The power of BD-J with the new ID4 release:

Chapter Summary
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1KLxcN25Zo

Alien Scavenger Hunt
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yc3maivq0oI

Text Commentary
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huqVUAEbMpk

Now, there's something to get excited about with special features and it's only the beginning!

Until they port over all the extras from the SD DVD, they don't.

Just to mention some past BD-J games there has been a top down shooter (Chicken Little), pinball game (Surf's Up), and dice game (POTC 2) that as far as I know have no equivalent on HD DVD.

Once you have the ID4 Blu-ray you will realize how difficult it is to navigate through the chapters.

Now...if they can just get some good movies.

Just to mention some past BD-J games there has been a top down shooter (Chicken Little), pinball game (Surf's Up), and strategy game (FF: Rise of the Silver Surfer) that as far as I know have no equivalent on HD DVD.

apparently you don't own 300

apparently you don't own 300

Yeah BD-J can't handle super cool PiP...........

Now, there's something to get excited about with special features and it's only the beginning!

No one cares about special features or interactivity or at least that's what I've been told.

No one cares about special features or interactivity or at least that's what I've been told.

You must not have gotten the memo.

PiP and web extras = stupid
useless Java games = awesome!

Don't let it happen again.

Just to mention some past BD-J games there has been a top down shooter (Chicken Little), pinball game (Surf's Up), and strategy game (FF: Rise of the Silver Surfer) that as far as I know have no equivalent on HD DVD.

300 HD DVD had a strategy game.

Until they port over all the extras from the SD DVD, they don't.

LMAO! :p (That's at HD DVD and Blu-Ray before anyone accuses me of bashing.)

Having tried a few of these Java games out, I can certainly say...

They suck. Not imagining this will be much better.

Just to mention some past BD-J games there has been a top down shooter (Chicken Little), pinball game (Surf's Up), and strategy game (FF: Rise of the Silver Surfer) that as far as I know have no equivalent on HD DVD.

There are loads of regular DVDs with games on them. Hell, there are even DVD games, lol! (I don't mean PC games I mean games you can play on DVD players.) Fantastic Four 2: Rise Of The Silver Surfer on Blu-Ray has got 1 up on the HD DVD version though as the HD DVD version hasn't got a game on it. :( (Then again maybe it has somewhere but I can't find it, is it an Easter egg on the Blu-Ray version or a plainly obvious option?)

300 HD DVD had a strategy game.I learned something new today and from what I read about it "Vengeance and Valor" was a strategy game.


There are loads of regular DVDs with games on them.BD-J is capable of games far more complex than what was possible with DVD.


Fantastic Four 2: Rise Of The Silver Surfer on Blu-Ray has got 1 up on the HD DVD version though as the HD DVD version hasn't got a game on it. :( (Then again maybe it has somewhere but I can't find it, is it an Easter egg on the Blu-Ray version or a plainly obvious option?)It was a prominent feature on the disc called "Who Dares Defy Galactus?" and is briefly mentioned in this review (http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/1082/fantasticfour_riseofthesilversurfer.html).

I'll play games on my consoles and handhelds. Supplements suck 99% of the time on both formats. Amen.

This was meant to happen. HD DVD was limited in many aspects that was one of them...

This is just the thing to drive me back to DVD. I guess they finally found a use for that extra space on BD50.

This is just the thing to drive me back to DVD.

I have to say, as long as I'm getting the main feature in high definition, I don't really care what other crap they pile on it. Extra stuff I can ignore ain't going to drive me back to SD. Not like standard definition films don't have lots of filler too.

You must not have gotten the memo.

PiP and web extras = stupid
useless Java games = awesome!

Don't let it happen again.

Sad, but true. :(

Doesnt look any more impressive than the German T2 HDDVD release. Looks like one of HDDVDs last gasp releases will finally show what HDI was really capable of.

No one cares about special features or interactivity or at least that's what I've been told.

I dont really care about them either. But the first few titles with these sort of feature always have cool/gimmick factor appeal to me.

You must not have gotten the memo.

PiP and web extras = stupid
useless Java games = awesome!

Don't let it happen again.

Exactly.

Let's put "games" on our discs instead of actual supplements about the making of film. Who needs that brainy crap. :rolleyes:

The power of BD-J with the new ID4 release:

Chapter Summary
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1KLxcN25Zo

Alien Scavenger Hunt
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yc3maivq0oI

Text Commentary
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huqVUAEbMpk

Now, there's something to get excited about with special features and it's only the beginning!

But But, no one wants extras remember?:rolleyes:

But But, no one wants extras remember?:rolleyes:

Like we needed a crystal ball to predict that after two years of "just give me the movie" and "I don't care about extras, and no one else does, either" that interactivity and extras would suddenly and magically become the greatest thing since sliced bread to certain people once BD could actually do it?

I have video games called:
JUICED
TREASURE TOWERS
AND SOME MUSICAL TETRIS GAME

Its on java 1.1...

anyone see the "strip jessica alba" mini game on FF4 rise of silver surfer....???

me neither :-(


now that would be a nice use of the technology

Thanks to BD-J many BD players take 2 to 10 minutes to a disc. That "special feature" will get far more use than any game you have to play with a DVD remote.

I can see this is going over big! :D

Funny all the negative comments are coming from former HD DVD-only owners.

I love this ABBREVIATION IBTL :D

Funny all the negative comments are coming from former HD DVD-only owners.

I've owned Blu-Ray for quite some time. I don't care about games. I play video games for games. I want extras that actually relate to the film.

Skip the games and give me a cut on the price of the disks.

Funny all the negative comments are coming from former HD DVD-only owners.

You assume that we've gotten rid of our self destructing, super fund toxic, no more releases after Jun 1, 2008 format.

BD-J has the same downside as every other wide open spec which is that there is so much that can be done it's hard to discover what should be done and how best to code to achieve that end.

Few will agree with me on this, but studios would be wise if they started by implementing the features and interactivity that worked (not all of them did) on HD DVD and made improvements from that point.

Since like 90% of blu-ray players are PS3s, why don't they just release a PS3 game on the disc? Seems like it might be much more enjoyable to use if they took advantage of the controller, rather than screwing around with a remote...

And the standalone buyers seem much more interested in "just watching the damn movie".

Few will agree with me on this

Would you care to guess why?

But But, no one wants extras remember?:rolleyes:

It really annoys me when people try to stutter on a message trying to be sarcastic. Quite annoying. More annoying than all the fanboys put together.

wow! out come all the HD DVD fans! YAY!

To the OP, I think I'll wait for Terminator 2 Ultimate Edition before making that claim ;)

Funny all the negative comments are coming from former HD DVD-only owners.

for two years if you liked this stuff hd dvd was the best choice. should be no surprise that people who like special features might have been hd dvd only.

if there was a special features footrace, hd dvd was way way out in front. then it was shot dead.

with the only other entry in the race shot dead. it should not be news to anybody that bd would eventually run past. i am amused that people want to brag about bd surpassing a corpse.

i have been looking forward to seeing what they can do with bd-j for a long long long time.

i have no interest in games.

And just like when HD DVD had all this pointless BS..... with blu-ray it is STILL Pointless BS. :rolleyes:

If blu-ray ants to "wow" me, try releasing some of your big catalog titles instead of wave after wave of stoopid new releases especially comedies and dramas. OK??? Thanks! :D

And just like when HD DVD had all this pointless BS..... with blu-ray it is STILL Pointless BS. :rolleyes:

If blu-ray ants to "wow" me, try releasing some of your big catalog titles instead of wave after wave of stoopid new releases especially comedies and dramas. OK??? Thanks! :D

imo we need more new release comedies and dramas with games.:confused:

I agree -- the games are too simple to be enjoyable.

Most professional games made from movies are horrible... Harry Potter games, Transformers (even if you go back 20 yrs), Lost the game, Total Recall, any Pixar game, Terminator)... Street Fighter the movie game (worst movie and game combo ever)

And unfortunatey comic book-to-movie-games aren't much much better (Spider-Man 3, Fantastic Four, any Superman game ever created, Conan).

Anyway.. if these professional gaming companies can't make a good game based on a movie, waht makes you think some interactive BD-J game is going to to lure people to buy a movie.

Funny all the negative comments are coming from former HD DVD-only owners.

Maybe you also find it funny that early BD adoptors that bought players other than PS3s will have to go in their pockets again to buy players that can access all of the content. The irony is they will have to buy another player just like non BD owners that already have HD DVD players. ;)

ibtl

you can thank bd-j for 10 minute loading times on ratatouille too

How much did the bda pay you to make this post?? This reeks of bda marketing tactics.

Maybe you also find it funny that early BD adoptors that bought players other than PS3s will have to go in their pockets again to buy players that can access all of the content. The irony is they will have to buy another player just like non BD owners that already have HD DVD players. ;)

About as funny as people who had to go in their pockets and buy another HD-DVD players since early adopters (of the A1) couldn't even play 1080P 24FPS on their players. So, that's 3 players I guess for some people. ;)

About as funny as people who had to go in their pockets and buy another HD-DVD players since early adopters (of the A1) couldn't even play 1080P 24FPS on their players. So, that's 3 players I guess for some people. ;)

Many early Blu-Ray adopters couldn't even play CD's on their players. The first Blu-Ray player (Remember the Samsung BD-P1000?) in the US doesn't do 24fps, either.

http://www.idoblu.co.uk/page2%20Blu-ray%20Players.html

The war is over. Back on topic... Bottom line is that we are seeing more talk than action from the BDA. It's time to get profile 2.0 onto the PS3 as well as standalones, so we can truly see BD-J's potential in action.

This same topic appeared on another forum, and this is what I posted there:

I've never used HDi, but I've done some programming in the past, and it looked like everything in those ID4 videos could have been done in HDi. To get to the answer I asked someone who would know: Peter Torr. In case you don't know who he is, Peter is a Program Manager at Microsoft, and has numerous entries about HDi on his blog (http://blogs.msdn.com/ptorr/default.aspx). He's also known for his HDi versions of Liar's Dice and Space Invaders.

So, to find out the truth, I sent him an email asking if HDi would be capable of the functions shown in the ID4 videos, and directed him to this thread.

Here's his answer:
The things shown in that video are trivial to do in HDi. All you need is the [x,y] co-ordinate of the object, mapped to a set of valid time-codes, and you're done. . . .

The only reason you haven't seen things like this on HD DVD is because of the production cost -- not of the HDi, but because it costs a LOT of money to pay someone to traipse through a movie and write down the [x,y] co-ordinates of every object for every frame. Also someone has to approve the idea, etc. and cursor-controlled "games" really are impractical for remote controls.

He also pointed me in the direction of this AH0-10 HD DVD specification guide (http://www.dvdforum.org/images/Requirements%20Specification%20for%20HD%20DVD%20Video%20Appl ication-July2005.pdf), which states:
4.2.2 Collecting Objects for Later Use
While the movie is playing the user periodically saves clues (graphics) by highlighting and activating them in
the video. The collected clues are stored for later use (used to solve the mystery at the end of the movie).
• The clues are stored in temporary storage for this disc session.
• Additionally, the clues may be stored persistently for future disc sessions.
This dates back to July, 2005, and is only one of many different applications planned for HDi.

Again, since BD-J development will continue, I would expect for it to surpass what was released on HD DVD - someday. But that hasn't happened yet. That's also not to say that HDi couldn't have kept up, had it not been abandoned.

Scott

Blu-ray now has the best special features thanks to BD-J

Special features that most gen 1 and 2 standalone BD players will either choke on or spend forever and a day loading.:eek:

About as funny as people who had to go in their pockets and buy another HD-DVD players since early adopters (of the A1) couldn't even play 1080P 24FPS on their players. So, that's 3 players I guess for some people. ;)

How many 24p displays existed when the A1 came out?

How many 24p displays existed when the A1 came out?
Not sure why that matters, since HD players on both formats should be built with the future in mind. If you want to play that game though, it couldn't even output regular 1080P either and there where plenty of those displays when it released.

My whole point in posting those remarks was to show that neither format their stuff together upon launching their formats.

Funny all the negative comments are coming from former HD DVD-only owners.

Just as a refresher, here's the first mention of HD DVD in this thread. Can you say "baiting?"

Just to mention some past BD-J games there has been a top down shooter (Chicken Little), pinball game (Surf's Up), and dice game (POTC 2) that as far as I know have no equivalent on HD DVD.

Not sure why that matters, since HD players on both formats should be built with the future in mind. If you want to play that game though, it couldn't even output regular 1080P either and there where plenty of those displays when it released.

My whole point in posting those remarks was to show that neither format their stuff together upon launching their formats.Most LCD AvsForum users still have displays that cannot receive 24p inputs though. And even though I have a 1080p capable Blu-ray player and TV (TV is not 24p) and when I play Blu-ray movies I usually output them at 1080p60, I'm still not sure whether I should be outputting them at 1080i60 as that option gives the TV more options to try to re-create a 'movie mode' - but I don't really see much difference (and I'm not sure it would help the menu much and I'm sure it wouldn't be as good as proper 24p?)

Also, the players which only output 1080i60 originally probably did so for a reason - so you would have the option of paying a bit extra (or a lot extra) for the 1080p60 or 1080p24 versions (to give you a reason to upgrade if you wanted etc.)

Yawn.

The fanboy crap gets very old. Some of you sound like teen girls arguing over which cell phone is the best to text each other...it is absolutely ANNOYING.

Not sure why that matters, since HD players on both formats should be built with the future in mind. If you want to play that game though, it couldn't even output regular 1080P either and there where plenty of those displays when it released.

My whole point in posting those remarks was to show that neither format their stuff together upon launching their formats.This argument is often brought up by Blu-ray fans. However, there is a big difference between incomplete format specifications and playback devices with different quality levels. Every HD DVD player ever built can play back all the content on every HD DVD. If you buy an entry-level player without 1080p output, the picture quality may or may not be reduced (depending on the quality of the deinterlacer in your display), but you will still be able to play it back. But most BD player models sold so far will never be able to play back profile 1.0 and 2.0 content. Also, for this reason, such features are less likely to be used on BD than if the specifications had been complete form the start.

