Why are the majority of BD releases still Mpeg2 (16 of the last 20 titles), especially when BD-25s still dominate new releases?Because Sony is the most prolific Blu-ray studio, and until very recently they used MPEG-2 for everything? Codec support is a studio issue, not a format issue.

A picture paints a thousand words... Time for the "chart". ;)

I already knew that. I didn't need a chart to show me that BR has more bandwidth and potentially more space. That alone does not prove Blu-ray to be the superior high definition format. It is, however, fairly clear that there are a lot of Blu-ray cheerleaders who believe it does.

I am asking someone to show me from among the current releases how Blu-ray's greater bandwidth equates to a superior home viewing high definition experience. I see the argument over and over again how the format's higher bandwidth makes it a better choice. My question is "better for whom?" I own 22 Blu-ray titles and while I believe several of them to be the equal of the best HD DVD titles I have, I cannot say that any of them are better. Certainly not better in a way that can be attributed to bandwidth that I can see.

Talkstr8t believes that I am being a little unfair perhaps. But no one really wants to address this question head on. I ask questions about bandwidth and the need for lossless audio and in response I get:

I can't prove that the reason far more Blu-ray titles have lossless audio than do HD DVD titles is because the lower bandwidth availability on HD DVD makes it less feasible, but that's certainly a reasonable conclusion to reach.I don't think he was deliberately being evasive, but this sort of dances around the issue since it has not been objectively established that lossless audio is better (or has it?). It is apparently assumed to be better as far as I can tell. Has it proven to be "better" though ABX testing? Anyone care to tackle that one with some science? Anyone? Or is this theory drawn from the same realm in which a $3,000 power cord makes a dramatic improvement in sound quality? My assertion here is that lossless audio is being put on Blu-ray titles for marketing reasons and not because it has been empirically shown to deliver a superior home movie viewing experience.

So the arguments now seem to be that Blu-ray's higher bandwidth means that studios can include more sound tracks to cover wider distribution, perhaps. Though I think that this is even a dubious assertion. I certainly don't recall being upset when my copy of the French film Amélie arrived on DVD with French audio only and English subtitles -- though perhaps some were put off. It seems to me that the greater bandwidth might actually make BR a better format (read: more profitable) for the studios for distribution reasons (setting replication costs aside for a moment) and not necessarily consumers for technical reasons.

--Jerome

NOTE TO SELF: Start shopping for a $3,000 power cord today... ;)

First, let me clarify that I was not thinking of the format war when I made my multiple disc comment. It was a general comment, not directed at either format. The mention of HD DVD was a compliment to the level of interactivity achieved so far so quickly.

Yuk. :) Makes moving around within the movie a little difficult. :)

I like the TL51 option. The additional capacity is there if somebody needs it, and you never know what the future needs. It's better to have it sooner rather than later on from an interoperability viewpoint. I haven't researched enough regarding the spin rate to have an opinion.

I could be very wrong about this but I thought one comment on the Insiders Thread suggested TL51 also upped the max bit rate a little. Anybody else remember this? I don't know how long ago it was.

- Tom

I already knew that. I didn't need a chart to show me that BR has more bandwidth and potentially more space. That alone does not prove Blu-ray to be the superior high definition format. It is, however, fairly clear that there are a lot of Blu-ray cheerleaders who believe it does.

I am asking someone to show me from among the current releases how Blu-ray's greater bandwidth equates to a superior home viewing high definition experience. I see the argument over and over again how the format's higher bandwidth makes it a better choice. My question is "better for whom?" I own 22 Blu-ray titles and while I believe several of them to be the equal of the best HD DVD titles I have, I cannot say that any of them are better. Certainly not better in a way that can be attributed to bandwidth that I can see.

Talkstr8t believes that I am being a little unfair perhaps. But no one really wants to address this question head on. I ask questions about bandwidth and the need for lossless audio and in response I get:

I don't think he was deliberately being evasive, but this sort of dances around the issue since it has not been objectively established that lossless audio is better (or has it?). It is apparently assumed to be better as far as I can tell. Has it proven to be "better" though ABX testing? Anyone care to tackle that one with some science? Anyone? Or is this theory drawn from the same realm in which a $3,000 power cord makes a dramatic improvement in sound quality? My assertion here is that lossless audio is being put on Blu-ray titles for marketing reasons and not because it has been empirically shown to deliver a superior home movie viewing experience.

So the arguments now seem to be that Blu-ray's higher bandwidth means that studios can include more sound tracks to cover wider distribution, perhaps. Though I think that this is even a dubious assertion. I certainly don't recall being upset when my copy of the French film Amélie arrived on DVD with French audio only and English subtitles -- though perhaps some were put off. It seems to me that the greater bandwidth might actually make BR a better format (read: more profitable) for the studios for distribution reasons (setting replication costs aside for a moment) and not necessarily consumers for technical reasons.

--Jerome

NOTE TO SELF: Start shopping for a $3,000 power cord today... ;)
Here are Cjplay's comments on HD-DVD. If the people that create content are already seeing problems working around HD-DVD limitations today, then there is a problem.
All,

The maximum mux rate may be HD-DVD's downfall and somewhat affected by this discussion. The DVD Forum arrived at a peak mux rate of 30.24Mbps. This means all the video, audio, PIP/subvideo, subtitling, and iHD cannot exceed 30.24Mbps at a given point. While I'm sure this was a conservative number to support the read speed capable only from the first gen roms (like DVD and 9.8Mbps is WAY below current 16x drives ability), it is nonetheless WAY lower than the 54Mbps PBR capable by BD. Again, not in either camp, but if I were Toshiba, I'd find a way to get that number up. Fast.

BD, on 50GB discs, can have 3 lossless 16/48's with a PBR in the 3Mbps range each, 2 Subvideos in the 4-5Mbps PBR range each, and a VC-1 Feature with a 30Mbps PBR, and still have room for stereo commentary tracks at 224Kbps PBR each and 1Mbps worth of subtitles (about 31 subtitle tracks).

Amir,

VC-1 is hitting your theoretical 10-12Mbps ABR on titles being released very soon. All of them are less than 5 years old. However, it's also hitting your 19-27Mbps dreaded PBR.

Cjplay.
The purpose of the "chart" is to illustrate the "canvas" that the people who create content have to work with to deliver the product. Cjplay's comments show that HD-DVD limits the choices that are available to do the job.

b2b

but that is exactly why extra BW and Capacity is important. Even though I don't use extras, obviously some care for them. That is why it is important for a format toi have extra capacity and BW so that J6P can have his extras and we can have our quality. If a studio decides to give up lossless because some moron migh have convinced himself that lossy is good enough and PiP is what is more important, I am the one that is losing quality, that other person is a moron to start off.


Oh I see ... so then really the issue becomes, "Blu-Ray has more BW, so it's better" from one side, and from the other, "Blu-Ray might have more BW, but they're not [yet] using it to provide all the things that would make it 'better'"?

Seems like a big mess to me ... at the end of the day, the Studios are going to give us what they think we want, not necessarily what we really want. They're going to look more to J6P than the subset of folks here I would think. *shrug*

This came up a while ago. One of the people who was involved in HD DVD back when they decided their minimum 1.0x spin rate that led to their current bandwidth limitations, and who brags about how the HD DVD camp didn't overdesign their format, didn't understand this and thought that the extra languages not being played didn't affect the bandwidth left for video, other audio, PiP, etc. Along with not understanding what branching was at the time (according to what they said here), I can understand how they wouldn't have had a problem with HD DVD deciding on a 1.0x minimum spin rate instead of a 1.5x minimum spin rate. I wish they had actually understood how things worked back when that decision was made. It may have changed that decision, as they might not have been so smug about how their side wasn't overdesigning things, if they had known how things really work. I have a strong feeling that the decision about spin rate would have been different if they had known then what they know today.

--Darin

Thanks! That's definitely some cool history. I agree, the 1.5x or 2.0x spin rate definitely makes a lot more sense now.

Should be interesting. I can understand what you are saying as far as if IME goes on the 2nd disc somehow, but if they were willing to split the movie across the 2 discs then it seems like they could still get around the capacity issue with a 2nd disc (or 3rd disc, ... :)). But maybe I'm missing something as far as what they want to do.

Do you have any position as far as whether adding TL51s for HD DVD, but staying with the same 1.0x spin rate, would make much difference?

