow until the fall and competition is still limited.

But retailers have an incentive to sell hardware and get the format moving and things will start happening by the fall.

I still say the sweet spot is $149 or less AND load times of less than a minute. If BR gets the rep of having 2+ minute load times, many consumers will be turned off.
You are absolutely right.

But $199 looks pretty good to consumers also, and free discs effectively reduce the consumers perceived price.

CE manufacturers are well aware of the slow start times and BD-J time to play issues and are trying to bring them to consumer acceptable levels.

It just has to be closer to DVD performance by the fall, by the time prices get to under $199 and mass market consumers start buying them. Or at least ergonomic cues need to be included so consumers don't think the player is broken and get frustrated.

CE manufacturers are well aware of the slow start times and BD-J time to play issues and are trying to bring them to consumer acceptable levels.

It just has to be closer to DVD performance by the fall, by the time prices get to under $199 and mass market consumers start buying them. Or at least ergonomic cues need to be included so consumers don't think the player is broken and get frustrated.

This is the problem with Blu-Ray beyond my personal needs. (Although they happen to be the same problems.) "J6P", or whoever, buys a cheap profile 1.0 Blu-Ray player (but doesn't know about profiles, although more people actually do know about profiles than some on here think) gets home and puts in a movie with loads of BDJ features, PIP and web enabled features. (Lets pretend this happens after profile 2.0 has been released, in fact Saw 4 is the first profile 2.0 movie I believe?) When it takes AGES to load, then is glitchy, they (obviously) can't get PIP to work and they (even more obviously) can't find where to connect the player to the internet then they're just going to think it's broken and return it to the shop. Not only that but it might possibly even put them off HDM players and just stick to HD on cable or wherever.

Since load time is mostly contributing from menu rendering. They could always author the bd so that the movies loads first, like they were doing before. But I guess that many users hate that.

Many blu-ray owners are reporting 5 - 10 minute load times for BD-java discs. Disney's Rat movie has a disclaimer that it may take more than two minutes to load (and on many players does).

If you can go to the bathroom and get a drink and still find the disc loading, then that is not being "impatient". The masses will never buy players like that.

I think 5-10 minute load times are a different issue. Clearly that is beyond reasonable---whether it be the fault of the disc or the player.

I was merely commenting on posts I have read here and in other threads where people were complaining about a 45 second to 1 minute time from turn-on to disc start. To me, that's the other end of the scale. I know they look like DVD players, but they are really PCs that play DVDs. If the boot time on my PC running Vista Home Premium was in the 45 second to 1 minute timeframe, I'd be clapping.

However, to be reasonable, I do agree that for mass market acceptance the performance of a BD player/disc will have to be significantly improved. I wouldn't want to have to ask a child to wait patiently for 2 minutes before they could watch the Rat movie!

Love the PS3. :D Speed is no issue.

Denon or someone should just license the PS3 and put it in a rectangular box so some of the HT Grognards can go for it and see what a wonderful device it really is.

Sony PSX-III?
The PS3 is fast but sometimes I don't want to watch an entire movie in one sitting.
1) They need a better book mark implementation. Most discs don't even have bookmarks, and those that do, often require multiple menues (and time) even when the bookmark has been saved.
2) They need a low power sleep mode that holds the bd-dvd place, and has very fast wakeup out of sleep mode; no menus.

Couple other thoughts.

Consumers have a short memory and are not as involved in this as you think.

Pretty much , most consumers don't remember pricing from one month ot the next, they may remember trends and threshold points, but that's about it.

Post purchase 90 days, if prices drop on a new technology, thats too far after a purchase to get upset about.

No one is going to slash prices on Blu-ray players to what HD DVD ended up at overnight. Especially in normally slower DVD hardware sales season from now until late August.

Toshiba dropped HD DVD prices , as a strategy, they had economy of scale, HD DVD optical units were cheaper than Blu-ray and the technology was closer to DVD, and they had an incentive to do so to increase the size of the hardware base over the holiday season. Even they the prices crept up to $249 after the Wal-Mart HD A2 sale, until after CES.

NO reason at all to sell Blu-ray hardware under $299 until the holiday season as first adopter demand for standalones is not met yet, new model premiums still can be had, mass market demand will be slow until the fall and competition is still limited.

But retailers have an incentive to sell hardware and get the format moving and things will start happening by the fall.


I agree with that. I am not advising keeping prices high... but letting market conditions determine pricing.

Also, they definately need to get resume working.

This is the problem with Blu-Ray beyond my personal needs. (Although they happen to be the same problems.) "J6P", or whoever, buys a cheap profile 1.0 Blu-Ray player (but doesn't know about profiles, although more people actually do know about profiles than some on here think) gets home and puts in a movie with loads of BDJ features, PIP and web enabled features. (Lets pretend this happens after profile 2.0 has been released, in fact Saw 4 is the first profile 2.0 movie I believe?) When it takes AGES to load, then is glitchy, they (obviously) can't get PIP to work and they (even more obviously) can't find where to connect the player to the internet then they're just going to think it's broken and return it to the shop. Not only that but it might possibly even put them off HDM players and just stick to HD on cable or wherever. I think the studios are now just forging ahead and are going to author in advanced BD-J regardless if its a horrible experience for early Blu-ray player owners. There are't that many to worry about compared to PS3 owners.