But this is all water under the bridge. What annoys me though is how slow the Blu-ray manufacturers are in bringing the fully "profiled" equipment to the market. They don't seem to be in a hurry anymore ...

This argument is often brought up by Blu-ray fans. However, there is a big difference between incomplete format specifications and playback devices with different quality levels. Every HD DVD player ever built can play back all the content on every HD DVD.
Except 25/50hz HD?

Except 25/50hz HD?Since there are no HD DVDs with 25/50 Hz material, I'm not sure what you are trying to say.

PS: Of course I meant "profile 1.1 and 2.0" in the previous posting.

Since there are no HD DVDs with 25/50 Hz material, I'm not sure what you are trying to say.

PS: Of course I meant "profile 1.1 and 2.0" in the previous posting.
Actually someone did mention there was one, I can't remember what it was though. But it is a catch 22, people didn't/wouldn't release their 25p/50i/50p content on HD-DVD precisely because HD-DVD couldn't do it. As for there not being any '25/50hz' material (I'm sure you mean High Def material), probably every UK/European HD broadcast is in 25p or 50i/p HD, and probably every professional/consumer HD video camera in the UK will be 25/50hz capable.

They've released a firmware upgrade for it now, but it's kind of too late.

Except 25/50hz HD?

Can

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=988167

Can

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=988167
It might be able to do it now if you decide to upgrade it's firmware, but it could not when the players were originally released (which prevented people like the BBC from releasing 25p/50hz HD content).

They only released the firmware upgrade at around the same time that HD-DVD was erm... dead (Toshiba will no longer make standalone players (LG/Samsung are still making Dual format I think, for now, if you like their players - though I'm not sure the Samsung is available in the UK, pretty much nobody will release new titles - or at least not for much longer)).

This argument is often brought up by Blu-ray fans. However, there is a big difference between incomplete format specifications and playback devices with different quality levels. Every HD DVD player ever built can play back all the content on every HD DVD. If you buy an entry-level player without 1080p output, the picture quality may or may not be reduced (depending on the quality of the deinterlacer in your display), but you will still be able to play it back. But most BD player models sold so far will never be able to play back profile 1.0 and 2.0 content. Also, for this reason, such features are less likely to be used on BD than if the specifications had been complete form the start.

But this is all water under the bridge. What annoys me though is how slow the Blu-ray manufacturers are in bringing the fully "profiled" equipment to the market. They don't seem to be in a hurry anymore ...

But you actually can play 1.1 content back on 1.0 players. You just can't play it in the same way. 1.1 discs have the features on the discs that allow people with 1.0 players to watch the exact same content that is overlayed on the PIP, so your not missing any of the content. You just can't watch it in the PIP while your watching the movie as well. Don't know what 2.0 will be like yet. I don't think it's a big deal either way, though.

But you actually can play 1.1 content back on 1.0 players. You just can't play it in the same way. 1.1 discs have the features on the discs that allow people with 1.0 players to watch the exact same content that is overlayed on the PIP, so your not missing any of the content. You just can't watch it in the PIP while your watching the movie as well. Don't know what 2.0 will be like yet. I don't think it's a big deal either way, though.
I haven't seen any 1.1 PiP discs and I don't have a 1.1 capable player, but it would probably be very odd to watch the PiP bit of a PiP commentary without the movie behind it as you won't be able to see which bit of the film they are talking about (I assume they'll have the option to resize the commentary to fill the screen? And they'll be talking about bits of the film you can't even see)

But you actually can play 1.1 content back on 1.0 players. You just can't play it in the same way. 1.1 discs have the features on the discs that allow people with 1.0 players to watch the exact same content that is overlayed on the PIP, so your not missing any of the content.That is not correct. The disc maker may decide to make secondary video available separately for profile 1.0 players when authoring the disc, but that doesn't mean that 1.1 content will automatically be available on 1.0 players.
You just can't watch it in the PIP while your watching the movie as well.Well, it is obvious that some PiP features (such as the "bluescreen feature" on 300 or video commentaries that refer directly to what happens on screen) completely lose their value when played separately. But this is not even the point.
Don't know what 2.0 will be like yet. I don't think it's a big deal either way, though.That's a matter of personal opinion. I think we can be quite sure though that players without a network interface will never be able to access network content. :)

I haven't seen any 1.1 PiP discs and I don't have a 1.1 capable player, but it would probably be very odd to watch the PiP bit of a PiP commentary without the movie behind it as you won't be able to see which bit of the film they are talking about (I assume they'll have the option to resize the commentary to fill the screen? And they'll be talking about bits of the film you can't even see)

I would assume people who care about said material would know the movie well enough to recognize what's going on. And it's really no different than interviews and behind the scenes footage talking about the film and parts when you don't have it running in the background, but to each his own.

I haven't checked it out to much, but I'm pretty sure the clips are just shown as regular SD material. It's not just the little window without anything behind it.

That is not correct. The disc maker may decide to make secondary video available separately for profile 1.0 players when authoring the disc, but that doesn't mean that 1.1 content will automatically be available on 1.0 players.


I didn't say it was automatic. However, Sunshine, Resident Evil and all the other discs seem to have the content. So, that makes it pretty true at this point. Obviously, no one can predict the future, so who knows if it will hold true.

Not sure why that matters, since HD players on both formats should be built with the future in mind.



Then I guess you're upset that early non PS3 BD owners have to buy 2nd and or maybe 3rd generation BD players because the first ones weren't built with the future in mind?

I would assume people who care about said material would know the movie well enough to recognize what's going on. And it's really no different than interviews and behind the scenes footage talking about the film and parts when you don't have it running in the background, but to each his own.
I think PiP commentaries without the movie behind are a lot different from behind the scenes stuff/making of/interviews etc.

If someone says anything without describing what they're seeing, chances are you aren't going to know what they're talking about (unless you have a second player running at the same time with a second disc in synchronization, showing the movie on a second TV ;))

Then I guess you're upset that early non PS3 BD owners have to buy 2nd and or maybe 3rd generation BD players because the first ones weren't built with the future in mind?

I'm not upset about anything. I just posted that to remind you that it goes both ways. Any early adoption of new tech is going to cause some people to want to re-buy newer version of said technology.

Whether it be 1080P 24FPS HD-DVD players, 2.0 Blu-Ray players, and earlier in time: DVD players with DTS decoders, then DVD players with Upscaling. Rebuying and Xbox 360 with an HDMI port, and I could go on and on.

I think it's a lot different from behind the scenes stuff/making of/interviews etc.
If someone says anything without describing what they're seeing, chances are you aren't going to know what they're talking about (unless you have a second player running at the same time with a second disc in synchronization, showing the movie on a second TV ;))

Most that I've seen have actually played out like any other doc you'd watch on DVD. IE, it was like a standalone feature doc or extra just put in a window to give it a little more context. I don't think it loses much being viewed alone, but that's just me and I can't speak for all the PIP content out there. Stuff like the 300 PIP may be different.

Whether it be 1080P 24FPS HD-DVD players, 2.0 Blu-Ray players, and earlier in time: DVD players with DTS decoders, then DVD players with Upscaling. Rebuying and Xbox 360 with an HDMI port, and I could go on and on.And yet, the Blu-ray 2.0 example is the only one in this list where some hardware simply cannot play back some of the content at all (in the case of DTS on DVD, a fallback track in either AC3 or MPEG audio was always mandatory).

Until profile 2.0 players are here and a reality, any sort of hodge podge interactivity on the BR discs is half baked at best and not really interactive in real time the way the features will be when internet connectivity is a reality through the PS3 and 2.0 players.

Dead or not, once you've used HD-DVD's interactive features, the comparison can't be made(at least not until BR gets the real thing later this year).

And yet, the Blu-ray 2.0 example is the only one in this list where some hardware simply cannot play back some of the content at all (in the case of DTS on DVD, a fallback track in either AC3 or MPEG audio was always mandatory).

If a DVD has 3 audio tracks (lets say MPEG, AC3, and DTS) and the hardware can only play 2. Well, then you cannot play back some of the content at all (the DTS track). The whole reason the DTS track is included is because it's different content from the AC3 or MPEG track. So, your statement would be incorrect.

And let's not get into the fact that by having internet content on either format in the first place you are not allowing all people to play back the content. Not everyone with a player will be able to connect their unit to the internet for said features.

If a DVD has 3 audio tracks (lets say MPEG, AC3, and DTS) and the hardware can only play 2. Well, then you cannot play back some of the content at all (the DTS track). The whole reason the DTS track is included is because it's different content from the AC3 or MPEG track. So, your statement would be incorrect. Well, I disagree. An audio track encoded with a different codec is still the same audio track. Or is Beethoven's 9th not the 9th anymore if it's on CD instead of vinyl? You don't lose any content by not being able to play back DTS. BTW, some people would argue that DTS on DVD has more to do with marketing than anything else. ;)
And let's not get into the fact that by having internet content on either format in the first place you are not allowing all people to play back the content. Not everyone with a player will be able to connect their unit to the internet for said features.Yeah, well, if you don't have electrical power, you cannot play back anything. That doesn't make the player incomplete. :)

And yet, the Blu-ray 2.0 example is the only one in this list where some hardware simply cannot play back some of the content at all (in the case of DTS on DVD, a fallback track in either AC3 or MPEG audio was always mandatory).

fyi, Sony and BD insiders (back when there was a thread) said the 1.1 content will be missing from the menu of 1.0 players and people with those players simply won't be able to select 1.1 options (PiP)...so now you have 2 on your list. Blu-ray 2.0 and Blu-ray 1.1.

I am waiting for the day when some BD-Java content is too complex for older players and that also gets blanked out if you processor is too old. That way people will quit complaining about discs taking 10 minutes to load.

btw, the BEST special feature by far is still being able to start the movie with out watching tons of crap first (i.e. anything Disney). The second best feature is being able to watch CURRENT HD trailers (straight from the Internet) rather than stale old ones that are "coming soon" even though the movie bombed 2 years ago:eek:.

Well, I disagree. An audio track encoded with a different codec is still the same audio track. Or is Beethoven's 9th not the 9th anymore if it's on CD instead of vinyl? You don't lose any content by not being able to play back DTS. BTW, some people would argue that DTS on DVD has more to do with marketing than anything else. ;)
Yeah, well, if you don't have electrical power, you cannot play back anything. That doesn't make the player incomplete. :)

Of course its the same audio track, but that doesn't change the fact that you can't access that particular bit of content. The whole reason it's their is to provide a slightly different sounding mix and maybe enhance your experience. You lose that content if the player can't access it.

And many people can't run cable or gain access to the web in the particular area of their home where their theater or player may be located. That's all I meant by the last comment.

Now, there's something to get excited about with special features and it's only the beginning!

I hope we start to see so cool BD-J titles soon. We know Warner is been holding off release some Blu Ray do the lack of profile 2.0 player. I can't wait to see the new inter-activate feature on BD. Maybe they will extend HDi titles like Transformers. Time will tell.

I hope we start to see so cool BD-J titles soon. We know Warner is been holding off release some Blu Ray do the lack of profile 2.0 player. I can't wait to see the new inter-activate feature on BD. Maybe they will extend HDi titles like Transformers. Time will tell.

HD DVD let the studios get a head start on some great ideas, and they were still only scratching the surface. I loved the idea of a director or studio being about to add comments or even having a special screening and taking questions while you watched the film. I also like the idea of being the first to be able to watch a trailer if you have a disc. For example, PotC4 would have an option to see the latest trailer or even "making of" PotC5. Its a cool special feature and gets people to buy discs.

Of course its the same audio track, but that doesn't change the fact that you can't access that particular bit of content. The whole reason it's their is to provide a slightly different sounding mix and maybe enhance your experience. You lose that content if the player can't access it.

And many people can't run cable or gain access to the web in the particular area of their home where their theater or player may be located. That's all I meant by the last comment.

66% of "pay TV" owners are CBL. The other 34% is broken down to 27% SAT and 7% TELCO.

Which means 2/3's have access to HS Internet because they have a CBL STB in their rack. The TELCO people also have access to HSI which makes the total 73% - almost 3 out of every 4.

Let's put "games" on our discs instead of actual supplements about the making of film. Who needs that brainy crap.Well for one thing not all supplements about the making of the movie are "brainy" and for another thing not all web extras were about making the movie (Donkey's coloring book, U-Shop, etc...).


But But, no one wants extras remember?When did I say that? In fact how many posters who said they didn't care about extras are currently in this thread promoting BD-J games?


only took bd 2 years to catch up on features with hd dud.And last I checked HD DVD will never catch up with Blu-ray in capacity, bandwidth, or durability.


we get to pay 2x and wait for 4 years.oliverjg, so you don't think we will see $300 BD-Live players for 4 years? Logically speaking that is what that statement means. As such I assume that you were using the $150 HD-A3 and illogically trying to attach it to HD DVD's launch back in April of 2006 when the $500 HD-A1 was released.

66% of "pay TV" owners are CBL. The other 34% is broken down to 27% SAT and 7% TELCO.

Which means 2/3's have access to HS Internet because they have a CBL STB in their rack. The TELCO people also have access to HSI which makes the total 73% - almost 3 out of every 4.

No, because only a bit more than half of cable subcribers actually have a broadband internet connection. Just because they have potential access doesn't mean they actually have access, ie they are paying for broadband.

http://www.ncta.com/Statistic/Statistic/Statistics.aspx

fyi, Sony and BD insiders (back when there was a thread) said the 1.1 content will be missing from the menu of 1.0 players and people with those players simply won't be able to select 1.1 options (PiP)...so now you have 2 on your list. Blu-ray 2.0 and Blu-ray 1.1.

I am waiting for the day when some BD-Java content is too complex for older players and that also gets blanked out if you processor is too old. That way people will quit complaining about discs taking 10 minutes to load.

btw, the BEST special feature by far is still being able to start the movie with out watching tons of crap first (i.e. anything Disney). The second best feature is being able to watch CURRENT HD trailers (straight from the Internet) rather than stale old ones that are "coming soon" even though the movie bombed 2 years ago:eek:.