--Darin

I think that with TL51, they'll have to go 1.5x spin rate at least. That is probably going to be the biggest stumbling block into adoption as it would likely leave the first adopters stranded. :(

A picture paints a thousand words... Time for the "chart". ;)

Blu-Ray 48Mbps, 50GB
0.........1.........2....x....3.........4.........50GB
+------------------------|------------------------+
| | |48 Mb/s
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |40
| | |
HD-DVD 30Mbps, 30GB | |
0.........1.........2.........30GB |
+-----------------------------+30 Mb/s |30
| | |
| | |
| | |
| |20 |20
| | |
DVD 10Mbps, 9.4GB | |
0........9.4GB | |
+--------+10 Mb/s |10 |10
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |0
+--------+--------------------+-------------------+
Chart is copyright © 2006 & 2007 by b2bonez and MrHanky
All rights reserved with permission to copy and publish without
alteration is hereby granted. Disfigurement or un-authorized
modification is not allowed.
Please respect other peoples work (however humble it is..)

b2b

Where have you been? This thread hasn't been jumping by pages upon pages per hour with you gone ... ;)

Because Sony is the most prolific Blu-ray studio, and until very recently they used MPEG-2 for everything? Codec support is a studio issue, not a format issue.

I'm not discussing old history Talk, I was talking about the last 20 titles. Sure, it's a studio issue, I'm just wondering why they continue to use mpeg2 predominantly under BD. This is surprising considering that the vast majority of BD discs are BD-25. No doubt this is why mpeg2 disproportionately dominates the bad PQ lists.

Yikes. Where's the outrage from those who complained about a Blu-ray demo disc showing network features not yet available?

While others have chimed in regarding the BR network features bait-n-switch, I was probably the one who made the biggest stink about it.

I'll say that I absolutely agree that it was a poor move to demo a disc to the European market displaying IME and then drop it for the actual release. I certainly hope such things do not become practice.

Where have you been? This thread hasn't been jumping by pages upon pages per hour with you gone ... ;)
All the wheels are in motion and what is going to happen, will happen, despite any chatter here on AVS. Besides, it's Springtime outside with plenty of things to take care of other than this trivial pursuit. ;)

b2b

The deadline was pushed back to October 31st in order to provide hardware manufacturers more time. Note that BD-Video 1.1 secondary video requirements are substantially higher than those of HD DVD, so first generation SoC's aren't sufficient to meet the spec. Lots of unforeseen developmental delays can happen with new silicon, firmware, etc.

I'd have said something sooner, but couldn't until it was otherwise announced.

- Talk

Did you know about this when I brought it up a few months back? Even if you couldn't disclose at the time? (Note: I see this has already been addressed. I'm interested in the answers to the questions below, however.)

Also, any word of where that profile logo/education document is? Is it's release likewise pushed back?

Finally, while we are on the subject of profiles, any comments on the implications for BD-Live players? Does it remain optional? If -Video1.1 is delayed 4 months, any ideas how long before we see Live players?

The purpose of the "chart" is to illustrate the "canvas" that the people who create content have to work with to deliver the product. Cjplay's comments show that HD-DVD limits the choices that are available to do the job.
That Cjplay thinks the bandwidth is insufficient isn't in dispute. But where my question is concerned, his opinion is no better than the average layperson. I am (still) asking someone to demonstrate why lossless is required, how it is better in some measurable way over lossy audio compression, and how customers ultimately benefit from it. This is, after all, what is being used to justify the superiority of BR. If the need for lossless goes away, so does BR's supposed advantages. Cjplay is a compressionist, not an audio engineer, audiologist, or a scientist, and note that even he is talking about cramming these discs full of lossless audio tracks.

Let's set the theories aside for a second and simply discuss what is out there right now. I'll ask one more time, show me the BR titles that clearly bear out BRs bandwidth advantage. I'll make it easy...name one in which we can attribute these differences to bandwidth. These should be titles that would make me into a believer as a consumer. It would be even better for me if the titles were also available on HD DVD so I could compare.

Let's put it another way...how may people would be able to tell the difference in a proper ABX between a lossless and lossy sound track? You see, I thought I had golden ears too until I subjected myself to an ABX and found out otherwise.

And for anyone who thinks I am being unreasonable, I am very much open to looking at any independent science or even compelling anecdotal evidence that would indicate that lossless audio provides a qualitatively better home viewing experience.

--Jerome

NOTE TO SELF: Still shopping for that $3,000 power cord. :)

All the wheels are in motion and what is going to happen, will happen, despite any chatter here on AVS. Besides, it's Springtime outside with plenty of things to take care of other than this trivial pursuit. ;)

b2b

True. I was in the garden most of the weekend. That and watching DirecTV install a new dish and HR20. Good to see you post again b2b. ;)

If it's sufficiently powerful. But Blu-ray requires more decoding power (to support higher bitrates and more flexible secondary video) while HD DVD requires more CPU (to support HDi). Yes, throw enough hardware at it and you can support both, but few of the existing designs can support both specs.
Yet still very substantial; building a player for either format is non-trivial. Building a player that supports both is almost absurdly complex.


Currently the SoC vendors tend to have solutions that are advertised as being for "Hi Def Disc Player" applications. As they ramp up versions do you foresee any circumstances where they wouldn't simply add capability necessary to support the latest requirements of both platforms?

Here are Cjplay's comments on HD-DVD. If the people that create content are already seeing problems working around HD-DVD limitations today, then there is a problem.



"All,

The maximum mux rate may be HD-DVD's downfall and somewhat affected by this discussion. The DVD Forum arrived at a peak mux rate of 30.24Mbps. This means all the video, audio, PIP/subvideo, subtitling, and iHD cannot exceed 30.24Mbps at a given point. While I'm sure this was a conservative number to support the read speed capable only from the first gen roms (like DVD and 9.8Mbps is WAY below current 16x drives ability), it is nonetheless WAY lower than the 54Mbps PBR capable by BD. Again, not in either camp, but if I were Toshiba, I'd find a way to get that number up. Fast.

BD, on 50GB discs, can have 3 lossless 16/48's with a PBR in the 3Mbps range each, 2 Subvideos in the 4-5Mbps PBR range each, and a VC-1 Feature with a 30Mbps PBR, and still have room for stereo commentary tracks at 224Kbps PBR each and 1Mbps worth of subtitles (about 31 subtitle tracks).

Amir,

VC-1 is hitting your theoretical 10-12Mbps ABR on titles being released very soon. All of them are less than 5 years old. However, it's also hitting your 19-27Mbps dreaded PBR.

Cjplay.


The purpose of the "chart" is to illustrate the "canvas" that the people who create content have to work with to deliver the product. Cjplay's comments show that HD-DVD limits the choices that are available to do the job.

b2b

b2bonez,

I wholeheartly support your agenda here, as I always have.

Please let me just make you aware that Cjplay's "format war related" comments in general and posts like this one in particular are the very reason for his sudden "departure" @ avsforum. That's sadly just how things are...

Take care :)

That Cjplay thinks the bandwidth is insufficient isn't in dispute. But where my question is concerned, his opinion is no better than the average layperson. I am (still) asking someone to demonstrate why lossless is required, how it is better in some measurable way over lossy audio compression, and how customers ultimately benefit from it. This is, after all, what is being used to justify the superiority of BR. If the need for lossless goes away, so does BR's supposed advantages. Cjplay is a compressionist, not an audio engineer, audiologist, or a scientist, and note that even he is talking about cramming these discs full of lossless audio tracks.

Let's set the theories aside for a second and simply discuss what is out there right now. I'll ask one more time, show me the BR titles that clearly bear out BRs bandwidth advantage. I'll make it easy...name one in which we can attribute these differences to bandwidth. These should be titles that would make me into a believer as a consumer. It would be even better for me if the titles were also available on HD DVD so I could compare.

Let's put it another way...how may people would be able to tell the difference in a proper ABX between a lossless and lossy sound track? You see, I thought I had golden ears too until I subjected myself to an ABX and found out otherwise.

And for anyone who thinks I am being unreasonable, I am very much open to looking at any independent science or even compelling anecdotal evidence that would indicate that lossless audio provides a qualitatively better home viewing experience.

--Jerome

NOTE TO SELF: Still shopping for that $3,000 power cord. :)
Forgive me if this is old news, but was the question of why King Kong's best audio track was only DD+ ever answered?

As has already been pointed out by jdg345, I've fully addressed this in this (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10118068&&#post10118068) post. I honestly did not have the information at the time I posted that response.

That's cool. It does change how authoritative you may be viewed to be, however. When you post:

"No discussion whatsoever about this. This shouldn't be a big deal - the Sigma and Broadcom chips have had support for some time."