If you don't like it, you can always migrate to a more advanced player. Kinda brutal if you bought a first generation Samsung back in 2006. Even basic BD players should be a better experience though.

Since load time is mostly contributing from menu rendering. They could always author the bd so that the movies loads first, like they were doing before. But I guess that many users hate that.

Apparently that's the way The Searchers ( and a few other earlier discs ) was produced. It started quickly and went directly to the movie. After the movie ended, you could go to the menu and watch the special features if you so desired. I'd like to see all them like that.

Since load time is mostly contributing from menu rendering. They could always author the bd so that the movies loads first, like they were doing before. But I guess that many users hate that.

works for me -- i liked the warner releases that were done this way.

People were bitching that they had to push a few buttons to select the lossless audio track..yet somehow they prefer waiting 10 minutes for the menu to load.

Manufacturer of SA player should do lots of efforts to reduce the loading time of the player and they will do, surely. But it is also certain that there is huge difference in CPU performance between PS3 and standalone BD players, and remains so for long time in coming years. So movie studio should do something about disc laoding time before most consumer's players will be as fast as PS3.

Movie studio should implement two menu scheme: Pretty and heavy menu for PS/3 and simple and light menu screen for SA BD player with less CPU. The initial loading sequence will try to detect and determine spped of the player and choose suitable menu automatically. This dual menu screen scheme will mitigate the disc loading problem and will make both owner of PS/3 and owner of SA player happy.
.

Manufacturer of SA player should do lots of efforts to reduce the loading time of the player and they will do, surely. But it is also certain that there is huge difference in CPU performance between PS3 and standalone BD players, and remains so for long time in coming years. So movie studio should do something about disc laoding time before most consumer's players will be as fast as PS3.

Movie studio should implement two menu scheme: Pretty and heavy menu for PS/3 and simple and light menu screen for SA BD player with less CPU. The initial loading sequence will try to detect and determine spped of the player and choose suitable menu automatically. This dual menu screen scheme will mitigate the disc loading problem and will make both owner of PS/3 and owner of SA player happy.
. Thats a great authoring idea. Hope studios do it.

Supposedly with BD-J there is a method to detect what type of player profile and hardware characteristics are on the hardware. So for example, on a non BD-Live player, the Internet options do not appear or are grayed out.

Seems that a BD-J title could detect if a PS3 or robust BD-Live player was there or not and adjust the boot up to give the best user experience.

My hunch with all of these java slowness/difficulties is that it entirely lies with the java compiler (implementation, thereof), rather than the java, itself. These issues will improve over time as the (runtime) compiler is further optimized to leverage its target hardware.

Short of that, there's probably also a degree of hardware acceleration (or lack of) that is having an impact where on-screen graphics effects are involved. A slim soc package may be capable of running java at an impressive pace, but if elaborate graphics effects involved, there better be some hardware acceleration on-board to make it happen. It was the whole point a "gpu" evolved into existence for pc's, in the first place.

Thats a great authoring idea. Hope studios do it.

Supposedly with BD-J there is a method to detect what type of player profile and hardware characteristics are on the hardware. So for example, on a non BD-Live player, the Internet options do not appear or are grayed out.

Seems that a BD-J title could detect if a PS3 or robust BD-Live player was there or not and adjust the boot up to give the best user experience.

My idea was to pop up a message before doing anything else and ask if you want the barebones fast version or the BD-J version...after all with BD its only about watch the movie.

Of course Disney would never go for this.

My idea was to pop up a message before doing anything else and ask if you want the barebones fast version or the BD-J version...after all with BD its only about watch the movie.

Of course Disney would never go for this.

It may be not so good idea that user should choose/decide something each time playing movie. That choice may be set as one of user preference of player itself. the player will detect multiple menu screens on a disc and choose a menu to show depending on the user preference. The preference may be changed at any time.

To implement this scheme, BDA and CE companies should standardize way to put multiple menus on a disc and choose/switch among them.

Now, I'm almost wishing there was a Blu-ray "profile 0" that only let you do the basics and do that very quickly:-)

Not gonna happen, because that's how people break encryption on things like BD+ these days:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,332368,00.html

I'm still expecting someone to try this with a PS3 or a standalone.

It is basic security measure that removing or erasing vital key information from RAM memory before going to maximum power saving mode and store RAM image to HDD/flash storage. Every cryptographic software programmer should do that. After restoring from maximum power saving mode, the key information and time-dependent informations will be re-installed by the save/restore software.

On general PC environment, the runtime hardware configuration and RAM image may change and may be different every time it goes maximum power saving mode.

But in the embedded environment like BD player, firmware works in near fixed configuration and it does not change whenever the player boot up and become ready to load a disc. So RAM will have exactly same content after each boot up. Ther is no need to save current RAM image when it goes maximum power saving time. Just turn off power and throw away the whole RAM contents. When the player powered up, restore the content of stored RAM image which is stored in factory or first time it booted after some configuration change (like firmware upgrade or hardware change, both are rare occasion).

By this way, BD player can be booted in few seconds and be ready to load disc and eject disc and turned off immediately lik any other DVD player.