As I have said before in other threads, it will be possible for Profile 2.0 players and discs to download an Ad package from the studio Ad server and pop up Ads for new content or TV shows, or sell Ad space for revenue. That 1 GB of ram has to be good for something!

I just can't wait for a movie where every 5 minutes, you get (using the PIP or overlay function) a popup Ad for something unrelated to the movie you are trying to watch. It will be just like the networks and cable. If that 1 GB is persistent, then once loaded, the Ads may continue to pop up on other movies that don't have Ad content.

I wonder which studio would have the nerve to do this first?

HD-DVD still has much better interactivity and i can't wait to pick up the german edition of T2. I refuse to pay more for less for blue ray and pat myself on the back that "I won". If this were 2004 this would be great.

Yawn.

The fanboy crap gets very old. Some of you sound like teen girls arguing over which cell phone is the best to text each other...it is absolutely ANNOYING.


+1 This post sums it up very well.

This thread got smacked by like 99% of the posters.

That's funny.

I am waiting for the day when some BD-Java content is too complex for older players and that also gets blanked out if you processor is too old. That way people will quit complaining about discs taking 10 minutes to load.

They'll still take 10 minutes to load because the disc still has to check the players capabilities.

Yhey!!! Does it make a bad movie better?? Like shoot am annoying character thru interactivity? On the seriouse note, it's a cool added feature which the mass market doesn't care. I'd still buy it coz of the movie, not the extra features.

This thread got smacked by like 99% of the posters.

That's funny.

This thread got smacked by early adopters who chose HD-DVD and are still waiting to unload the dead weight...99% sounds about right...thats VERY FUNNY :D

"And last I checked HD DVD will never catch up with Blu-ray in capacity, bandwidth, or durability."


Oh SNAP !!!....is that a PWONED!! bomb...take cover...IT'S ON LIKE DONKEY KONG...:D

ibtl

you can thank bd-j for 10 minute loading times on ratatouille too

How much did the bda pay you to make this post?? This reeks of bda marketing tactics.

10 minutes? i watched the movie today on my ps3, it started almost instantly!:)

The point, I think, cadbury8, is that BD still doesn't have all of the features that a dead format had from the beginning.

10 minutes? i watched the movie today on my ps3, it started almost instantly!:)

Those of us with PS3s are lucky. Many stand alone owners are complaining that BD-Java discs take from 2 to 10 minutes to load.:(

Aslo, I do hope that in a year or two Blu-ray does adopt some of the cool features that HD DVD offered. I love the T2 release that has the "goof" option for PiP. It point out all the mistakes and goofs during the movie. For many cult classics, this is a must have...and yes HD DVD is dead, but that is no excuse for Blu-ray to not be able to all these cool things.

The point, I think, cadbury8, is that BD still doesn't have all of the features that a dead format had from the beginning.
LOL +1
Those of us with PS3s are lucky. Many stand alone owners are complaining that BD-Java discs take from 2 to 10 minutes to load.:(

Aslo, I do hope that in a year or two Blu-ray does adopt some of the cool features that HD DVD offered. I love the T2 release that has the "goof" option for PiP. It point out all the mistakes and goofs during the movie. For many cult classics, this is a must have...and yes HD DVD is dead, but that is no excuse for Blu-ray to not be able to all these cool things.

+10

Many blu-ray owners are reporting 5 - 10 minute load times for BD-java discs.Thanks to BD-J many BD players take 2 to 10 minutes to a disc.That way people will quit complaining about discs taking 10 minutes to load.Many stand alone owners are complaining that BD-Java discs take from 2 to 10 minutes to load.Everdog, since you keep making this claim how many posters do you know actually timed a Blu-ray disc and got a 10 minute load time on a Blu-ray player? I ask for posters since you clearly imply that it is more than one with the use of the term "people" and I ask for timed estimates since anything else might be an exaggeration.

I've never seen a Blu-ray Disc take 10 minutes to load, even on the BD-P1400.
I think the longest I've waited was about 45-50 seconds for Pirates.

The point, I think, cadbury8, is that BD still doesn't have all of the features that a dead format had from the beginning.

It's managed to have several times more releases with audio tracks that are bit-for-bit identical to the studio master, which is more than enough reason for me to continue to enjoy the format.

Everdog, since you keep making this claim how many posters do you know actually timed a Blu-ray disc and got a 10 minute load time on a Blu-ray player? I ask for posters since you clearly imply that it is more than one with the use of the term "people" and I ask for timed estimates since anything else might be an exaggeration.

I am sorry that you are unable to look for yourself, but in less than 60 seconds, I found the following:

Here is a 2-3 minute post:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=13247437#post13247437

and here is a 10 minute post:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=13302437#post13302437

Yes, it is a very real problem. Try looking in the Blu-ray forums for more examples.

It's managed to have several times more releases with audio tracks that are bit-for-bit identical to the studio master, which is more than enough reason for me to continue to enjoy the format.

How about if we just say this:

We love Blu-ray, it won the format war, most discs provide great audio, we wish they would soon adopt the features that HD DVD offered from day one.

Is there any good PIP (bonus view) titles out there? I want to try them on my PS3.

Superbad takes 3 minutes on a current firmware Sharp HP20.

It's managed to have several times more releases with audio tracks that are bit-for-bit identical to the studio master, which is more than enough reason for me to continue to enjoy the format.

I don't think that the audio tracks are bit-for-bit identical to the master. Lossless does not equal identical.

I've never seen a Blu-ray Disc take 10 minutes to load, even on the BD-P1400.
I think the longest I've waited was about 45-50 seconds for Pirates.

Here is another. This is a well documented issue.http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=13339649#post13339649

why are people even comparing blu ray to hd dvd? hd dvd is dead. all the hd dvd flame posts are nothing but trolling.

Because it had some great features that Blu-ray doesn't have yet or at least not in a standard way like IME was.

Here is a 2-3 minute post:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=13247437#post13247437I am only asking for evidence for the 10 minute claim.


and here is a 10 minute post:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=13302437#post13302437I thought it would be something like that. Let's see exactly what that poster said:


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.Everdog, in what way did you think that a buggy player would be a good example to use for your claim? Did you think that no one would notice the first part of his post?


One time Ratatouille took near 10 minutes,The fact that one time a buggy player took "near 10 minutes" to load a disc is not a valid example.


Yes, it is a very real problem. Try looking in the Blu-ray forums for more examples.I did, and one of the best timed examples I could find was this one (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=13330136&postcount=3196). The poster tested firmware 3.2 and firmware 3.8 for the Sony BDP-S300 using Ratatouille and got 5.4 minutes (firmware 3.2) and 4 minutes (firmware 3.8).

I feel you dobyblue. I'm all about enjoy the best PQ and SQ in my home and that is what blu-ray offers. Of course I'm a home theater enthusiast while others are extra's enthusiast. Day 1 blu-ray's incomplete specs have been superior to the complete specs of DVD and HD DVD, specs that DVD and HD DVD would will never catch up in.

:rolleyes:

What player are you using "briankmonkey"? I assume something other than a PS3, since you are all about the best SQ. If you are using a PS3 I can't take you seriously, since you don't care so much about lossless audio such as DTSHD-MA.

It's managed to have several times more releases with audio tracks that are bit-for-bit identical to the studio master, which is more than enough reason for me to continue to enjoy the format.

Which player are you currently using? Only a few players enable you to enjoy every one of those "bit for bit" identical to the master tracks. PS3, as we all know, isn't one of them.

I am only asking for evidence for the 10 minute claim. The fact that one time a buggy player took "near 10 minutes" to load a disc is not a valid example....

I did, and one of the best timed examples I could find was this one (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=13330136&postcount=3196). The poster tested firmware 3.2 and firmware 3.8 for the Sony BDP-S300 using Ratatouille and got 5.4 minutes (firmware 3.2) and 4 minutes (firmware 3.8).

Wow, you are really digging a hole for yourself. That is anohter great example of someone complaining that it can "take 2 to 10 minutes to a load a disc". I think the S300 is the most popular stand alone and Sony claims they have sold 100,000 of them. The fact users have tested and confirmed that it takes 5.4 minutes to load a disc is really not great news (although with some FW dates you can get it down to 4:eek:).

btw, thanks to scoob for taking a second to find the post stating:
It took my Sammy BDP-1000 10-15 minutes of swirling white dots for this (ID4) to start playing.

maybe I should start saying upto 15 minutes now.:D

I guess there are just point of views on this:

1) wow, this is a problem and I hope BD CEs will address it.
2) problem, what problem?

Well, what player? You are a great proponent of lossless audio... curious what player you are using. It must be a something that bitstreams all codecs, or perhaps the new 3800?

Wow, you are really digging a hole for yourself. That is anohter great example of someone complaining that it can "take 2 to 10 minutes to a load a disc". I think the S300 is the most popular stand alone and Sony claims they have sold 100,000 of them. The fact users have tested and confirmed that it takes 5.4 minutes to load a disc is really not great news (although with some FW dates you can get it down to 4:eek:).

btw, thanks to scoob for taking a second to find the post stating:


maybe I should start saying upto 15 minutes now.:D

I guess there are just point of views on this:

1) wow, this is a problem and I hope BD CEs will address it.
2) problem, what problem?


If Superbad takes 3 minutes consistently on one of my players, I'd believe 10 minutes.

I've never seen a Blu-ray Disc take 10 minutes to load, even on the BD-P1400.
I think the longest I've waited was about 45-50 seconds for Pirates.I believe that the current torture test for loading time is Ratatouille and loading time also depends a lot on the player that is used.


Is there any good PIP (bonus view) titles out there? I want to try them on my PS3.Resident Evil: Extinction and Sunshine both have PiP tracks and a neat thing I noticed is that even with the PiP track on you can play them back at 1.5x on the PS3.


I don't think that the audio tracks are bit-for-bit identical to the master. Lossless does not equal identical.Just curious but what do you think lossless means?


Here is another. This is a well documented issue.http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=13339649#post13339649Well assuming it isn't a buggy player or due to old firmware that might be something.

Is there any good PIP (bonus view) titles out there? I want to try them on my PS3.


last i heard these are the profile 1.1 titles out...

war
resident evil extinction
sunshine

:rolleyes:

What player are you using "briankmonkey"? I assume something other than a PS3, since you are all about the best SQ. If you are using a PS3 I can't take you seriously, since you don't care so much about lossless audio such as DTSHD-MA.


Is that the new talking point now? You can't be a serious audio fan if you can't decode one of the many lossless formats?


:rolleyes:, indeed.

Wow, you are really digging a hole for yourself.I only care about the truth. What do you care about?


1) wow, this is a problem and I hope BD CEs will address it.Last I checked BD-J performance has been improving in recent Blu-ray players and most noticeably in the Panasonic DMP-BD30.

Is that the new talking point now? You can't be a serious audio fan if you can't decode one of the many lossless formats?


:rolleyes:, indeed.

Of course it is. Maybe he can ask me a 4th and 5th time and send me a few more PM's :o

He's well aware I want DTS-MA to come to the PS3. I'm not counting on but definitely hope it hits in a firmware update.

No one cares about special features or interactivity or at least that's what I've been told.

I heard the exact same thing, about a bajillion times.

The fact that one time a buggy player took "near 10 minutes" to load a disc is not a valid example.


I did, and one of the best timed examples I could find was this one (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=13330136&postcount=3196). The poster tested firmware 3.2 and firmware 3.8 for the Sony BDP-S300 using Ratatouille and got 5.4 minutes (firmware 3.2) and 4 minutes (firmware 3.8).

So . . . just so I've got this straight . . . you're arguing that a 5.4 minute load time is a good thing? The OP may be incorrect in his "10 minute"
assertion, although there seems to be some evidence that load times can actually be that long, but I think most people without blinders on would admit that anything over, I don't know . . . 15-20 seconds probably qualifies as an annoyance to most consumers, and that anything beyond a minute would likely frustrate most consumers enough for them to feel load times are "an issue". Virtually the only environment I can see 5 minutes being acceptable or a non-issue is amongst the early adopter, HD fanatics (that 's a good thing, btw) on this forum. For everyone else (i.e., the majority of the consuming public), I'm betting at somewhere around the 2 minute mark they'd begin pushing buttons on their C/E device or remote and assume it was broken or "locked up" (how patient do you witness people being in the workplace with their PCs . . . how long after a PC has "hung" before most people simply reboot it?). Bottom line: there are issues out there, and many of either the devices or the discs are not yet ready for "prime time" (prime time being equivalent to 'mass consumption audience' in this context). It's not a knock against BD uniquely, and it's not a HD DVD versus BD thing, it's a pretty simple statement of what most people realize about the general, consuming public . . . they don't read instructions/directions, and they're not very patient.

I

Just curious but what do you think lossless means?




Lossless may mean different thing. Mathematicaly lossless (2+2=4 and 3+1=4 but they are not specifically the same even if the result is the same). Also you may get the same information than the original track (all the bits are there) but the mix is different (DTS is known to use different mix if it can "help" the sound field).

So . . . just so I've got this straight . . . you're arguing that a 5.4 minute load time is a good thing? The OP may be incorrect in his "10 minute"
assertion, although there seems to be some evidence that load times can actually be that long, but I think most people without blinders on would admit that anything over, I don't know . . . 15-20 seconds probably qualifies as an annoyance to most consumers, and that anything beyond a minute would likely frustrate most consumers enough for them to feel load times are "an issue". Virtually the only environment I can see 5 minutes being acceptable or a non-issue is amongst the early adopter, HD fanatics (that 's a good thing, btw) on this forum. For everyone else (i.e., the majority of the consuming public), I'm betting at somewhere around the 2 minute mark they'd begin pushing buttons on their C/E device or remote and assume it was broken or "locked up" (how patient do you witness people being in the workplace with their PCs . . . how long after a PC has "hung" before most people simply reboot it?). Bottom line: there are issues out there, and many of either the devices or the discs are not yet ready for "prime time" (prime time being equivalent to 'mass consumption audience' in this context). It's not a knock against BD uniquely, and it's not a HD DVD versus BD thing, it's a pretty simple statement of what most people realize about the general, consuming public . . . they don't read instructions/directions, and they're not very patient.