You give the impression, not of being excluded from those discussions, but as being somebody who is categorically stating there haven't been any. Especially when you follow it up with an explanation of exactly why your conclusion is one that should not concern us.

Not, of course, that it's reasonable to expect anybody to be aware of everything going on, but that a healthy degree of skepticism has now been demonstrated as being A Good Thing©.

And for anyone who thinks I am being unreasonable, I am very much open to looking at any independent science or even compelling anecdotal evidence that would indicate that lossless audio provides a qualitatively better home viewing experience

As for anecdotal evidence, people like me who used to listen to Laserdisks are still feeling that DVD was a huge let down audio wise.

There are many DVD titles that just sound awfully thin compared to their LD PCM counterparts. I never was able to watch Jurasik Park on DVD for example.

Another (still anecdotal) evidence would be the huge difference between the D-Theater version of Backdraft and the LD version. It's just night and day.

Of course, there is no way to do a proper ABX test between LDs and DVDs, because the LD tracks were 2 channels only, and that alone allows to know which one you are hearing. And the masters (2 channels versus 5.1) are different.

But still, on a simple statistical point of view, I never heard a DVD sounding better than a LD, it was always the other way around.

The day my processor supports HDMI, I'll make more serious tests, but I *do* want to finally find back the LD sound, either on HD-DVD or Blu-ray.

Edit: Amir posted that there are DBT tests showing that 20 bits audio sounds better than 16 bits audio.

Considering that the difference between 16 bits and 20 bits is several order of magnitude more subtle than the difference between lossy and loseless, it seems unreasonable to think that the damage done with lossy codecs cannot be heard. I know, still anecdotal...

That Cjplay thinks the bandwidth is insufficient isn't in dispute. But where my question is concerned, his opinion is no better than the average layperson. I am (still) asking someone to demonstrate why lossless is required, how it is better in some measurable way over lossy audio compression, and how customers ultimately benefit from it. This is, after all, what is being used to justify the superiority of BR. If the need for lossless goes away, so does BR's supposed advantages. Cjplay is a compressionist, not an audio engineer, audiologist, or a scientist, and note that even he is talking about cramming these discs full of lossless audio tracks.

Let's set the theories aside for a second and simply discuss what is out there right now. I'll ask one more time, show me the BR titles that clearly bear out BRs bandwidth advantage. I'll make it easy...name one in which we can attribute these differences to bandwidth. These should be titles that would make me into a believer as a consumer. It would be even better for me if the titles were also available on HD DVD so I could compare.

Let's put it another way...how may people would be able to tell the difference in a proper ABX between a lossless and lossy sound track? You see, I thought I had golden ears too until I subjected myself to an ABX and found out otherwise.

And for anyone who thinks I am being unreasonable, I am very much open to looking at any independent science that would indicate that lossless audio provides a qualitatively better home viewing experience.

--Jerome

NOTE TO SELF: Still shopping for that $3,000 power cord. :)

If you want to get into the "what's required" game, then why wouldn't 720p + DD 640kbs using VC-1 or AVC on red laser DVD media not meet the needs of 95% of the market for 95% of titles available ??

None of this stuff is about what people need, it's about what they want. And there seems to be a lot of people who what lossless audio because it eliminates any possibility that "processing" could change the presentation in any way.

What is the goal ?? Is the goal to deliver content as close to the original source as technology allows or is the goal to deliver content using as much digital processing as possible without people noticing the artifacts during presentation ??

b2b

As for anecdotal evidence, people like me who used to listen to Laserdisks are still feeling that DVD was a huge let down audio wise.

There are many DVD titles that just sound awfully thin compared to their LD PCM counterparts. I never was able to watch Jurasik Park on DVD for example.

Another (still anecdotal) evidence would be the huge difference between the D-Theater version of Backdraft and the LD version. It's just night and day.

Of course, there is no way to do a proper ABX test between LDs and DVDs, because the LD tracks were 2 channels only, and that alone allows to know which one you are hearing. And the masters (2 channels versus 5.1) are different.

But still, on a simple statistical point of view, I never heard a DVD sounding better than a LD, it was always the other way around.

The day my processor supports HDMI, I'll make more serious tests, but I *do* want to finally find back the LD sound, either on HD-DVD or Blu-ray.
Man I just watched Casino Royale on DVD the other night. Talk about thin sound!

A fair amount of testing between HDTV movies vs. their DVD counterparts has yielded only a very minor difference on my 50" Optoma 720p (known to have a very capable scaler) at 11-12'. It's DD soundtracks like Casino Royale that remind me of what I'm really missing by not yet adopting HD optical.

That Cjplay thinks the bandwidth is insufficient isn't in dispute. But where my question is concerned, his opinion is no better than the average layperson. I am (still) asking someone to demonstrate why lossless is required, how it is better in some measurable way over lossy audio compression, and how customers ultimately benefit from it. This is, after all, what is being used to justify the superiority of BR. If the need for lossless goes away, so does BR's supposed advantages. Cjplay is a compressionist, not an audio engineer, audiologist, or a scientist, and note that even he is talking about cramming these discs full of lossless audio tracks.

Let's set the theories aside for a second and simply discuss what is out there right now. I'll ask one more time, show me the BR titles that clearly bear out BRs bandwidth advantage. I'll make it easy...name one in which we can attribute these differences to bandwidth. These should be titles that would make me into a believer as a consumer. It would be even better for me if the titles were also available on HD DVD so I could compare.

Let's put it another way...how may people would be able to tell the difference in a proper ABX between a lossless and lossy sound track? You see, I thought I had golden ears too until I subjected myself to an ABX and found out otherwise.

And for anyone who thinks I am being unreasonable, I am very much open to looking at any independent science or even compelling anecdotal evidence that would indicate that lossless audio provides a qualitatively better home viewing experience.

--Jerome

NOTE TO SELF: Still shopping for that $3,000 power cord. :)


Try CHICAGO if you want to see one example.

A highly detailed, non-filtered/DNRed, overly grainy 1.85:1 transfer like this one together with 24bit/48khz real lossless audio track (=exact replication of the original master tape, not some downconverted "TrueHD" 16bit track) is technically impossible to achieve with HD-DVDs bandwidth limitation and without severe compromises (eg. excessive filtering in advance of encoding) IMHO. The AVC stream goes as high as ~ 40MBit/s (approaching BDs limit for video streams) and stays there for whole sequences. And even with AVCs efficiency there are scenes in this movie where every last bit of it is needed.

About your lossless audio question: Get yourself a decent audio setup, rip a CD (or better yet a SACD/DVD-A) to MP3/AAC/WMA @ the bitrate of your choice and hear for yourself. Remember: The better your setup is the more striking the difference will be.

But using a 2nd disc limits the IME that's possible. What you see today on HD DVD is nothing compared to what the studios really want to do.

If I may borrow this point for a completely different subject matter for a moment:

This is one of the reasons why non-disclosure of deck/profile interactive capabilities bothers me so.

I agree with many of the folks who have said, based on current titles, "Just gimme the stinkin' movie. Screw the IME/Menus/Extras." Clearly, however, what we see currently is very early in the ramp-up-phase of what will be offered.

Given what the platforms are capable of, there may be significantly more compelling content in the pipeline. To decide that people will not care when this content is released and their $1000 deck cannot play it is folly, IMO.

Now back to your regularly scheduled argument...

Doing pitch adjustment on the audio is not easy, which is why it's done that way in many cases.

So, how is the FF stuff done? If the drives can only do 1x, is it a series of head seeks, and playback of a bunch of 1x segments, but with time skips inbetween?

That actually is what it tends to look like...

Get yourself a decent audio setup...
How do you know I don't already have one???

Let's not turn this into another equipment debate.

--Jerome

Try CHICAGO if you want to see one example.

A highly detailed, non-filtered/DNRed, overly grainy 1.85:1 transfer like this one together with 24bit/48khz real lossless audio track (=exact replication of the original master tape, not some downconverted "TrueHD" 16bit track) is technically impossible to achieve with HD-DVDs bandwidth limitation and without severe compromises (eg. excessive filtering in advance of encoding) IMHO. The AVC stream goes as high as ~ 40MBit/s (approaching BDs limit for video streams) and stays there for whole sequences. And even with AVCs efficiency there are scenes in this movie where every last bit of it is needed.



How do you know these things? You are stating absolutes based on what?

Blu-Ray 48Mbps, 50GB
0.........1.........2....x....3.........4.........50GB (26.7% of BD titles reviewed*)
+------------------------|------------------------+
| | |48 Mb/s
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |40
| | |
HD-DVD 30Mbps, 30GB | |
0.........1.........2.........30GB |
+-----------------------------+30 Mb/s |30
| | |
+-------------------------------------------------|25 (73.3% of BD titles reviewed*)
| | |
| |20 |20
| | |
DVD 10Mbps, 9.4GB | |
0........9.4GB | |
+--------+10 Mb/s |10 |10
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |0
+--------+--------------------+-------------------+

*Based on latest data from highdefdigest.com

Chart revised by 2Channel
Inspired by the prior work of b2bonez and MrHanky

Caveat emptor b2b. Let's be sure people know what they're really buying.

Please consider that 20% of the titles out there make up for 80% of the sales, perhaps even more (considering Casino Royal ;) ). These are called "blockbusters" btw.

Sure, releases like Casino Royal, The Departed, Kingdom of Heavens, The Prestige and MI:III 50GB Dual Layer discs are equally represented in your "statistics" just like SL Young Guns, The Marine, Lake House and Stir of Echoes... You get the point.

Other than some rushed to market, early Fox blockbuster releases like X-men III and Ice Age 2 I have a very hard time to remember a popular (="what people are really buying") title that's released on a single layer disc.

Cheap (for the consumer...I got Black Hawk Down for $13.- from Amazon, 1 million (!!!) PS3 customers in Europe get Casino Royal for free...) and mass-produced Dual Layer BD50 is far from being Science Fiction - like some want(ed) us to believe ;)

Edit: data removed due to copyright issue..

Caveat emptor b2b. Let's be sure people know what they're really buying.

Your line is drawn from the wrong axis. If you are trying to indicate what percentage of BD discs are BD25, then the demarcation point is indicated with a small "x" on the top line.. Your line is at the 25mbps bandwidth point.

Left to right is GB and bottom to top is mbps bandwidth...


b2b

How do you know these things? You are stating absolutes based on what?

10 years of working experience with video authoring. 5 years of experience with various HD content including 21 D-Theater tapes, 89 HD-DVDs, 19 BDs and 7 TB of recorded h.264 and Mpeg2 transport streams from all over the world.

Please notice the "IMHO" in the sentence.

PS3 bitrate meter.

How do you know I don't already have one???

Let's not turn this into another equipment debate.

--Jerome

I'm sorry Jerome, I don't.

But if you had a "decent audio" setup you wouldn't doubt the benefits of lossless audio in comparison to any psychoacoustical compression method. :)

But if you had a "decent audio" setup you wouldn't doubt the benefits of lossless audio in comparison to any psychoacoustical compression method.
Now that was funny! :D

Thanks for the late afternoon chuckle...

--Jerome

10 years of working experience with video authoring. 5 years of experience with various HD content including 21 D-Theater tapes, 89 HD-DVDs, 19 BDs and 7 TB of recorded h.264 and Mpeg2 transport streams from all over the world.

Please notice the "IMHO" in the sentence.

PS3 bitrate meter.

And after you state you "humble opinion", you go on to state that every bit of 40Mbs is needed for entire sequences as hard evidence to support that opinion.

So, based on:

- A different codec
- Multiple generations of encoders later
- A master of unknown quality ( I assume you have not seen the master?)
- A compressionist of unknow capability
- Other unknown constraints (time? budget?)

You are stating that it "IS" (present tense) impossible to encode one of those sequences today within HD DVD's limitations along with a lossless stream?

Hmmm.

Talk, in the Insider's thread you said reagrding profiles:

I believe the issue is being blown out of proportion. Yes, there will be features which won't work the same on all players. Secondary video is the most significant of these. While it's unfortunate, this is the nature of a new hardware format, and is not much different from DVD where newer titles often didn't work on 1G players. In general I believe most consumers willing to spend $1K on an unproven format understand the risks which come with that purchase, both that the format may not survive and that future players will likely cost less and support more features. In addition, it doesn't mean that certain movies simply won't work, it just means that certain bonus features may not be available or will offer reduced features on players not fully supporting BD-Video 1.1 or BD-Live.
The vast majority of interactivity will work fine. It is similar to DTS; just as movies with DTS soundtracks won't work on DVD players without a DTS decoder (or a receiver which decodes DTS), Blu-ray features requiring network support won't work on players which don't have a network connection.
As a PS3 owner, I have every expectation that current PS3's will fully support the BD-Live profile once a firmware update is released to support it.

This is absurd, it's not like DTS at all. Without a DTS, you still get an audio feature. Without a secondary decoder you do NOT get a PiP feature (barring secondary encode shenanigans). Without a network connection, you do NOT get network feature.

Your (ridiculous) argument is like saying: "Well, even though you the deck doesn't have a working audio feature, you still get the video (albeit without sound)".

Seriously man.

But if you had a "decent audio" setup you wouldn't doubt the benefits of lossless audio in comparison to any psychoacoustical compression method. :)

I guess that includes the $150 after market power cable ? :p

Oh as Darin would point out this is the AV Science forum - not AV SnakeOil foum.

What a bizarre response. In any case, even if the USA didn't exist, you'd still have the problem of putting multiple languages on discs meant for Europe. It's a heck of a lot easier putting multiple languages on one disc instead of one language for each region.

There's no reason to settle for HD DVD's crippled bandwidth when BD is here now.You know, I'm starting to wonder if the BDA pays you for every time you say that... :)

And just for your information, taking your all time favourite title (by number of times mentioned) King Kong, the Euro version of the disc has six DD+ language tracks, and fifteen subtitle tracks. They didn't seem to have all that much trouble putting multiple languages on a single disc.
I think that with TL51, they'll have to go 1.5x spin rate at least. That is probably going to be the biggest stumbling block into adoption as it would likely leave the first adopters stranded. :(Actually, the spin rate shouldn't be an issue, every HD DVD drive I've seen has been 2x speed or better. (Including the HD-A1). It's the actual reading of the third layer that's the hassle, but since I believe the technology is similar to the current (in Japan) twin disc format (which is two layers HD DVD and one layer DVD on a single side) which all players can read, it may be possible to update current drives to read the triple layer all HD DVD discs.

10 years of working experience with video authoring. 5 years of experience with various HD content including 21 D-Theater tapes, 89 HD-DVDs, 19 BDs and 7 TB of recorded h.264 and Mpeg2 transport streams from all over the world.

Please notice the "IMHO" in the sentence.

PS3 bitrate meter.


In other words, you're expecting us to take your word on it.

Your line is drawn from the wrong axis. If you are trying to indicate what percentage of BD discs are BD25, then the demarcation point is indicated with a small "x" on the top line.. Your line is at the 25mbps bandwidth point.

Left to right is GB and bottom to top is mbps bandwidth...

0.........1.........2....x....3.........4.........50GB

Not to mention you are in violation of my copyright.. Please read it again and remove the offending modified chart.. :(


b2b

And how do we know that this is your original work? :) Did you register it?

Not to mention you are in violation of my copyright.. Please read it again and remove the offending modified chart.. :( b2b

For a copyright to be in effect it must first be registered at the Patent and Trademark office in Washington, DC. Have you done that yet?

-Robert

Not to mention you are in violation of my copyright.. Nah. That's covered in the forum rules. Now, lets get this back on topic and skip any more bar graphs.

I'm sorry Jerome, I don't.

But if you had a "decent audio" setup you wouldn't doubt the benefits of lossless audio in comparison to any psychoacoustical compression method. :)

This brings up something I've been wondering about re: lossless audio. I'm asking anyone, not just TheLion, to post what they think they would have to spend ( or have spent ) on audio equipment to hear the substantial difference some are claiming for lossless. This is asking for a lot of opinion and that is fine. I'm just curious as to what others think about this.
BTW Jerome I have your 3,000 dollar power cord in my freezer waiting for you and some pixie dust to sprinkle on it too. :D

And after you state you "humble opinion", you go on to state that every bit of 40Mbs is needed for entire sequences as hard evidence to support that opinion.

So, based on:

- A different codec
- Multiple generations of encoders later
- A master of unknown quality ( I assume you have not seen the master?)
- A compressionist of unknow capability
- Other unknown constraints (time? budget?)

You are stating that it "IS" (present tense) impossible to encode one of those sequences today within HD DVD's limitations along with a lossless stream?

Hmmm.

Steve,

you are right. This is just an educated guess of mine and by no means a scientific proof. But I really do not see any way to deliver such "proof".