Sony claimed awhile back that the S300 sold 100,000 units, which leads me to believe that there are clearly more than 100,000 people experiencing this problem (it has been reported on Sharp, Samsung, LG and Sony models).

As BD-Java implementations get more complex on the discs, it will only get worse for those users. As I have said in the past, it would be nice if the studios popped up a message that asked if you want the BD-J version or the non-BD-J version before anything is loaded...after all BD users only care about the movie.

Just curious but what do you think lossless means?

Do they ever add audio watermarking to releases - and if so, is it still lossless?

What about if the original was 24 bit but was converted to a 16 bit lossless track?

Also, aren't we still losing something? If you watch a documentary would it sound 100.00000% exactly the same as if you were stood right next to the person doing the commentary/the things in the documentary? And if you watch a concert/music event would it sound 100.00000% exactly the same as if you were at the actual event? Would a film about some event (say a war) sound 100.0000% exactly like if you were at that war (with only 5 or 7 speakers instead of something like 24 or more?)

Seriously how bad is the number of good games for the PS3 that owners are looking for BD-J games for their console :eek: :D

Many people don't need/want the extras, but many people do, so now people that do want will fight against people that don't want the features?

Remember that Studios want Blu-ray to grow more than a low niche number, they need to find ways to make more people jump into it, they already have the people that "don't need extras, it's all about the movie", so the next step is people that "I want to know everything about the movie, PIP, how was made", then people that don't have a game console so they want to "play some games with my Blu-ray player", then the people that want to "edit the movie and share it with friends", some people that want "the movie's ringtone" or other things, all this for a little more than normal DVD (less than $10 difference).

Just curious but what do you think lossless means?It means that a lossless codec was used for encoding the audio track. That does not necessarily mean it's "identical to the master". :) E.g., 24-bit audio mastering is common in modern Hollywood productions, but many "lossless" tracks on BD are truncated to 16-bit word length. Also, home video versions usually receive a custom sound mix that is different from the theatrical mix. Depending on the source material, it may also be the case that the source for the "lossless" encoding was previously stored in a lossy way. Reality does not always match the marketing. :)

It means that a lossless codec was used for encoding the audio track. That does not necessarily mean it's "identical to the master". :) E.g., 24-bit audio mastering is common in modern Hollywood productions, but many "lossless" tracks on BD are truncated to 16-bit word length. Also, home video versions usually receive a custom sound mix that is different from the theatrical mix. Depending on the source material, it may also be the case that the source for the "lossless" encoding was previously stored in a lossy way. Reality does not always match the marketing. :)

There have been some crappy "lossless" tracks. I think one BD fan commented that the 5.1 PCM sound on Halloween left him begging for the mono version (which is what the original master is)!

Seriously how bad is the number of good games for the PS3 that owners are looking for BD-J games for their console

Bato, got a link to these PS3 owners looking for BD-J games?

Bato, got a link to these PS3 owners looking for BD-J games?

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=13330950

You need to look for at thread titled "Blu-ray now has the best special features thanks to BD-J". I know its hard to find, but you just have to look real hard.:D


(It is kind of funny that PS3 owners are touting BD-J games that they can play.)

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=13330950

You need to look for at thread titled "Blu-ray now has the best special features thanks to BD-J". I know its hard to find, but you just have to look real hard.:D


(It is kind of funny that PS3 owners are touting BD-J games that they can play.)

I read through that thread but didn't see any people complaining about PS3 games looking for Java games instead.

I read through that thread but didn't see any people complaining about PS3 games looking for Java games instead.

Lookat tqlla's signature..."2 PS3s, 2 Stand alone players, 62 BD movies and 7 BD games".

2 PS3 and 7 BD games? Wow, PS3 games must really stink for him to be touting BD games over PS3 games.:eek:

btw, I have owned a PS3 for over 6 months now and never bought a single game. I do buy games for the Wii though.:)

Again, its funny that PS3 owners are posting how great BD Java games are...that says a lot.

Bato, got a link to these PS3 owners looking for BD-J games?

I'm pretty sure bato was just adding a bit of humor to this rather lame thread. Try not to be so serious. I mean, really, you want a link?

Lookat tqlla's signature..."2 PS3s, 2 Stand alone players, 62 BD movies and 7 BD games".

2 PS3 and 7 BD games? Wow, PS3 games must really stink for him to be touting BD games over PS3 games.:eek:

btw, I have owned a PS3 for over 6 months now and never bought a single game. I do buy games for the Wii though.:)

Again, its funny that PS3 owners are posting how great BD Java games are...that says a lot.

Simple solution is to ask him. I don't personally don't jump to the same conclusion. Granted I never jumped to the same conclusions with you in regards to the Nielsen thread either, lol

tqlla are the number of good games for the PS3 lacking that you are looking for BD-J games?

Is this true for your tastes Everdog? If so then we have 1 confirmed so far for Bato's statement. Granted I wouldn't be surprised if you fell into that category.


edit:
I'm pretty sure bato was just adding a bit of humor to this rather lame thread. Try not to be so serious. I mean, really, you want a link?

Probably right.

to help with the slow load issues and glacial advancement of special features on bd, they should put HDi into bd and use one of the following names for the improved product....

profile 3.0
super bonus view
bd minus j

maybe they could just call it...

bd minus j super bonus view profile 3.0 :eek:

So . . . just so I've got this straight . . . you're arguing that a 5.4 minute load time is a good thing?Never said that nor do I believe that. I simply like my truth straight up without the exaggeration, hatred, or bitterness that some posters have towards Blu-ray.

this looks potentially cool...

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/Fox/Exclusive_HD_Content/Disc_Announcements/Fox_Prepping_New_AvP_Blu-ray_with_BD-Live,_PIP/1553

but why are they wasting all this on a title they released already? :confused:

Bato, got a link to these PS3 owners looking for BD-J games?

I'm pretty sure bato was just adding a bit of humor to this rather lame thread. Try not to be so serious. I mean, really, you want a link?

Exactly, that's why I put 2 smilies after that. Then I was serious, some people like, others don't, but Studios want a product that can be pleasing to almost everybody (they can't give the movies free :p )

Never said that nor do I believe that. I simply like my truth straight up without the exaggeration, hatred, or bitterness that some posters have towards Blu-ray.

If someone says that it can take between 2 and 10 minutes for something to load, and you have documented that there are those with 5+ minute loads, does not 2 < 5 < 10 make that statement true?

Worse still we have someone reporting 15 minutes to load a title. If you were after the truth then you would demand that Everdog edit his posts to reflect that load times can take between 2 and 15 minutes.

Buggy players that are sold to the public still count. It would be like saying there is no compatibility issues with an OS and anyone who disagrees is using buggy software/hardware.

It is hard to pretend you are after the truth if all you ever do is go after those who put your favoured BluRay in a less than desireable light, simply admitting that would be nice for a change. In any case, I think the truth has to mean that everything is considered, otherwise it is just facts.

Anyways... who the heck cares about all this? Bottom line, BD-J is the future of interactivity on HiDef media and if it takes too long to load discs irrespective of whether one uses the special features or not... then the future of HiDef media is not looking too rosy.

Who gives a crapola, where's teh movies, and where's my < $28 movies (FOX!!!!)

The point, I think, cadbury8, is that BD still doesn't have all of the features that a dead format had from the beginning.

well sir as you know bd will have all the features soon
and i for one will be glad not to hear about the dead format anymore.
i supported hd dvd and would like to see it put to rest.

If someone says that it can take between 2 and 10 minutes for something to load, and you have documented that there are those with 5+ minute loads, does not 2 < 5 < 10 make that statement true?

Worse still we have someone reporting 15 minutes to load a title. If you were after the truth then you would demand that Everdog edit his posts to reflect that load times can take between 2 and 15 minutes.

Buggy players that are sold to the public still count. It would be like saying there is no compatibility issues with an OS and anyone who disagrees is using buggy software/hardware.

It is hard to pretend you are after the truth if all you ever do is go after those who put your favoured BluRay in a less than desireable light, simply admitting that would be nice for a change. In any case, I think the truth has to mean that everything is considered, otherwise it is just facts.

Anyways... who the heck cares about all this? Bottom line, BD-J is the future of interactivity on HiDef media and if it takes too long to load discs irrespective of whether one uses the special features or not... then the future of HiDef media is not looking too rosy.

Thanks for the comments. The funny thing is not only did I mention the problem, but I have offered a solution. Just ask people if they want to load the BD-J version of menus and extras or the just the barebones non-BD-J version. Since this problem can occur on a number of BD players in the 6 figures, I think it would be helpful to bring this up with the studios so that they can do something about it, rather than ignore it or pretend it does not exist.

I'm pretty sure bato was just adding a bit of humor to this rather lame thread. Try not to be so serious. I mean, really, you want a link?

It was rather funny and great for a chuckle. Think about it, PS3 owners touting BD-J games that you play with your remote.:D

It works for other consoles too, think about all the people playing the old school Nintendo and SNES games on their Wiis...OK, some of those are great games.

i know you didnt ask that question. hehehehe. get ready for the double & triple dips ahead. ;)

it is going to be slim pickin's for new content this year if....

universal/paramount just release the same stuff that was already on hd dvd.

fox (and other studios) start double dipping with new special features on content they already released. i hope this doesn't become a pattern with new versions of spiderman, potc, casino royal etc.

in any case, i will wait for the new version of avp in the fall since i never bought the first one anyway.

Which player are you currently using? Only a few players enable you to enjoy every one of those "bit for bit" identical to the master tracks. PS3, as we all know, isn't one of them.

BD-P1400. I'll be getting a DMP-BD50 when they are released.

I don't think that the audio tracks are bit-for-bit identical to the master. Lossless does not equal identical.

Actually, yes they are. Most digital masters are in 16/48 or 24/48, depending on budget and/or production year. For example, the Pirates of the Caribbean movies all have 24/48 studio masters. The 24/48 PCM track is the same, bit-for-bit, identical track.

Well, what player? You are a great proponent of lossless audio... curious what player you are using. It must be a something that bitstreams all codecs, or perhaps the new 3800?

Wow you waited three minutes and then asked the same question again?!! I'm very sorry that I wasn't sitting here yesterday refreshing this thread.

:rolleyes:
I think most people without blinders on would admit that anything over, I don't know . . . 15-20 seconds probably qualifies as an annoyance to most consumers, and that anything beyond a minute would likely frustrate most consumers enough for them to feel load times are "an issue".

Then I guess it's a good thing that "most consumers" don't wait more than 20 seconds on any title, given that "most consumers" have a PS3, when assuming that most consumers is referring to most Blu-ray consumers.

Otherwise if we're referring to "most consumers" as in the general public, well by the time they buy a player it won't be a profile 1.0 player and it will not have any load issues.

does anyone know the full capabilities of BD-J? What it can or will be able to do in the future? i had posted this question earlier but got no response.

this is a good question.

but, imo (like HDi) it is more limited now by what the studios choose to do with it then by limits of bd-j.

the other limit was in the hardware.... lack of secondary video decoding, lack of local storage, lack of ethernet interface.

imo the hardware is still a bottleneck since they are still selling players with parts missing and the soc cpus are too slow.

Lossless may mean different thing. Mathematicaly lossless (2+2=4 and 3+1=4 but they are not specifically the same even if the result is the same). Also you may get the same information than the original track (all the bits are there) but the mix is different (DTS is known to use different mix if it can "help" the sound field).

If you were to just count the PCM tracks then, there are around 200 titles on Blu-ray.

Also, aren't we still losing something? If you watch a documentary would it sound 100.00000% exactly the same as if you were stood right next to the person doing the commentary/the things in the documentary? And if you watch a concert/music event would it sound 100.00000% exactly the same as if you were at the actual event? Would a film about some event (say a war) sound 100.0000% exactly like if you were at that war (with only 5 or 7 speakers instead of something like 24 or more?)

Ah, I see, so unless we're actually there at all the foley recording, score recording, dialogue recording, voice overs, etc., it's not truly lossless.

I get it.

We're talking about being bit-for-bit identical to the "studio master", not to the actual events being represented by the studio master.

Let's come back from Sillyville now, m'kay?
It means that a lossless codec was used for encoding the audio track. That does not necessarily mean it's "identical to the master". :) E.g., 24-bit audio mastering is common in modern Hollywood productions, but many "lossless" tracks on BD are truncated to 16-bit word length. Also, home video versions usually receive a custom sound mix that is different from the theatrical mix. Depending on the source material, it may also be the case that the source for the "lossless" encoding was previously stored in a lossy way. Reality does not always match the marketing. :)

Actually there are many 16-bit recordings in Hollywood also.

There are well over 70 24-bit lossless releases on Blu-ray. The instances you're describing, such as the mix differing from the theatrical mix, are usually when there was no multi-channel mix for the theatrical recording and the're presenting a new mix, like Disney does with a lot of its older catalogue titles. I can't think of too many ways where an encoding is stored in a lossy way for modern films, which comprise the majority of units purchased at the moment.

It was rather funny and great for a chuckle. Think about it, PS3 owners touting BD-J games that you play with your remote.:D

It works for other consoles too, think about all the people playing the old school Nintendo and SNES games on their Wiis...OK, some of those are great games.

i guess we need pong for the ps3 gaming crowd. :)

If someone says that it can take between 2 and 10 minutes for something to load, and you have documented that there are those with 5+ minute loads, does not 2 < 5 < 10 make that statement true?Logically and mathematically the answer would be no. After all based on that same logic if someone says that it can take 2 to 100 minutes for something to load and there is a 4 minute load time on a certain disc would his statement be true? No, and it would only be true if he could prove that statement.