The question was to come up with a real world example that demonstrates BDs superior bandwidth capabilities. I suggested CHICAGO because it contains some of the thoughest to compress sequences I have ever encountered (IMHO). For example take a look at the scene right at the end of the movie with all the flashing bulbs in the background. It doesn't get more demanding than that. Now add 1.85:1 aspect ratio, high sensitivity film stock resulting in very pronounced film grain and an unfiltered (no DNR to be seen), highly detailed transfer and you got a compressionist's nightmare.

Sadly enough Cjplay "was purposely silenced" so you really have to take my word for it - but who am I? Just another anonymous forum "troll" with questionable manners, a laughable login name (it is my zodiac sign) and broken English (English is NOT my native tongue, just one of 3 languages + latin I try to manage - with limited success ;) ). So it is definitly much better yet to look at it yourself and build your own educated opinion.


BUT please don't get me wrong. For the VAST MAJORITY of releases HD-DVDs HD30/VC-1 configuration is perfectly fine. Any additional bandwidth would not result in an increased picture quality.

But we wouldn't be HT enthusiasts if we didn't care about the few instances when 30MBit/s peak rate is just not enough to meet our expectations.

HD-DVD is a perfectly fine, very well executed format that I enjoy very much. But I certainly cannot agree that there is NO POINT NOR BENEFIT of increased and superior technical capabilities. We are very early in this game and yet HD-DVD is already pushing its limits regarding available bandwidth (->IMHO).

The business economist in me (I hold a degree in Business Administration) really appreciates the (cost-)efficiency of HD-DVDs design as a format. The tech geek in me adores BD50 as an option for its superior capablities.

I try to enjoy both formats as much as I can while remaining critical and discerning at the same time. That's the perfectionist in me. I just really care about this stuff - call it passion.

This brings up something I've been wondering about re: lossless audio. I'm asking anyone, not just TheLion, to post what they think they would have to spend ( or have spent ) on audio equipment to hear the substantial difference some are claiming for lossless. This is asking for a lot of opinion and that is fine. I'm just curious as to what others think about this.
I would be interested to hear some take on this as well. I hope it doesn't require a set of $20K maggies or something crazy like that. I'm guessing that something along the lines of a set of B&W 601 S3s could pull it off or anything with a good, flat frequency curve like the Ascends, but that would just be a guess.

I have a set of Boston VR-Ms coupled with an M&K MX, and DD sounds, to me like bad mp3 on my system. Standard DTS is a MAJOR step up. A good CD like "Sailing to Philadelphia" sounds great!... but could, maybe sound better? At this point, I would just be content with anything 1.5Mbps+. :) Now that my birthday's come and gone, I'm really wishin' I would've asked the Mrs. for a PS3. :(

b2bonez,

I wholeheartly support your agenda here, as I always have.

Please let me just make you aware that Cjplay's "format war related" comments in general and posts like this one in particular are the very reason for his sudden "departure" @ avsforum. That's sadly just how things are...

Take care :) Yeah except it was the Blu-ray side that got him booted and the HD DVD side that wanted him back. :mad:

This brings up something I've been wondering about re: lossless audio. I'm asking anyone, not just TheLion, to post what they think they would have to spend ( or have spent ) on audio equipment to hear the substantial difference some are claiming for lossless. This is asking for a lot of opinion and that is fine. I'm just curious as to what others think about this.
BTW Jerome I have your 3,000 dollar power cord in my freezer waiting for you and some pixie dust to sprinkle on it too. :D

You sure know that but it is certainly not just about how much you spend but how you spend your money.

Hint: Optimize the weakest link. Buy a well balanced system.
-> If somebody tells you to spend $2,000 don't go out and spend $900.- on silver coated, hand drilled, NASA approved cables...

I would say $ 5,000 can buy you a decent system (5 speaker, subwoofer, cables, preamp+amp) that clearly is capable of demonstrating the benefit of uncompressed audio - depending on the content. Proper calibration and THE ROOM are just as important as the system itself.

About $10,000 is the point of diminishing returns in my experience.

Just my 2 cents - highly subjective matter.

Yeah except it was the Blu-ray side that got him booted and the HD DVD side that wanted him back. :mad:

Kosty,

are you sure about that? ;)

Why have there always to be these childish "sides" and BD/HD-DVD camps??? Let's just say it was about politics... Look at his post history and do the math.

And just for your information, taking your all time favourite title (by number of times mentioned) King Kong, the Euro version of the disc has six DD+ language tracks, and fifteen subtitle tracks. They didn't seem to have all that much trouble putting multiple languages on a single disc.


Did THEY get a lossless audio track? What did they drop to get those extra language tracks? U-Control?

Here are Cjplay's comments on HD-DVD. If the people that create content are already seeing problems working around HD-DVD limitations today, then there is a problem.

b2b

Convenient omission of what CJPlay said after these initial comments, when he and the other compressionists were more familiar with the encoding:



Do you feel that the added bandwidth of Blu-Ray would enable you to present a disc with better PQ, AQ, and/or features?


We do our best not to compromise on PQ at all, and I don't feel we're doing it now at 8-bit 4:2:0 master files, so I don't think BD's added BR would help much. Many have said we compromised on AQ by not doing 24/96 TrueHD on POTO, but obviously WHV doesn't as they've kept going since then on Troy and Batman Begins and on... There are also many fans of the TrueHD in its current incarnation, but I'd like to see 20/48 make it, first.

Yes, it would allow for more features, but count how many DVDs you own for their interactivity value that weren't part of some game (Sorry, SceneIt, I like you too). It would allow for "higher" AQ as well, but at some point, the return is minimal.



I think this would sum up all the confusing jargon on this thread for me at least:
Without caring about extra features, languages and only caring about audio and picture quality, does the extra space of BD make any difference?

Not really. At full muxed bandwidth, HD DVD can fit a movie almost 133 minutes long, which covers over 95% of studio content on the market. Maybe a BD50 means one less disc in the package of a TV content disc (i.e. Smallville from 5 to 4 discs). Bottom line is, which format costs less to the studios to put on the shelves while simultaneously making retailers happy? (Answer not really available at the moment).

You sure know that but it is certainly not just about how much you spend but how you spend your money.

Hint: Optimize the weakest link. Buy a well balanced system.
-> If somebody tells you to spend $2,000 don't go out and spend $900.- on silver coated, hand drilled, NASA approved cables...

I would say $ 5,000 can buy you a decent system (5 speaker, subwoofer, cables, preamp+amp) that clearly is capable of demonstrating the benefit of uncompressed audio - depending on the content. Proper calibration and THE ROOM are just as important as the system itself.

About $10,000 is the point of diminishing returns in my experience.

Just my 2 cents - highly subjective matter.

I appreciate any replies, as I've stated it is a question asking for opinions. I have about 3000 or a bit more in my system ( and old ears ) and could use an upgrade but most upgrade money is probably going to be aimed at an FP and some new gear in the 2 channel room. PS3 is coming this week so I'll be completely neutral. ;)

Did THEY get a lossless audio track? What did they drop to get those extra language tracks? U-Control?
:D

Probably not enough bandwidth for a lossless audio track. ;)

Nah. That's covered in the forum rules. Now, lets get this back on topic and skip any more bar graphs.

:D

Convenient omission of what CJPlay said after these initial comments, when he and the other compressionists were more familiar with the encoding:
Sure, if the studios only want to present video and audio and ignore any of the additional features that HD-DVD claims as a "feature", then HD-DVD is the perfect "good enough" 95% solution.

b2b

Did THEY get a lossless audio track? What did they drop to get those extra language tracks? U-Control?

The European King Kong release fits 6 DD+ tracks because they went with 640kb/s tracks instead of Universal's usual 1.5MBit/s and dropped the (dispensable) U-Control feature. IMHO it is a crime not to provide at the very least a down-converted 16bit TrueHD track for such a release.

But in the end it was a better decision to just drop lossless audio in order to not go with an (even) lower bitrate VC-1 encoding. I respect Universal's decision here and appreciate the picture quality they provided.

Walter, I sincerely appreciate your tag line and excellent posts. Thanks for being the very fine gentleman you are. I hope your simple, but profound statement at the end of every post makes everyone think twice before posting garbage.

-Robert

The European King Kong release fits 6 DD+ tracks because they went with 640kb/s tracks instead of Universal's usual 1.5MBit/s and dropped the (dispensable) U-Control feature. IMHO it is a crime not to provide at the very least a down-converted 16bit TrueHD track for such a release.

But in the end it was a better decision to just drop lossless audio in order to not go with an (even) lower bitrate VC-1 encoding. I respect Universal's decision here and appreciate the picture quality they provided.
Still...

that sucks.

Thank God we've mainly got a 3 language limit, here in Region 1.

Really though, I'm surprised they couldn't, at least give the native (English) language version a 1.5Mbps track. So many Europeans can understand English anyway. I bet they would want it, if you asked them.

Sure, if the studios only want to present video and audio and ignore any of the additional features that HD-DVD claims as a "feature", then HD-DVD is the perfect "good enough" 95% solution.

b2b

:D

"HD-DVD - the perfect "good enough" 95% solution" - now this would make for a great signature line, don't you think...

If you don't have any use for it (yours is really fine as it is...) I think I'll take it. Pubescent members like Django would enjoy it for sure and will call me BD troll three times a day instead of the usual two from now on :p

I'm just joking btw.

Sure, if the studios only want to present video and audio and ignore any of the additional features that HD-DVD claims as a "feature", then HD-DVD is the perfect "good enough" 95% solution.

b2b

HPGoF, BB, Troy, and soon the Matrix Trilogy, etc...prove you can have great PQ, AQ and IME, as can be witnessed today and as CJplay himself pointed out after actually working on some of these titles. And all of which can be played on G1 hardware. Too bad no G1 BD hardware nor software can do the same, and that the minority of 50 GIG BD titles still haven't proven PQ/AQ/interactivity "superiority" on BD.

The European King Kong release fits 6 DD+ tracks because they went with 640kb/s tracks instead of Universal's usual 1.5MBit/s and dropped the (dispensable) U-Control feature. IMHO it is a crime not to provide at the very least a down-converted 16bit TrueHD track for such a release.

Agreed. Generally, I don't buy an HD disc that doesn't have lossless audio just like I stopped buying standard def. I got KK free with my add-on (not that I can get lossless audio from it anyway).

Guess the europeans don't get the benefit of enhanced interactivity. :shrug:



But in the end it was a better decision to just drop lossless audio in order to not go with an (even) lower bitrate VC-1 encoding.

Breaking up the releases into language speaking versions would seem a better aesthetic alternative to either of those two rock and a hard place options, but then that costs mula. Of course, Universal could hypothetically release all of them on a BD50 and not have to worry about it, which is the point of this topic of debate. ;)

Breaking up the releases into language speaking versions would seem a better aesthetic alternative to either of those two rock and a hard place options, but then that costs mula. Of course, Universal could hypothetically release all of them on a BD50 and not have to worry about it, which is the point of this topic of debate. ;)
You know, this is a really interesting case in point. We Region 1 centrists are not attune to situations where 6 languages need be encoded. Europe DEFINITELY makes a case for higher capacity and bandwidth. I mean, yeah a BD50 disc costs a few cents more to replicate, but that pales in comparison to separate discs, separate artwork, separate boxes and extra shelf space!

Gee, I wonder whether or not the studios have considered this. ;)

Walter, I sincerely appreciate your tag line and excellent posts. Thanks for being the very fine gentleman you are. I hope your simple, but profound statement at the end of every post makes everyone think twice before posting garbage.

-Robert

Dear Robert,

you are aware that we have had our rough times in the past but I want you to know that it was just my (not always very political/gentle but rather very passionate) way to object against some IMHO ill balanced and misleading statements and never something personal.

Sometimes we both seem just to be almost too passionate about HT for our own good.

I sure appreciate your comment.

Take care.

The European King Kong release fits 6 DD+ tracks because they went with 640kb/s tracks instead of Universal's usual 1.5MBit/s and dropped the (dispensable) U-Control feature. IMHO it is a crime not to provide at the very least a down-converted 16bit TrueHD track for such a release.Japanese version of KK also lacks U-Control. It's little bit off topic, but as you may know, the Japanese and the European version of Kingdom of Heaven have two 48kHz/24bit DTS-HD MA tracks - one for original (English) and the other for local language.

:D

"HD-DVD - the perfect "good enough" 95% solution" - now this would make for a great signature line, don't you think...

If you don't have any use for it (yours is really fine as it is...) I think I'll take it. Pubescent members like Django would enjoy it for sure and will call me BD troll three times a day instead of the usual two from now on :p

I'm just joking btw.

It's the truth. The only real difference between HD-DVD and Blu-ray is at the very core of the engineering of the disc structure that allows Blu-ray to pack data more densely than HD-DVD. People argue to no end singing the virtues of VC-1 SW being able to pack HD content in less bits and ignore Blu-ray HW packing more bits on the same amount of area on the physical disc.

My attitude is that whatever is reasonably possible to yield a better technology via both HW and SW is good and to give up either benefit is extremely short sighted and foolish.

"Smaller and slower" being "better" than "faster and bigger" for a storage technology is only valid when the goal is simply to be "good enough"... ;)

b2b

"Smaller and slower" being "better" than "faster and bigger" for a storage technology is only valid when the goal is simply to be "good enough"... ;)

b2b

Diminishing returns is a simple concept, lost on many. Especially when confused with "bigger" being necessary only for less effecient encoding. :cool:

It's the truth. The only real difference between HD-DVD and Blu-ray is at the very core of the engineering of the disc structure that allows Blu-ray to pack data more densely than HD-DVD. People argue to no end singing the virtues of VC-1 SW being able to pack HD content in less bits and ignore Blu-ray HW packing more bits on the same amount of area on the physical disc.

My attitude is that whatever is reasonably possible to yield a better technology via both HW and SW is good and to give up either benefit is extremely short sighted and foolish.

"Smaller and slower" being "better" than "faster and bigger" for a storage technology is only valid when the goal is simply to be "good enough"... ;)

b2b
Hear hear!

You know, this is a really interesting case in point. We Region 1 centrists are not attune to situations where 6 languages need be encoded. Europe DEFINITELY makes a case for higher capacity and bandwidth. I mean, yeah a BD50 disc costs a few cents more to replicate, but that pales in comparison to separate discs, separate artwork, separate boxes and extra shelf space!

Gee, I wonder whether or not the studios have considered this. ;)

I guess Disney doesn't agree with you. They are putting out the Pirate movies on 2 disks for each one. And they aren't the first. Now, what was you point again?

Diminishing returns is a simple concept, lost on many. Especially when confused with "bigger" being necessary only for less effecient encoding. :cool:

Julian Hirsch would be proud.

It's the truth. The only real difference between HD-DVD and Blu-ray is at the very core of the engineering of the disc structure that allows Blu-ray to pack data more densely than HD-DVD. People argue to no end singing the virtues of VC-1 SW being able to pack HD content in less bits and ignore Blu-ray HW packing more bits on the same amount of area on the physical disc.

My attitude is that whatever is reasonably possible to yield a better technology via both HW and SW is good and to give up either benefit is extremely short sighted and foolish.

"Smaller and slower" being "better" than "faster and bigger" for a storage technology is only valid when the goal is simply to be "good enough"... ;)

b2b

b2bonez,

I'm with you all the way. My "I'm just joking comment" was just about my sarcastic format war remark.

I don't know if you are aware of my post/thread history. I fought the bandwidth "battle" even before Darin chimed in. I fight the native, unprocessed 24p "battle". The 20bit/24bit lossless audio "battle". And above all the high-bitrate video encoding "battle"....

I was discussing with Amir already 10 months ago about HD-DVDs bandwidth and storage space limitations. His argument was and continous to be that HD-DVD aka 30GB per disc aka ~30MBit/s transfer rate "is good enough". If you use VC-1 that is. :p
My argument back than was and continous to be that we want a format that is not just good enough now but will be so in the future. MUCH more revealing display technologies will become available. Screen sizes will continue to increase. Studios will want to come up with completely new and demanding "additional features". Multiple high bitrate streams. We are barely scratching the surface and yet Buena Vista will come up with releases like Pirates of the Caribbean I + II on TWO BD50 each - with peak rates surely approaching 48MBit/s like some of their other releases. Although they are using the highly efficient AVC codec. Now imagine what will be in a couple of years. IMHO BD50 is barely "good enough"...

"Microsoft" once believed 640kb RAM in a computer is "good enough" and will continue to be so... I told him (Amir) that in a couple of years we will laugh about 30GB/30MBit/s just as loud as we laugh about the 640kb RAM limitation right now.

Nobody will dare to disagree that BD50 is a technological master piece and its prospects really are exciting.

HD-DVD is a cost effective, VERY well executed solution that deserves to have a place in this market - be it just to push Blu-Ray to better live up to its potential by giving it some competition. I also see it in a good position to serve as the preferred format for niche markets (small adult labels, Indie/Art film studios, anime,...) and the purely cost sensitive consumer (buzzword: dirt cheap chinese players).