Worse still we have someone reporting 15 minutes to load a title.He said "10 to 15 minutes" which certainly sounds like he didn't time it and how many other owners of the Samsung BD-P1000 have confirmed this? It just seems to me that certain posters are eager to find the worst load time they can without first checking whether it is due to a buggy player or old firmware.


If you were after the truth then you would demand that Everdog edit his posts to reflect that load times can take between 2 and 15 minutes.So far the worst timed estimate I have heard for a Blu-ray player using current firmware is 4 minutes.


Buggy players that are sold to the public still count.That is an interesting opinion and would you have judged HD DVD loading times based on a buggy player that had trouble loading discs?


It is hard to pretend you are after the truth if all you ever do is go after those who put your favoured BluRay in a less than desireable light,hdkhang, I have no problem accepting negative truths about Blu-ray but you have shown a lack of objectivity about this. Did you show any interest in verifying the worst load time found? No. Did you show any interest in verifying whether the player's firmware was up to date and indicative of other players of that model? No. Did you show any interest in using timed load times to insure accuracy? No. As such from what I can see you and Everdog are far more interested in getting a negative result than in getting an accurate result.


Bottom line, BD-J is the future of interactivity on HiDef media and if it takes too long to load discs irrespective of whether one uses the special features or not... then the future of HiDef media is not looking too rosy.I am all for the improvement of BD-J load times and considered it great news when I heard that the same UniPhier SoC used in the Panasonic DMP-BD30 will be used in the Funai Blu-ray player (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=13206919&postcount=14).


The funny thing is not only did I mention the problem, but I have offered a solution. Just ask people if they want to load the BD-J version of menus and extras or the just the barebones non-BD-J version.I am pretty sure that most extras could be put in both menu systems and from what I read PiP can be done using HDMV.


Since this problem can occur on a number of BD players in the 6 figures,Everdog, care to tell us exactly which Blu-ray players sold in the 6 figures price range?

Everdog, care to tell us exactly which Blu-ray players sold in the 6 figures price range?

The S300 sold over 100,000 units according to Sony. I said the number of players that load discs slowly in in the six figure range...nothing to do with price.

I feel for people who bought an S300.

...2 < 5 < 10...
Logically and mathematically the answer would be no. After all based on that same logic if someone says that it can take 2 to 100 minutes for something to load and there is a 4 minute load time on a certain disc would his statement be true? No, and it would only be true if he could prove that statement.

Wow, I am pretty sure that 2 < 5 < 10 is true. Can you check again?:D

btw, since we provided links to people saying up to 10 minutes and 10-15 minutes, and you even gave examples of ver 5 minutes, I'll stick with my statement.

I haven't been impressed with the BD-J games yet. Some seemed to lag in response time and control.

If they ever get all the bugs out then it might be something for someone to enjoy. I doubt any of us are playing a few hours of Chicken Little Space Invaders right now.

I'm happier with the content that tells you how a movie was made with commentary and visuals.

If you were to just count the PCM tracks then, there are around 200 titles on Blu-ray.



Ah, I see, so unless we're actually there at all the foley recording, score recording, dialogue recording, voice overs, etc., it's not truly lossless.

I get it.

We're talking about being bit-for-bit identical to the "studio master", not to the actual events being represented by the studio master.

Let's come back from Sillyville now, m'kay?

I was just pointing out that 5.1 or 7.1 'lossless' may not be the 'best' soundtrack that can ever be made, especially with audio watermarking, conversion from higher bitdepths or sample rates, limited speakers/whatever.

But thanks very for much for calling me 'silly'.

The S300 sold over 100,000 units according to Sony. I said the number of players that load discs slowly in in the six figure rangeI see, and just curious but what are the other Blu-ray players that have sold over 100,000 units?


I feel for people who bought an S300.The Sony BDP-S300 is about average for loading times and is a reliable Blu-ray player. In my opinion if you want to use an example of a Blu-ray player with problems the Samsung BD-P1000 and Samsung BD-P1200 are better choices and both are based on a Broadcom chip. I don't know if Broadcom was spending to much time cuddling with Microsoft or just not enough time working on their BD-J software but from what I have read players based on the Broadcom chips have had the most issues. Just my opinion of course and that could change in the future.


btw, since we provided links to people saying up to 10 minutes and 10-15 minutes, and you even gave examples of ver 5 minutes, I'll stick with my statement.Not exactly a surprise though unless you are counting the buggy player you are basing your entire statement for 10 minutes on a single estimate. An estimate that was not timed and may be based on a player which is buggy or using old firmware.

Not exactly a surprise though unless you are counting the buggy player you are basing your entire statement for 10 minutes on a single estimate. An estimate that was not timed and may be based on a player which is buggy or using old firmware.

What about the other ones like:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=13339649#post13339649
It took my Sammy BDP-1000 10-15 minutes of swirling white dots for this to start playing (the new ID4 disc).

Oh well, I guess you'll never admit that this is a problem. How about if we just use your numbers and say that on the over 100,000 S300 BD players loading BD-J discs may take over 5 minutes, 1 person reported up to 10, and at least 1 other person has reported 10-15 on his Samsung.**

It would just be nice is studios offer you the choice to by pass the BD-J stuff and just watch the movie. I think this is the right solution.



** this does not mean that it does take 10 minutes, because according to one AVSer those people did not time their players properly and the players were clearly buggy.

Actually there are many 16-bit recordings in Hollywood also.Mastering of major Hollywood movies is almost alway done in a 24-bit environment these days.
There are well over 70 24-bit lossless releases on Blu-ray. The instances you're describing, such as the mix differing from the theatrical mix, are usually when there was no multi-channel mix for the theatrical recording and the're presenting a new mix, like Disney does with a lot of its older catalogue titles.This is incorrect. In modern movies, usually a separate remix is made for home use instead of just using the theatrical print master. Home viewing environments have vastly different acoustical characteristics than movie theaters. Most theatrical mixes would sound terribly bright if directly played back in a home environment (because they are made for an "X-curve" response, and because home theaters have more room reflections), and the staging would be off because of near-field speaker placement.
I can't think of too many ways where an encoding is stored in a lossy way for modern films, which comprise the majority of units purchased at the moment.You would be surprised. :)

it's amazing some of the old cheerleaders are still going on and on and on...

I haven't been impressed with the BD-J games yet. Some seemed to lag in response time and control.

If they ever get all the bugs out then it might be something for someone to enjoy. I doubt any of us are playing a few hours of Chicken Little Space Invaders right now.

I'm happier with the content that tells you how a movie was made with commentary and visuals.

i agree with you.

i have also mucked around with the fly swatter game in The Fly and some HDi games on hd dvd.

the other features are a lot more interesting then the games. i spent a couple hours going through beowolf stuff. there is a lot more left i didn't get to yet.

What about the other ones like:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=13339649#post13339649Everdog, unless you count the buggy player (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=13302437&postcount=73) that is the only estimate you have for your 10 minute statement. An estimate that was not timed and may be based on a player which is buggy or using old firmware.


Oh well, I guess you'll never admit that this is a problem.I dislike negative exaggerations and if you said 2 to 4 minutes I wouldn't have a problem with that.


How about if we just use your numbers and say that on the over 100,000 S300 BD players loading BD-J discs may take over 5 minutes, 1 person reported up to 10,It was a buggy player which he said did that one time. Anyone without a deep hatred for Blu-ray might just consider that information to be relevant. Also it was a Sharp Blu-ray player.


** this does not mean that it does take 10 minutes, because according to one AVSer those people did not time their players properly and the players were clearly buggy.Everdog, for someone who keeps mentioning that post you seem to be ignoring a lot of what he said:


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,

Everdog, unless you count the buggy player (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=13302437&postcount=73) that is the only estimate you have for your 10 minute statement. An estimate that was not timed and may be based on a player which is buggy or using old firmware.

If a player has a bug, surely that means some function won't work or would work incorrectly.

If it's working, but slowly, might it just mean that it is inefficient code that is to blame, or that the hardware just isn't up to it (fast loading of content)?

If a player has a bug, surely that means some function won't work or would work incorrectly.

If it's working, but slowly, might it just mean that it is inefficient code that is to blame, or that the hardware just isn't up to it (fast loading of content)?If you play the same movie twice and get two different load times with the same firmware that indicates a bug with the player and a buggy player is not a valid example.

If you play the same movie twice and get two different load times with the same firmware that indicates a bug with the player and a buggy player is not a valid example.
Was the player turned off at the plug for a while before each test? If so, I'd imagine it would take about the time for each test.

If you include the time it takes for the machine to power on in the time to load the first disc it will take longer, but the second time you try to load a particular disc it will already have loaded it's operating system or whatever they call it, and may have cached/buffered stuff it needs to so the second time you try to load a disc should in theory be faster I'd think (I haven't done any tests - but as I said it depends if powering on is including or whether it was in standby etc.?)

If you play the same movie twice and get two different load times with the same firmware that indicates a bug with the player and a buggy player is not a valid example.
Not necessarily. If you did not power cycle the player, then it may be working "right" but have gabage collection/memory reallocation efficiency issues.

In other words, what has run before, impacts the performance of what is run later. No bug, but inefficient implementation or lack of resources in the box.

Take a PC and run a program and time how long it takes to load. Quit out of it and run it again. The second time it loads faster. Why? Because the kernel (operating system) doesn't throw away of the pages used by the application when it exited. Instead, it notices that the data is still in memory, and simply marks the pages valid in the VM page tables and lets the app use it, saving a slow disk access to fetch it. No bug but a big efficiency boost.

Note that I am not taking sides in your arguments :). Just that what you say is not indicative of a bug per-se and builds a defense based on too few facts....

wow

par on course! lol

<-- goes back to the Supra

I did, and one of the best timed examples I could find was this one (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=13330136&postcount=3196). The poster tested firmware 3.2 and firmware 3.8 for the Sony BDP-S300 using Ratatouille and got 5.4 minutes (firmware 3.2) and 4 minutes (firmware 3.8).


I dislike negative exaggerations and if you said 2 to 4 minutes I wouldn't have a problem with that.

Hmmm, first in YOUR example you mention a player that takes 5.4 minutes, and then you say it would be better to say 2-4 minutes????

Then I give this example...
It took my Sammy BDP-1000 10-15 minutes of swirling white dots for this to start playing.

and you reply with...

It was a buggy player which he said did that one time. Anyone without a deep hatred for Blu-ray might just consider that information to be relevant. Also it was a Sharp Blu-ray player.


Weird. I am sticking with 2 - 10, because that is what it seems to be from user's experiences (actually 2 -15). I have also repeatedly suggested a solution because I would like this to go away. Studios should offer an option to bypass BD-J.

Not necessarily. If you did not power cycle the player, then it may be working "right" but have gabage collection/memory reallocation efficiency issues.

In other words, what has run before, impacts the performance of what is run later. No bug, but inefficient implementation or lack of resources in the box. If that causes a great increase in load time in my opinion that would be a bug in how the player clears its memory. Also I would point out that there is no evidence that is what caused it.


Just that what you say is not indicative of a bug per-se and builds a defense based on too few facts.Well besides disagreeing with what you consider a bug that is a rather hypocritical statement to make. Everdog's argument rests on two posts one of which is a buggy player and the other is a player we have far to little information on. Amir, I have to say that the lack of scientific testing and verification of results is something that I think you would normally have a problem with.

Hmmm, first in YOUR example you mention a player that takes 5.4 minutes, and then you say it would be better to say 2-4 minutes????I also pointed out in that post (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=13342538&postcount=105) that with the new firmware it decreased the loading time for Ratatouille from 5.4 minutes to 4 minutes. Everdog, if you don't care whether the player is using current firmware you are basically just fishing for the worst example you can find regardless of whether it is currently accurate.


Weird. I am sticking with 2 - 10, because that is what it seems to be from user's experiences (actually 2 -15).Which you are basing on a single post which has not been verified and that we have very little information on. For instance can you even verify that it has happened with any other Samsung BD-P1000 owner?

If that causes a great increase in load time in my opinion that would be a bug in how the player clears its memory. Also I would point out that there is no evidence that is what caused it.

A bug is an error. It could be clearing it's memory correctly but using an inefficient way to do it. If someone could perform a calculation and the result was 42 and there was another program on the same system, written differently that came up with the same result, and had 100% correct logic in it, just like the first one, but took half the time, it would just be that one was more efficiently written than the other.

If it's failing to clear some memory properly (which could be the case I suppose), wouldn't that mean that each time you load it it gets slower and slower until it eventually stops with some error due insufficient memory?

If the 2nd time you load it it takes longer than the 1st, does the 3rd time take longer than the 2nd etc?

If not, it might just be inefficient/takes longer to free up the previously used memory ready for the new disc you are loading?

I also pointed out in that post (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=13342538&postcount=105) that with the new firmware it decreased the loading time for Ratatouille from 5.4 minutes to 4 minutes. Everdog, if you don't care whether the player is using current firmware you are basically just fishing for the worst example you can find regardless of whether it is currently accurate.


Which you are basing on a single post which has not been verified and that we have very little information on. For instance can you even verify that it has happened with any other Samsung BD-P1000 owner?

lol, I said 2 to 10 minutes and provided examples, and you come back with 4 to 5.4 minutes depending on FW and my examples need to be verified somehow?

You are basically arguing that there is not a forest through those trees.:D

OK.... I've seen this thread title on the front page the last few days and I have to get something off my chest.

Comparing HD DVD (RIP) to Blu-Ray at this point, HDi is still regarded as being superior and better implemented. HD DVD menus are much more fluid and HD DVD content has much wider variety of interactive features, not to even mention when they were showing at CES that nobody paid any attention too because of theWarner bombshell.

Creating a thread with such a title because of a couple goofy video games on Blu-Ray is utterly ridiculous. My only hope is that Blu-Ray can refine BD-J and continue with interactive features and ideas where HD DVD left off.

Does all of this bickering remind anyone else of this? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SP-JylNCAB0)

Mastering of major Hollywood movies is almost alway done in a 24-bit environment these days.
Yes, "Major Hollywood Movies" and "these days"
Let's conveniently forget all the movies that were made in the 90's shall we?
You would be surprised. :)

No, I wouldn't be.