I'm a tech geek at heart. I'm very well aware that 12-18MBit/s avg. VC-1, 640kb/s DD+ or downsampled 16bit "True"HD, recycled SD extra features and a single (how about providing several, selectable or simultaneous PIP streams for a change? How crazy is that idea?) occasional IME feature depending on available bandwidth is "good enough" or even perfectly fine for the vast majority of consumers out there.

But I have more imagination than that :)

Japanese version of KK also lacks U-Control. It's little bit off topic, but as you may know, the Japanese and the European version of Kingdom of Heaven have two 48kHz/24bit DTS-HD MA tracks - one for original (English) and the other for local language.

As it should be. Everything else is a compromise.

You know, I'm starting to wonder if the BDA pays you for every time you say that... :)

And just for your information, taking your all time favourite title (by number of times mentioned) King Kong, the Euro version of the disc has six DD+ language tracks, and fifteen subtitle tracks. They didn't seem to have all that much trouble putting multiple languages on a single disc.
Actually, the spin rate shouldn't be an issue, every HD DVD drive I've seen has been 2x speed or better. (Including the HD-A1). It's the actual reading of the third layer that's the hassle, but since I believe the technology is similar to the current (in Japan) twin disc format (which is two layers HD DVD and one layer DVD on a single side) which all players can read, it may be possible to update current drives to read the triple layer all HD DVD discs.

That would be pretty cool indeed ... why the mention of the 1.5x if all players can do 2x though? I thought I read that one of the non-NEC drives or something might have an issue at speeds > 1x ?

Nah. That's covered in the forum rules. Now, lets get this back on topic and skip any more bar graphs.

Are weather maps okay? ;)

This brings up something I've been wondering about re: lossless audio. I'm asking anyone, not just TheLion, to post what they think they would have to spend ( or have spent ) on audio equipment to hear the substantial difference some are claiming for lossless. This is asking for a lot of opinion and that is fine. I'm just curious as to what others think about this.
BTW Jerome I have your 3,000 dollar power cord in my freezer waiting for you and some pixie dust to sprinkle on it too. :D

I suspect that one would have to easily spend 10's of thousands of dollars on equipment, and likely a multiple of that on their room.

I seriously don't think it's a major issue at all. Particularly at high bit depths.

Suggesting that even a fraction of a percent of listeners could even detect 24 bit vs 20 but lossless is generous. To suggest that folks MIGHT be able to tell between lossless 20 bit and lossless 16 bit is a bit more plausible, but even then I'd be willing to bet we are still talking fractions of a percent in real installations.

I suspect that in real blind tests, 20 or 24 bit lossy would sound just as good as lossless 99.999% of the time. And for those listening in anything other than a sensory deprivation chamber, that's below the threshold of your significant other passing gas in the adjacent chair.

Steve,

you are right. This is just an educated guess of mine and by no means a scientific proof. But I really do not see any way to deliver such "proof".

The question was to come up with a real world example that demonstrates BDs superior bandwidth capabilities. I suggested CHICAGO because it contains some of the thoughest to compress sequences I have ever encountered (IMHO). For example take a look at the scene right at the end of the movie with all the flashing bulbs in the background. It doesn't get more demanding than that. Now add 1.85:1 aspect ratio, high sensitivity film stock resulting in very pronounced film grain and an unfiltered (no DNR to be seen), highly detailed transfer and you got a compressionist's nightmare.

Sadly enough Cjplay "was purposely silenced" so you really have to take my word for it - but who am I? Just another anonymous forum "troll" with questionable manners, a laughable login name (it is my zodiac sign) and broken English (English is NOT my native tongue, just one of 3 languages + latin I try to manage - with limited success ;) ). So it is definitly much better yet to look at it yourself and build your own educated opinion.


BUT please don't get me wrong. For the VAST MAJORITY of releases HD-DVDs HD30/VC-1 configuration is perfectly fine. Any additional bandwidth would not result in an increased picture quality.

But we wouldn't be HT enthusiasts if we didn't care about the few instances when 30MBit/s peak rate is just not enough to meet our expectations.

HD-DVD is a perfectly fine, very well executed format that I enjoy very much. But I certainly cannot agree that there is NO POINT NOR BENEFIT of increased and superior technical capabilities. We are very early in this game and yet HD-DVD is already pushing its limits regarding available bandwidth (->IMHO).

The business economist in me (I hold a degree in Business Administration) really appreciates the (cost-)efficiency of HD-DVDs design as a format. The tech geek in me adores BD50 as an option for its superior capablities.

I try to enjoy both formats as much as I can while remaining critical and discerning at the same time. That's the perfectionist in me. I just really care about this stuff - call it passion.

That's cool, and I respect your opinion. My point is not to disparage your experience, but to clarify that it is opinion drawn from working with something OTHER than the toolchain being used today. Hence to talk in absolutes is dangerous.

The existence of 40Mbit sequences does not imply they HAD to be 40Mbit, any more than the setting my dryer for an hour gets my clothes any dryer if there's no moister after 40 minutes. This goes double for a different codec. Triple for newer generations of an encoder for that differing codec.

See where I'm going with this? You've got some great experience, but that doesn't mean it's directly applicable in all cases.

For a copyright to be in effect it must first be registered at the Patent and Trademark office in Washington, DC. Have you done that yet?

Totally OT.

INAL, but IIRC, that is not correct. Yes, if you have got a patent it is easier to get a verdict in your favor - but copyright notice is not necessary. Ofcourse what we write here - may be subject to another discussion - whether we own it or AVS.

ps :

http://www.ladas.com/NII/CopyrightNoticeRegis.html

Prior to the United States accession to the Berne Convention and the concomitant amendments to the Copyright Act, a copyright notice was required on all publicly distributed copies or phonorecords of works. Omission of the notice could result in the loss of copyright protection for the work. However, in 1989, the use of a copyright notice became permissive rather than required.[1] Section 401(a) of the Copyright Act provides:

Whenever a work protected under this title is published in the United States or elsewhere by authority of the copyright owner, a notice of copyright ... may be placed on publicly distributed copies from which the work can be visually perceived, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.[2]

...and broken English (English is NOT my native tongue, just one of 3 languages...Your English is as good as the Queen's. :D Seriously.

I didn't realize the Japanese version of KK lacked U-Control. How sad. The format has already reached its limits, and it's barely out of the crib.

Totally OT.

INAL, but IIRC, that is not correct. Yes, if you have got a patent it is easier to get a verdict in your favor - but copyright notice is not necessary. Ofcourse what we write here - may be subject to another discussion - whether we own it or AVS.

ps :

http://www.ladas.com/NII/CopyrightNoticeRegis.html

Actually, I was being a total smart@$$ with my original remark. Technically, a copyright does not need to be registered, although from a practical point of view, registering a trademark makes it really easy to verify that the owner of the copyright does indeed own it, but it is not legally necessary. Not registering a copyright makes it a bit more difficult to prove that the work in question is indeed unique and has not been challenged, replicated, or in fact, was first to market. But I digress . . .

I guess Disney doesn't agree with you. They are putting out the Pirate movies on 2 disks for each one. And they aren't the first. Now, what was you point again?
Well your sarcasm aside, I think my point does not require reaffirmation.

I think it's great that Disney would choose to provide the best content possible, though they could easily get away with less and still provide a better sound format than King Kong (HD DVD) in Europe.

What was your point again?

The point is that marketing will determine how many disks are used. I prefer that they use two disks myself. Put all the extras on a second disk. Which it appears, is what a lot of studios will do for blockbuster titles. Just like they do for dvd.

If that becomes standard practice, size makes no difference at all. Not that it does anyway.

Here is a piece of news that can be interesting from hidef POV.

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6427966.html?nid=2840

Microsoft Corp. named Netflix chairman and CEO Reed Hastings to its board of directors Monday, adding a tenth spot on the company’s board for his appointment.

Seems like a big mess to me ... at the end of the day, the Studios are going to give us what they think we want, not necessarily what we really want. They're going to look more to J6P than the subset of folks here I would think.

agree and why I think it ios important to have extra room to do both.

Here is a piece of news that can be interesting from hidef POV.

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6427966.html?nid=2840

Hmmm. Now that is interesting. How much longer will it be before MS buys a movie studio or two? I'm betting sometime next year. Makes since considering their aggressive stance with HD DVD and movie downloads with the xbox.

What better way to assure content. Just ask Sony.