Does all of this bickering remind anyone else of this? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SP-JylNCAB0)

actually it reminds me more of this...

This is the song that doesn't end,
It just goes on and on my friend
Some people started singing it, not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue singing it forever just because—

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Song_that_never_ends

actually it reminds me more of this...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Song_that_never_ends

My daughter's favorite song! Great, now it is stuck in my head.:D

I'm lucky if we (my family) get to sit down together long enough to watch an entire movie, uninterrupted, once or twice a week. So the extra BD-J "games" don't really interest me at all.

I already have two game systems...X-box 360 & Wii. No need to have my kids & their friends passing around the Blu-Ray player remote control. ;)

I'd rather see Blu-Ray movie release prices come down, forget the extra games on these discs.

Mike

to me this means that BD-J will never be able to do anything very impressive unless they turn players into quazi computers like the ps3 for instance.

to me the perfect bd player would be a ps3 in a home theater form factor with ir remote and front panel display. plus add dts-ma internal decoding.

one overlooked thing is wireless networking. that is really slick if you don't have wired ethernet to your equipment.

looking at the prices they charge for some bd sa players, it is amazing to me that they cheap out on the cpu and the networking.

My daughter's favorite song! Great, now it is stuck in my head.:D

:D

If it's failing to clear some memory properly (which could be the case I suppose), wouldn't that mean that each time you load it it gets slower and slower until it eventually stops with some error due insufficient memory?

Yes actually. In the computer world that type of error is called a memory leak. Where the application in question just keeps growing, and growing until it gets slow or crashes. Usually, it crashes and takes the OS along with it. A power recycle will clear the problem for X time until it rinses, lathers and repeats.

lol, I said 2 to 10 minutes and provided examples, and you come back with 4 to 5.4 minutes depending on FW and my examples need to be verified somehow?Everdog, logically speaking you should verify your evidence considering how weak it is and you don't even have two examples for the same player model. I very much doubt you would have accepted such weak evidence against HD DVD and you certainly wouldn't have questioned the relevance of up to date firmware.

even if it is 4 to 5.4 minutes, how is that considered okay?

blu kool aid is definitely potent.

Even the PS3, which is pretty much a supercomputer compared to what's out there, takes 1 minute to load some titles -- this is not acceptable, but we're forced to deal with it

Thanks, Java!!

even if it is 4 to 5.4 minutes, how is that considered okay?

blu kool aid is definitely potent.

Even the PS3, which is pretty much a supercomputer compared to what's out there, takes 1 minute to load some titles -- this is not acceptable, but we're forced to deal with it

Thanks, Java!!

Pretty much every HD DVD I've used on my A3 takes well over a minute to load. For the $99 price tag with 10 movies it was acceptable. The freezing and skipping, error code 408b?? however is not.

blublockers for others it seems:cool: I certainly wouldn't be happy with 4 to 5 minute load times, though in over a good 70-80 titles viewed on my blu-ray player I've never onced experienced that or any of the other major issues I've had with my HD DVD player.

Pretty much every HD DVD I've used on my A3 takes well over a minute to load. For the $99 price tag with 10 movies it was acceptable. The freezing and skipping, error code 408b?? however is not.

blublockers for others it seems:cool: I certainly wouldn't be happy with 4 to 5 minute load times, though in over a good 70-80 titles viewed on my blu-ray player I've never onced experienced that or any of the other major issues I've had with my HD DVD player.

(If you player freezes and gets errors, why didn't you exchange it?)

I have an A3 and the boot times are sometimes a good 30-40 seconds, which is very frustrating (no freezing or locking though). Thankfully it loads discs in much less time. For that reason, I have said that HD DVD was not quite for the average consumer.

Now we have 100,000+ players that can take 4 minutes+ to load a BD-J disc...that 8x longer than a crappy A3!!. Since these players are already in the users hands, it would be nice for studios to offer a way to bypass BD-J.

BD-J seems to be a serious issue that may hinder the adoption of Blu-ray, and we are ALL trying to avoid that.


Be a CONSUMER, not a format cheerleader.

Sadly, slow response seems to have become more than a norm than exception. My Samsung LCD takes 3-4 seconds to turn off! I mean what on earth does it need to do before powering off? Likewise, it needs time to boot as it takes a few seconds for the image to show up, and a few more before it accepts remote control commands. Better not try to turn the sound down quickly or you are in for some frustration. There is no excuse for this.

Back to topic here, there needs to be 10X more cries for faster response than there is. BD defenders really need to step aside and let the voices be heard by the rightful folks. Truth to be told, I was horrified to see how long my first HD DVD took to load and play titles. I thought it would for sure doom the format and the player. To my surprise, you all were pretty accepting :). I think two years later, there is little reason for it to be that way, let alone worse.

There is danger with tolerating long load times. There is pressure to use lower cost hardware to reduce player costs. This goes against using faster parts with dual-core CPUs and more processing power. And of course, it encourages poor programming practices in developing titles. So for the good of the format, I hope folks don't argue back for the sake of it. If an equipment maker or silicon provider wants to do that, let's see that and have that discussion. But having end users defend such things doesn't seem right to me.

And this is to give you a flavor of how bad these systems are. HD DVD had a code on disc that could be read by the player to instantly recognize the media. But instead, the players attempted every media type (and by the process of getting errors) to recognize it. I asked why. I was told that shining the blue laser on writable DVD could damage/corrupt it! So by allowing the player to play recordable media, and lack of good design in what it took to detect these media types, we have to put up with multiple seconds of load time, even if everything else is fixed.

even if it is 4 to 5.4 minutes, how is that considered okay?I never said it was and apart from some early adopters people wouldn't accept such load times from a video format.


Even the PS3, which is pretty much a supercomputer compared to what's out there, takes 1 minute to load some titles -- this is not acceptable, but we're forced to deal with it

Thanks, Java!!Rakesh, you might want to read this review of the Panasonic DMP-BD30 (http://www.bigpicturebigsound.com/panasonic-dmp-bd30k-1403.shtml):

When comparing the load times to Toshiba's 3rd Generation HD-DVD player, the HD-A35, the Panasonic's perkiness become even more impressive. Compared to the 33 seconds the Panasonic player takes to power on and begin playing a Blu-ray Disc, the HD-A35 takes a sluggish 76 seconds to accomplish the same task with an HD-DVD disc. Standard DVDs also load quicker on the DMP-BD30 than the HD-A35, but only about 2 seconds quicker (17 vs. 19 seconds). Also, the Panasonic player (as with most Blu-ray Disc players) actually remembers where you were on a Blu-ray Disc when you stop and resume playback, but the Toshiba players are unable to perform the same feat with HD-DVD discs.Granted he is talking about HDMV discs but that makes up the vast majority of Blu-ray discs that have been released. Also should we now expect some sarcastic remarks from you about HDi?

(If you player freezes and gets errors, why didn't you exchange it?)...

I will be, but I'm waiting a bit hoping they will not have any A3's left when I go in and be forced to give me $100 credit or a better player. I have the 2 year warranty from BB.

I've read load times would be faster if I updated the firmware but the times I've tried to connect it never would work. I'm not expert on internet connection stuff so maybe the default settings were wrong on the player to connect but never had problems finding a connection with PS3, 360 or PC.

Never had serious issues with BD-J despite "All" trying to avoid it.

Granted he is talking about HDMV discs but that makes up the vast majority of Blu-ray discs that have been released. Also should we now expect some sarcastic remarks from you about HDi?

HD DVD players had awful boot times (not related to HDi). Some took 1 minute. Your review is including that in the load time which makes it look worse. Many owners just left their players on to avoid that issue (and yes it was an issue).

Now imagine players that take 4x longer to load a disc than the awful example you gave (and that's not even including boot time!).

Clearly that is a serious problem that need to be resolved.

There is danger with tolerating long load times. There is pressure to use lower cost hardware to reduce player costs.I agree, though I think the fact that the Funai Blu-ray player is going to use the UniPhier chip is a good indication that sometimes even budget CE companies want good performance.

I will be, but I'm waiting a bit hoping they will not have any A3's left when I go in and be forced to give me $100 credit or a better player. I have the 2 year warranty from BB.

I've read load times would be faster if I updated the firmware but the times I've tried to connect it never would work. I'm not expert on internet connection stuff so maybe the default settings were wrong on the player to connect but never had problems finding a connection with PS3, 360 or PC.

Never had serious issues with BD-J despite "All" trying to avoid it.

I keep forgetting my brother an mom both have A3s. They take forever to boot (30+ seconds) which is why they just leave them on all the time. FW updates are amazing easy though, and the menus are faster than my PS3. The good news is that not all A3s are bad. It is a shame you couldn't just exchange it for one that works.

I keep forgetting my brother an mom both have A3s. They take forever to boot (30+ seconds) which is why they just leave them on all the time. FW updates are amazing easy though, and the menus are faster than my PS3. The good news is that not all A3s are bad. It is a shame you couldn't just exchange it for one that works.

I'm going to try to remember to time mine tonight to see if I'm off on the times as I haven't fired one up in a couple of weeks. I'll try a few titles for good measure.

I wish the firmware updates were as easy as my PS3. PS3 simply knows when it is ready and goes straight to it, click on the "accept" and go.

HD DVD players had awful boot times (not related to HDi). Some took 1 minute. Your review is including that in the load time which makes it look worse.The Panasonic DMP-BD30 has a boot time of 23 seconds (http://www.bigpicturebigsound.com/panasonic-dmp-bd30k-1403.shtml) and from what I heard the HD-A35 had a boot time of about 35 seconds (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=11792929#post11792929). As such if you exclude the boot times the loading times from that review would be 10 seconds for HDMV on the Panasonic DMP-BD30 compared to 41 seconds for HDi on the Toshiba HD-A35.

The Panasonic DMP-BD30 has a boot time of 23 seconds (http://www.bigpicturebigsound.com/panasonic-dmp-bd30k-1403.shtml) and from what I heard the HD-A35 had a boot time of about 35 seconds (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=11792929#post11792929). As such if you exclude the boot times the loading times from that review would be 10 seconds for HDMV on the Panasonic DMP-BD30 compared to 41 seconds for HDi on the Toshiba HD-A35.

I doubt the 41 seconds is because of HDi since older players and lesser players load discs faster.

You have to admit though that 41 seconds is lightning fast compared to 4 minutes for BD-J (heck, some have reported 10 to 15 minutes right?).

I doubt the 41 seconds is because of HDi since older players and lesser players load discs faster.

You have to admit though that 41 seconds is lightning fast compared to 4 minutes for BD-J (heck, some have reported 10 to 15 minutes right?).

So which BD-J titles are these to try out? I want to see how they fair on my player. I'll compare them with any of my HD DVD titles.

Back to topic here, there needs to be 10X more cries for faster response than there is. BD defenders really need to step aside and let the voices be heard by the rightful folks. Truth to be told, I was horrified to see how long my first HD DVD took to load and play titles. I thought it would for sure doom the format and the player. To my surprise, you all were pretty accepting :). I think two years later, there is little reason for it to be that way, let alone worse.

Very good post. IMHO, BD-J complicates the whole process even more than it should be. I can only imagine the A1 loading a disk with Java on it. BD-J is making the dedicated BD players look a whole lot worse and buggier than they really are. Frankly, if I had to wait five minutes for my A1 to load a disk, I would have sent it to Toshiba for repair. I really wish BD would drop BD-J for HDi, but it just ain't gonna happen. I don't like Java even on my computer, since it seems to slow down everything unnecessarily. But Java on a BD player? That makes no sense to me. Promises of perfecting the code and getting things to run faster in the future sound hollow to me. Java, whether BD-J or any other kind of J, is a hog of processing power -- and needlessly so. BD should learn from HD DVD's mistakes, but they should also learn from HD DVD's successes. One of those successes was HDi.

So which BD-J titles are these to try out? I want to see how they fair on my player. I'll compare them with any of my HD DVD titles.

i heard rat and cars are slow. i don't have them.

there was a video on how slow potc was.... imo very funny at the time.

imo the solution is obvious... get a ps3. :confused:

this thread is supposed to be about bd-j special features but it is just filled with crap about load times.

i guess this thread is just like bd-j... it takes so long to get past the initialization issues that nobody bothers with the actual special features.

btw: sunshine is on sale on amazon so i will finally have my first 1.1 title to play with. :)

Cool, thanks for the tip on Sunshine. I decided to order as well. Not for the 1.1 stuff (whatever that is) but the movie ;)

Yup, Ratatiouille loads quicker than any of my HD DVD's on my A3. Pirates 1 and 2 probably as well but I haven't played them in a long time.

Cool, thanks for the tip on Sunshine. I decided to order as well. Not for the 1.1 stuff (whatever that is) but the movie ;)

Yup, Ratatiouille loads quicker than any of my HD DVD's on my A3. Pirates 1 and 2 probably as well but I haven't played them in a long time.

profile 1.1 aka. bonus view aka. pip + some other "useless crap" that i like to play with. :) sunshine is the first fox title with it (and maybe the only halfway decent movie with it so far).

This.
Thread.
SUCKS.

BD-J isn't the best, or worst, it is now the ONLY. What the hell are people going on about?

This thread needs a padlock.

profile 1.1 aka. bonus view aka. pip + some other "useless crap" that i like to play with. :) sunshine is the first fox title with it (and maybe the only halfway decent movie with it so far).

Well I meant what it was for that particular title. Well I just read about it, I have to say this part sounds cool to me being an audio dork and all:

Next up is a new type of feature entitled Journey Into Sound: Surround Sound Enhancement. This feature is only available to viewers with 1.1 complaint Blu-ray players and 5.1 audio systems. Basically, this feature lets you mix the soundtrack. For example, the first scene features the character of Dr. Searle in the observation deck. He dialogues with the computer and the viewer can choose which speaker the voice of the computer comes from. It's a nifty gimmick feature, but as far as honest to goodness "value added" material it amounts to insignificant at best.

This.
Thread.
SUCKS.

BD-J isn't the best, or worst, it is now the ONLY. What the hell are people going on about?

This thread needs a padlock.

No, they need to get rid of BD-J or find a way to speed up the players. Also, if they keep BD-J, then they need to send a firmware engineer to Samsung so they can update their players in a timely fashion.

Well I meant what it was for that particular title. Well I just read about it, I have to say this part sounds cool to me being an audio dork and all:

i got what you meant just before i posted but posted anyway...wth it was already typed. :)

like the man said the audio mixer thingy will be fun to play with ...once.

that is the way most of these interactivity things are so far. they are just experiments studios are doing. eventually they will hit on something people like to use.

i just like to play around with these first primitive "next gen" steps to see where things might be headed.... my imagination fills in the gaps.

Agreed, just once probably unless showing another friend but that's about it.

Agreed, just once probably unless showing another friend but that's about it.

problem with demoing to friends is they only see the demo. not what i see for what it could be.

it is like showing somebody a rusty old car you found in a barn. some people just see a rusty old car. i see a museum piece that just needs to be restored.

Sadly, slow response seems to have become more than a norm than exception. My Samsung LCD takes 3-4 seconds to turn off! I mean what on earth does it need to do before powering off? Likewise, it needs time to boot as it takes a few seconds for the image to show up, and a few more before it accepts remote control commands. Better not try to turn the sound down quickly or you are in for some frustration. There is no excuse for this.

Back to topic here, there needs to be 10X more cries for faster response than there is. BD defenders really need to step aside and let the voices be heard by the rightful folks. Truth to be told, I was horrified to see how long my first HD DVD took to load and play titles. I thought it would for sure doom the format and the player. To my surprise, you all were pretty accepting :). I think two years later, there is little reason for it to be that way, let alone worse.


There is danger with tolerating long load times. There is pressure to use lower cost hardware to reduce player costs. This goes against using faster parts with dual-core CPUs and more processing power. And of course, it encourages poor programming practices in developing titles. So for the good of the format, I hope folks don't argue back for the sake of it. If an equipment maker or silicon provider wants to do that, let's see that and have that discussion. But having end users defend such things doesn't seem right to me.

And this is to give you a flavor of how bad these systems are. HD DVD had a code on disc that could be read by the player to instantly recognize the media. But instead, the players attempted every media type (and by the process of getting errors) to recognize it. I asked why. I was told that shining the blue laser on writable DVD could damage/corrupt it! So by allowing the player to play recordable media, and lack of good design in what it took to detect these media types, we have to put up with multiple seconds of load time, even if everything else is fixed.

I wholeheartly agree, it only makes sense that we can openly discuss BD's shortcomings in order to get the CEs to make the product with the features we want. Too often cheerleaders step in to derail and sidetrack the discussions to label anyone that does not like BD's current state as crying sour grapes and having no legitimate concerns. HD owners and others have many legitimate concerns. After all we accustom to using players with full feature sets not found on most if not all current BD standalones. Shouldn't those features be incorporated in a BD standalone since it is the only current HD optical media format?

I also pointed out in that post (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=13342538&postcount=105) that with the new firmware it decreased the loading time for Ratatouille from 5.4 minutes to 4 minutes. Everdog, if you don't care whether the player is using current firmware you are basically just fishing for the worst example you can find regardless of whether it is currently accurate.


Which you are basing on a single post which has not been verified and that we have very little information on. For instance can you even verify that it has happened with any other Samsung BD-P1000 owner?

Man this thread is hilarious. Lets just go with Richards 4 minutes. That still seems ridiculously slow. I remember the same posters here making a big deal of the fact that the HD-A1 took like 40-60 seconds to start a disk from turn on and here they are defending 4 minutes.

This is classic stuff. Keep it coming.

In all seriousness, I think the rabid Blue supporters need to come to terms with the fact that Blu-Ray won :D Accept that even though it won it isn't perfect and rather than defend everything, join the masses here and push for it to recognize it's deficiencies and address them sooner rather than later.

There is no way that that is not in all of our best interests.

Cheers,

Richard

Edit: PS. To show that I am not just trying to stir up the pot, in the end I bought a PS3 40gb about 2 weeks ago. I have about 10-15 titles already with another 12 on the way from Amazon. So far my experience with the PS3 has been as good as I could have hoped for. From a loading times perspective, including Cars, the POTC movies etc I haven't seen any delays. Pretty much DVD player like load times to the point where I never even noticed load times ;-).

Also, one quick (quick is good) support call for setting up an optical digital connection to a Pioneer Wireless Headset was about as good an experience as I have every had with a companies support. So, you see I can give credit where credit is due. Doesn't mean if there is an issue somewhere else that it shouldn't be addressed

Honest question for other Ps3 owners all be it a bit off topic. I get the occasional audio drop out for a couple seconds then it comes back. I figure this is an HDMI thing and not related to the PS3. I remember something about this and Wireless connectivity, but I am pretty sure that was addressed a million firmware updates ago. Is there anything known that any of you are aware of that could be causing this other than HDMI flakyness in general?

Honest question for other Ps3 owners all be it a bit off topic. I get the occasional audio drop out for a couple seconds then it comes back. I figure this is an HDMI thing and not related to the PS3. I remember something about this and Wireless connectivity, but I am pretty sure that was addressed a million firmware updates ago. Is there anything known that any of you are aware of that could be causing this other than HDMI flakyness in general?

Most of it has to do with the TV I believe. I hook the PS3 via component. But I've had HDMI devices flake out on my Westinghouse TV (ugly green screen for seconds before it would start to play discs among other things) Then when I moved to my Projector I never had an issue again with the same equipment.

Most of it has to do with the TV I believe. I hook the PS3 via component. But I've had HDMI devices flake out on my Westinghouse TV (ugly green screen for seconds before it would start to play discs among other things) Then when I moved to my Projector I never had an issue again with the same equipment.

Yeah that is pretty much what I figure it to be. To complicate things even further I connect my sources to my Anthem D2. While the D2 is an awesome processor it offers so many resolution and timing options to anything trying to connect to it that it tends to increase these types of issues. Especially with the initial source switch on some sources.

I figured as a new PS3 owner and not having really kept up with its progression as a Blu-Ray player (beyond it being pretty much the best and most future proof and thus the purchase choice despite some caveats) so I figured I would ask in case there was something I should know.

I look forward to the day when the CE's et all can actually come together on all this hand shaking BS. The mess that is HDMI puts our little HDM flame war to shame hahaa. It's beautiful when it works, but there is simply no excuse for what is supposed to be a "standard" to simply NOT function in certain device pairings. Shame on everyone :mad:

Thankfully my issues are extremely minor (knocks on wood). Anthem goes above and beyond for these types of things. They will literally contact CE's with a device with pairing/handshake issues and try to work with them to resolve the issue. If the CE isn't interested in a joint effort, Anthem in many cases will obtain their own samples in order to troubleshoot.

Cheers,

Richard

I doubt the 41 seconds is because of HDi since older players and lesser players load discs faster.That 41 second load time was on the HD-A35 and on the HD-A1 I have heard that HDi titles can take 75 seconds to load (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=11683425&postcount=533). As such HDMV is faster than either BD-J or HDi and if someone only cared about load times HDMV would be the best choice.

That 41 second load time was on the HD-A35 and on the HD-A1 I have heard that HDi titles can take 75 seconds to load (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=11683425&postcount=533). As such HDMV is faster than either BD-J or HDi and if someone only cared about load times HDMV would be the best choice.

I do love that argument. Forget about the 4 to 5 minute disc load times for Blu-ray players, there is this dead format that isn't made anymore, and it used to take more than 1/2 a minute to over a minute to load!!

By the way if I had to wait 4 minutes to load a disc, I'd be begging for an A35 that is 6 times faster!

The fact that Disney feels they have to put disclaimer on thier discs saying it could take 2 minutes to load, says it all. They know it is a very real problem and that is their solution.
It is a shame they would let the consumer just bypass BD-J. I guess they worry that vitrually everyone would.

I do love that argument.

By the way if I had to wait 4 minutes to load a disc, I'd be begging for an A35 that is 6 times faster!

The fact that Disney feels they have to put disclaimer on thier discs saying it could take 2 minutes to load, says it all. They know it is a very real problem and that is their solution.
It is a shame they would let the consumer just bypass BD-J. I guess they worry that vitrually everyone would.


Frankly, I would expect Disney to be the last to comply with a option to bypass BD-J. After all, Disney forces you to watch 5 or more minutes of trailers/coming attractions when loading their DVDs.

Frankly, I would expect Disney to be the last to comply with a option to bypass BD-J. After all, Disney forces you to watch 5 or more minutes of trailers/coming attractions when loading their DVDs.
To say nothing of the fact that the whole thing was their idea....

I do love that argument.Everdog, I rather doubt that since instead of responding to it directly you made a strawman argument to respond to instead.


It is a shame they would let the consumer just bypass BD-J.If you want the studios to use HDMV you certainly can advocate that and HDMV is capable of PiP and audio mixing so it is pretty versatile.

Everdog just tested U-571 on my HD-A3.

44 seconds to power up and final open the tray.
1 minute 18 seconds until Universal logo. Not skippable
1 minute 52 seconds until movie menu.
Just over 2 minutes for it to actuallly start playing the movie with skipping what was skippable.

Everdog just tested U-571 on my HD-A3.

44 seconds to power up and final open the tray.
1 minute 18 seconds until Universal logo. Not skippable
1 minute 52 seconds until movie menu.
Just over 2 minutes for it to actuallly start playing the movie with skipping what was skippable.
I think there is something wrong with your A3. There have been a few timing threads in the HD DVD section and I don't recall ever seeing a 2 min load on an A3. Heck I complained about the <1 min load (30 secs to eject? come on).

The complaisancy in some BD people is astonishing.

John

Everdog, I rather doubt that since instead of responding to it directly you made a strawman argument to respond to instead.

??? You are the one that who's defense of BD-J slow load times, brought up a long since discontinued player of a dead format that sill loads discs 3x faster than many BD players. I was just pointing that out and saying how funny I thought it was...and is!:D

That is as bad as your claim that 2<5<10 is not true.:eek:

If someone says that it can take between 2 and 10 minutes for something to load, and you have documented that there are those with 5+ minute loads, does not 2 < 5 < 10 make that statement true?

..Logically and mathematically the answer would be no.

FYI, If some some says a number will be between 2 and 10 and then that number is 5, he is right. Its kind of what "between" means.



The problem here is that studios and CE makers are NOT listening to consumers. They do not care that the Sony S300 takes over 4 minutes to load BD-J discs even after FW updates. Disney thinks that just putting a disclaimer on the discs while it loads is enough.

btw, for several years Disney has issued SD DVDs that force you to watch trailers and ads that you could care less about, so this is nothing new.

"Be a CONSUMER not a format cheeleader" (I forgot who first posted that, but I do like it!)

"Be a CONSUMER not a format cheerleader."

It's good to be a wise consumer. Why eat everything they feed us?

"Be a CONSUMER not a format cheerleader."

It's good to be a wise consumer. Why eat everything they feed us?

Acctually that is is better. I was quoting someone else, but you are right and the addition of "wise" is important.

no profile 2.0 support for space ace....

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/Digital_Leisure/High-Def_Gaming/Street_Date_Changes/Digital_Leisure_Grounds_Space_Ace_HD_DVD/1564

I think there is something wrong with your A3. There have been a few timing threads in the HD DVD section and I don't recall ever seeing a 2 min load on an A3. Heck I complained about the <1 min load (30 secs to eject? come on).

The complaisancy in some BD people is astonishing.

John

Well yes, there certainly is as it skips or gives me error codes on a large percentage of discs. I've mentioned before I'm waiting until Best Buy hopefully doesn't have any HD DVD players in stock before bringing it in with my 2 year EW ;) Granted I bought 3 HD-A3's players last year and the one other I used was just as slow. The guy I sold one of my A3's to said his A1 was much slower :eek: but built like a tank.

Well yes, there certainly is as it skips or gives me error codes on a large percentage of discs. I've mentioned before I'm waiting until Best Buy hopefully doesn't have any HD DVD players in stock before bringing it in with my 2 year EW ;)
Ahh. Got it. I was just making reference to your timings and that they didn't seem typical.

I guess you don't have any HD DVD's that you want to continue to play or maybe they're "backed up" to another format? ;)


The guy I sold one of my A3's to said his A1 was much slower :eek: but built like a tank.
I've heard the A1 is much slower, which would probably make it unacceptable to me. My A3 is very close to that status. ;)

The A1 "built like a tank" comments always crack me up. In my mind, that's a bad thing for a digital device. Light, smaller = better

What was this topic about again?

John

Ahh. Got it. I was just making reference to your timings and that they didn't seem typical.

Typical for the two A3's two I've used purchased on 11-1-2007. I've read about firmware updates but I was unsuccessul getting my player to connect.

I guess you don't have any HD DVD's that you want to continue to play or maybe they're "backed up" to another format? ;)

Not true, I like HD DVD's I own and enjoy watching them. The player however is frustrating to use, not because of the load times but the skipping and error codes. I wouldn't mind an upgrade to an A35 or something that doesn't give error codes. Even better would be to sale them and buy them if they were to become available on blu-ray sometime soon.

I did call best buy yesterday, the rep wasn't sure if they'd swap it out or send it out for service..

Ahh. Got it. I was just making reference to your timings and that they didn't seem typical.

I guess you don't have any HD DVD's that you want to continue to play or maybe they're "backed up" to another format? ;)


I've heard the A1 is much slower, which would probably make it unacceptable to me. My A3 is very close to that status. ;)

The A1 "built like a tank" comments always crack me up. In my mind, that's a bad thing for a digital device. Light, smaller = better

What was this topic about again?

John

Actually Heavier and more solid is much preferred (unless its portable of course). The added weight and stability offers a more stable and skip jostle free playback even if it doesn't represent better quality components necessarily. All things being equal from a parts quality perspective a little more weight and solid is a good thing.

As for the HD-A1, I have one and load times are about 40-60 from turn on with the open/load button (if the disk is already in with machine off then its like 30 sec)

Delays will of course effect people differently depending on tolerance levels, but for me it's no big deal. Hit open, go grab the disk, drop it in, go back to my seat and within 10-20 secs I am good to go (Assuming no beverage or munchie stops on the way in which case the machine is waiting for me ;-) ).

That's just my experience. Maybe it is longer for some others for some reason.

With my 2 week old PS3 40gb, I haven't noticed any load times in excess of what I am used to with good old DVD ;-). Basically I haven't noticed load times hahaa.

All said, pretending there is no downside to load times in excess of 2 minutes, let alone 3, 4 or more does not do anyone any good. Lets say in a perfect world you are able to convince everyone that 4 minutes is fine. Congratulations we all get to have 4 minute load times.

Heck I am sure the CE's would be happy if we were all happy with 5 or 10 minutes (not saying that is what we have now) so they could lower their bar.

As someone else said, lets be consumer centric now. Richard you are not going to convince me that you think even 2 minutes or more is perfectly acceptable let alone more.

Worse case scenario is as with the HD DVD supporters who will soon not be able to buy new releases to play on them, early adopter Blu-Ray folks (other than PS3) will need to buy a newer model if the load times get too annoying or they want 1.1 or 2.0 features.

Lets assume that they understood that they were early adopters, just as many (myself included) on the HD DVD side new the risks and accepted that we were early adopters.

In short the reality is that there are probably less that 5% of the existing Blu-Ray users who will experience these delays. Does that mean it doesn't suck and the situation should never have been allowed to develop this way? No, but it really does mean that this isn't the end of the world for Blu-Ray by any stretch.

Cheers,

Richard

You are the one that who's defense of BD-J slow load timesEverdog, that is a false claim and I have already said that I don't consider 4 minute load times to be acceptable for a mass market product. I don't have any problem with criticism as long as it accurate and not based on exaggeration.


That is as bad as your claim that 2<5<10 is not true.Everdog, you shouldn't make deceptive claims and you are completely ignoring the context of what I said (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=13349799&postcount=145).


FYI, If some some says a number will be between 2 and 10 and then that number is 5, he is right. Its kind of what "between" means.So if someone said that it takes between 1 and 100 minutes for the HD-A1 to load a HD DVD disc would that be right simply because he can provide an example between those two numbers? After all if your going to defend what he said (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=13349799&postcount=145) you should at least be fair about it.

So if someone said that it takes between 1 and 100 minutes for the HD-A1 to load a HD DVD disc would that be right simply because he can provide an example between those two numbers? After all if your going to defend what he said (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=13349799&postcount=145) you should at least be fair about it.

Yes, 1<1.1<100 and 2<5<10 are both "logically and mathematically" correct...even though you think they are not. I will say for my example, 2<5<10, the middle number falls about half way between the other 2, and so there is nothing misleading about it.


For those just joining us, I did a quit search before and found Blu owners who said it took "up to 10 minutes" and "10 to 15 minutes" to load a BD-J disc. So I made the claim that some players can take "2 to 10 minutes" to load BD-J discs.

Then RP came back with... one of those players is buggy and we do not have enough info on the other, so they both do not count...and also to say 2<5<10 is VERY misleading.

On a related note, anyone else remember krinkle? It was the whole swing in percentage that sent him over the edge... if you go from 70:30 to 50:50, is that a difference of 20% or did you make up 40% in marketshare??

Actually Heavier and more solid is much preferred (unless its portable of course). The added weight and stability offers a more stable and skip jostle free playback even if it doesn't represent better quality components necessarily. All things being equal from a parts quality perspective a little more weight and solid is a good thing.

So adding a brick to my A3 (it certainly has the room inside! ;) ) will turn it into a better player? Even if I've never experienced a playback problem, including teeth rattling bass passages?

I'm not trying to put down the A1; I'm sure it's a great player. I just don't agree with the heavier = better mentality for certain technologies.

John

I did call best buy yesterday, the rep wasn't sure if they'd swap it out or send it out for service..

Uh oh. That might be bad news. Toshiba has stated that they will service the HD DVD players for a good while (don't remember the the exact time span).

John

I am only asking for evidence for the 10 minute claim.




Close enough.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gQG4OFgrpA&feature=related

Close enough.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gQG4OFgrpA&feature=related

Freakin' hilarious!

Now think about the poor guy who reported 10 to 15minutes before he could watch ID4. That guy didn't video it, so RP says it didn't happen.

Close enough.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gQG4OFgrpA&feature=related

thats actually a hoax if you look at the clock it moves faster than normal :mad: profile 2.0 is not needed to play movies when you have profile 1.0. you get what you pay for a 1000 dollar sony blu ray machine is 10x better than HDDVD thats fire saled right now and its obviously.

So adding a brick to my A3 (it certainly has the room inside! ;) ) will turn it into a better player? Even if I've never experienced a playback problem, including teeth rattling bass passages?

I'm not trying to put down the A1; I'm sure it's a great player. I just don't agree with the heavier = better mentality for certain technologies.

John

Well actually as stupid as it sounds, if you could add the brick without impacting anything else in any way, then yes actually, on a possibly infinitesimal level of which I for sure couldn't tell the difference, you probably would improve the stability of the read/transport.

At the high end audiophile level way way above were I am there is a whole market for stuff that does just that to other stuff. Sand to weight down speakers/stands, Weight pucks for this and that. Way way past any point of diminishing returns for me unless your source unit actually dances across your cabinet or shelf hahaa.

I am perfectly willing to agree that < 1 % would notice any difference and of those 2/3rds would only be imagining it hahaa.

Cheers,

Richard

thats actually a hoax if you look at the clock it moves faster than normal :mad: profile 2.0 is not needed to play movies when you have profile 1.0. you get what you pay for a 1000 dollar sony blu ray machine is 10x better than HDDVD thats fire saled right now and its obviously.

That Sir is just blowing smoke into the wind.

Do you base that on the fact that the HD DVD format lost the war and you consider it dead so it is worse?

Surely you don't actually believe in contrast to almost any review that pretty much puts HD DVD and Blu-Ray on par for Audio and Video or compares hardware of the Blu-Ray masses to the Toshibas?

While I don't doubt that perhaps the top end Pioneer or some of the new ones from Denon or Meridian may top the XA1-2 any comment such as yours is easily dismissed as pure fanboyism. Thank you for participating.

Cheers,

Richard

thats actually a hoax if you look at the clock it moves faster than normal :mad: profile 2.0 is not needed to play movies when you have profile 1.0. you get what you pay for a 1000 dollar sony blu ray machine is 10x better than HDDVD thats fire saled right now and its obviously.

Nice run on sentence.

thats actually a hoax if you look at the clock it moves faster than normal :mad: profile 2.0 is not needed to play movies when you have profile 1.0. you get what you pay for a 1000 dollar sony blu ray machine is 10x better than HDDVD thats fire saled right now and its obviously.

That Sir is just blowing smoke into the wind.

Do you base that on the fact that the HD DVD format lost the war and you consider it dead so it is worse?

Surely you don't actually believe in contrast to almost any review that pretty much puts HD DVD and Blu-Ray on par for Audio and Video or compares hardware of the Blu-Ray masses to the Toshibas?

While I don't doubt that perhaps the top end Pioneer or some of the new ones from Denon or Meridian may top the XA1-2 any comment such as yours is easily dismissed as pure fanboyism. Thank you for participating.

Cheers,

Richard

...He's not blowing smoke into the wind. He's blowing it somewhere else. :D

BLU_ALL_DAY - take your fanboy crap somewhere else. No one needs it here.

Yes, 1<1.1<100 and 2<5<10 are both "logically and mathematically" correct...even though you think they are not.Everdog, that is not what I think and you continue to take what I said out of context (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=13349799&postcount=145) and ignore what hdkhang posted.


Close enough.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gQG4OFgrpA&feature=relatedThat was based on old firmware for the Sony BDP-S1 and it is amazing how some HD DVD supporters still use that out of date example. Also the load times were about 4 minutes from what I can see and that included the trailers that you can now skip through on that player.


Now think about the poor guy who reported 10 to 15minutes before he could watch ID4. That guy didn't video it, so RP says it didn't happen.Everdog, that is a lie and I never said that. What I said was that you don't know if that single Samsung BD-P1000 player was up to date or if it was buggy. After all you never even verified if that happened with another Samsung BD-P1000 player.

thats actually a hoax if you look at the clock it moves faster than normal :mad: profile 2.0 is not needed to play movies when you have profile 1.0. you get what you pay for a 1000 dollar sony blu ray machine is 10x better than HDDVD thats fire saled right now and its obviously.
This is just too funny. The video is running in real time. Don't even bother looking at the clock, just look at the video run time. Ridiculous.

John

Everdog, that is a lie and I never said that. What I said was that you don't know if that single Samsung BD-P1000 player was up to date or if it was buggy. After all you never even verified if that happened with another Samsung BD-P1000 player.

Me:I am sticking with 2 - 10, because that is what it seems to be from user's experiences (actually 2 -15).

You:Which you are basing on a single post which has not been verified and that we have very little information on.

As I said before, you either did not believe it or were just trying to ignore because it has not been "verified".

But nowit looks like you think it is true. So I guess that means you finally agree that my statement that some Blu-ray players can take from 2 to 10 minutes to load is true also. We now have an example of a player that for whatever reason took 10 to 15minutes, and you finally agree that it did.

So just to end this... Are there Blu-ray players (one you buy at the store and plug in) that, for whatever reason, take 2 to 10 minutes to load BD-J discs?

Yes or No?

We now have an example of a player that for whatever reason took 10 to 15minutes, and you finally agree that it did.Everdog, to be accurate I neither agree or disagree that it happened since we don't really know how long it took to load. That is why I say a timed estimate would be more accurate and though you mocked me for saying that you never disagreed with that.


So just to end this... Are there Blu-ray players (one you buy at the store and plug in) that, for whatever reason, take 2 to 10 minutes to load BD-J discs?

Yes or No?I don't know, and I have not yet seen sufficient evidence to know which answer is accurate. The highest timed estimate I have seen even with old firmware was 5.4 minutes. My standards for evidence are not going to get any lower so unless I see new evidence further debate isn't going to change anything.

5.4 minutes?!?!?!?! I must be spoiled with the PS3. I've never waited longer than 15-20 seconds for a disc to load.

Dump all of this BD-J crap and just give me lots of movies at acceptable prices.

It's all there to veil the fact that they want to have an internet connection to your player so they can track you for piracy reasons.

It's all there to veil the fact that they want to have an internet connection to your player so they can track you for piracy reasons.
There are no requirements to have a network cable plugged in. You only need to do it if you want to take advantage of the extras that use the network. There are no authorization requirements in the current profiles. BD-J (for good or bad) exists on its own, independent of the network connection.

If you're so worried about privacy (tracking), why in the world are you posting on a public forum? Better yank that network connect out of you computer. Get rid of that wireless network. How about you PS3 (XB360, Wii)? Better get rid of that cell phone. Cable TV? DirecTv?

Your fridge is watching you...

John

5.4 minutes?!?!?!?! I must be spoiled with the PS3. I've never waited longer than 15-20 seconds for a disc to load.

+1.

Waiting 5.4 mins for *any* type of disc to load would result in said player meeting an early bath in this household.

HD players should load stuff a whole lot quicker than that. And I don't care what unit, FW, how many bugs, how few bugs, colour etc the box is.

Seggers

My son and I watched PotC - Black Pearl last night, but before we did I ran a few tests.

I was actually surprised to learn it took an average of 30 seconds to load the disc. I started timing from when the disc was fully inserted, to when the blue Disney screen appeared. I thought it would be unfair to include trailers and FBI warnings.

So, the first time it took 31 seconds, and the second it took 29. Most of the time the screen was either black or had the little circle in the upper left. Once the spinning coin showed up it only took another 5-10 seconds.

Now I am starting to wonder about people who say PS3s load BD-J discs in only a few seconds. Maybe we need to do more tests.

My son and I watched PotC - Black Pearl last night, but before we did I ran a few tests.

I was actually surprised to learn it took an average of 30 seconds to load the disc. I started timing from when the disc was fully inserted, to when the blue Disney screen appeared. I thought it would be unfair to include trailers and FBI warnings.

So, the first time it took 31 seconds, and the second it took 29. Most of the time the screen was either black or had the little circle in the upper left. Once the spinning coin showed up it only took another 5-10 seconds.

Now I am starting to wonder about people who say PS3s load BD-J discs in only a few seconds. Maybe we need to do more tests.

I just tried the same movie in my PS3 and it took 25 seconds until the Disney logo appeared. Not too far off from my original estimate of 15-20 seconds. For reference, I'm using a 60gb PS3 passing the signal by HDMI to a Denon 3808ci and then to my TV.

I just tried the same movie in my PS3 and it took 25 seconds until the Disney logo appeared. Not too far off from my original estimate of 15-20 seconds. For reference, I'm using a 60gb PS3 passing the signal by HDMI to a Denon 3808ci and then to my TV.

I have the 40 GB PS3 right now connected to a Onkyo 605 then to a Panny projector running at 24 FPS. The menus must only be available at 30 or 60 FPS because my projector flcikers a few times before I get the Disney screen. I am not sure if that adds a second or 2 or not.

Everdog just tested U-571 on my HD-A3.

44 seconds to power up and final open the tray.
1 minute 18 seconds until Universal logo. Not skippable
1 minute 52 seconds until movie menu.
Just over 2 minutes for it to actuallly start playing the movie with skipping what was skippable.

This is interesting. It took 34 seconds to get to the Studio screen when loading a disc on your A3. On my PS3 it took 29-31 seconds.

Who would have guessed that a PS3 (with BD-J) and an A3 can have similar load times?

Actually, I have to admit 30 seconds is not too bad. I have watch PotC several times before an never thought of it as being slow.