The point is that marketing will determine how many disks are used. I prefer that they use two disks myself. Put all the extras on a second disk. Which it appears, is what a lot of studios will do for blockbuster titles. Just like they do for dvd.

If that becomes standard practice, size makes no difference at all. Not that it does anyway.

Isn't the whole point of iHD/BD-J that many of the new extras are interactive with the movie, necessitating their inclusion on the movie disk, itself? Although non-interactive content may be placed on a second disk, it would seem that additional space on the actual movie disk is a necessary and desirable commodity.

Do we know that POTC is not two 50GB disks?

That Cjplay thinks the bandwidth is insufficient isn't in dispute. But where my question is concerned, his opinion is no better than the average layperson.

so CJPLAY saying WB could not put on a disk what WB wanted and they had to decrease the quality is not proof that they had to give something up?

I am (still) asking someone to demonstrate why lossless is required, how it is better in some measurable way over lossy audio compression

I can't remember the guys name, but look for the posts from the guy from Dolby. There is a reason Dolby and DTYS created lossless codecs. There is a reason they are called lossless and the others lossy I will give you a hint, the lossy ones are losing detail that should be there.

Let's put it another way...how may people would be able to tell the difference in a proper ABX between a lossless and lossy sound track? You see, I thought I had golden ears too until I subjected myself to an ABX and found out otherwise.

what did you test? Did you test absolutely every soundtrack ever produced?

And for anyone who thinks I am being unreasonable, I am very much open to looking at any independent science or even compelling anecdotal evidence that would indicate that lossless audio provides a qualitatively better home viewing experience.

it is not a better viewing but sounding experience :) it is also a more exact sounding experience. If it is better or not, that is a qualitative statement someone might like better the way something sounds even though it is less exact, the same way some like full screen over OAR

Hmmm. Now that is interesting. How much longer will it be before MS buys a movie studio or two? I'm betting sometime next year. Makes since considering their aggressive stance with HD DVD and movie downloads with the xbox.

What better way to assure content. Just ask Sony.

MS generally doesn't buy expensive established companies ...

I can't remember the guys name, but look for the posts from the guy from Dolby. There is a reason Dolby and DTYS created lossless codecs. There is a reason they are called lossless and the others lossy I will give you a hint, the lossy ones are losing detail that should be there.

I'll give you a hint. There is a market for lossless ....

(and I guess you know of a lossless microphone :p )

Your line is drawn from the wrong axis. If you are trying to indicate what percentage of BD discs are BD25, then the demarcation point is indicated with a small "x" on the top line.. Your line is at the 25mbps bandwidth point.

Left to right is GB and bottom to top is mbps bandwidth...

0.........1.........2....x....3.........4.........50GB

Not to mention you are in violation of my copyright.. Please read it again and remove the offending modified chart.. :(


b2b

Thanks b2b. I've corrected the chart.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10130427#post10130427

Please feel free to bring legal action against me if you feel wronged. ;)

This brings up something I've been wondering about re: lossless audio. I'm asking anyone, not just TheLion, to post what they think they would have to spend ( or have spent ) on audio equipment to hear the substantial difference some are claiming for lossless. This is asking for a lot of opinion and that is fine. I'm just curious as to what others think about this.


there is no answer. The problem is one is lossy. Lossy can be from extremely bad to something half decent. The loss will be dependent on the complexity of the segment and the criteria entered by the tech.

You know, this is a really interesting case in point. We Region 1 centrists are not attune to situations where 6 languages need be encoded. Europe DEFINITELY makes a case for higher capacity and bandwidth. I mean, yeah a BD50 disc costs a few cents more to replicate, but that pales in comparison to separate discs, separate artwork, separate boxes and extra shelf space!


it is not a need but a studio want. Do you think people in Germany care about Italian , French and Spanish? how about people in Spain about the other languages. The same is true in region 1, do you think most people in Canada care about Spanish? How about French for guys in the US. The reason there are multiple audio and even more subtitles is that it is much cheaper and easier for a studio to have one disk in all its markets then micromanaging each market individually. The joke is that eventually Universal will realize that the "European" HD DVD of a movie could do equally well in the US

Suggesting that even a fraction of a percent of listeners could even detect 24 bit vs 20 but lossless is generous

who is talking 20 vs 24? the discussion is DD/DD+ good enough or should we demand lossless

If that becomes standard practice, size makes no difference at all. Not that it does anyway.
You keep tellin' yourself that, tr. ;)

Yeah, like I said, It's too bad that King Kong went astray with their European release.

I'll give you a hint. There is a market for lossless ....

(and I guess you know of a lossless microphone :p )
Well, since you added the emoticon, I'll just quickly throw in the standard reminder about signal chain degradation. It's ahhh... never desirable. Why don't we just go back to cassette tapes and hiss while we're at it. Kept Dolby busy. ;)

Oh and BTW, I know of some damn fine microphones, what they can do and how much they can cost. And in all likelihood, they hear better than you do; so I guess, technically they are less lossy than your own ears which would then be the more limiting factor when it comes to microphones. :p

Sure it would be desirable. But no one has shown that it makes a movie look or sound any better with the use of modern codecs. All I keep hearing is that it could. So far it hasn't, IMHO. The more mass market this becomes, the less apt we are to see it, I believe. I own both and I don't see or hear it on any titles.

What seems to be overlooked quite often is that these studios are putting out disks for the mass market, not for the A/V people here.

Most people don't even use a receiver for sound from their HDTV's. They don't care as much as we do. They want to put in a movie and play it. I want the best quality, just like everyone here does, but we are not important in the long run.

We keep talking about 16 vrs 20 or 24 bit audio or 50gb vrs 30gb. I want high quality audio and video as well, but we need to understand the vast majority do not care about that tiny advantage that one may have over the other. They can't see it or hear it anyway.

Who do you think the studios are going to cater too. A few thousand geeks or the millions that don't care about any of these things we argue about.

We come here because we enjoy those tiny differences. But, for either format to survive, compromises will be made and we will all complain and argue the merits of one over the other, but such is life.

I plan to enjoy both. If BR ever surpasses HD DVD in quality I will be one of the first to proclaim it. It hasn't to date and I don't think it will for the reasons I gave above.

Oh and BTW, I know of some damn fine microphones, what they can do and how much they can cost. And in all likelihood, they hear better than you do; so I guess, technically they are less lossy than your own ears which would then be the more limiting factor when it comes to microphones. :p

So why exactly are we talking about lossless ? Because somehow it shows BD in better light ? Not because of any Science, right ?

Exactly my point.

it is not a need but a studio want. Do you think people in Germany care about Italian , French and Spanish? how about people in Spain about the other languages. The same is true in region 1, do you think most people in Canada care about Spanish? How about French for guys in the US. The reason there are multiple audio and even more subtitles is that it is much cheaper and easier for a studio to have one disk in all its markets then micromanaging each market individually. The joke is that eventually Universal will realize that the "European" HD DVD of a movie could do equally well in the US
You're preachin' to the choir.

In fact, I'm all for wipin' the floor with Canada just because your stupid French has been chewin' up space on my DVDs all these years!!!


Kidding, of course. I know many a Canuck. Can say I'm a huge fan of all but one of them and he's not all that bad, just hates Yanks and likes to make sure I know it.

But I digress.

I've always been all-for separate discs whenever possible. Not a fan of extras and hate to think how they could be affecting my DVD picture.

However, it does seem possible, with BD50 to get plenty of extras on a single disc, without compromises so, why not?

So why exactly are we talking about lossless ? Because somehow it shows BD in better light ? Not because of any Science, right ?

Exactly my point.
To be honest nataraj, I don't know. I've not heard them side by side. I'll bet you the farm that I could hear the difference between 1.5Mbps DTS and DD at 640, though. I'm sure you could too. The next gen. format should never, IMO have anything less than 1.5Mbps audio.

As far as lossless and PCM are concerned, they may just be a nice perk. As a music producer, I was reputed to have a golden ear that would confound engineers, so sound is pretty important to me. So who did I produce the track for, the average Joe that may or may not hear all the nuances that I wished to include, or was it wiser to aim a little higher and make the best sounding tracks I could?

Maybe you and I are just different people.

Call it a selfish thing, but I'd rather have the goods, than make excuses for why the goods ain't any gooder. :)

Maybe you and I are just different people.

As an ex audiophile - I can assure you that I like nothing but lossless. Just that I think only accoustic music heard live without electronics is the only way to get it.

Personally I'm inclined to beleive only things that can be proven in a DBT. I'm thr' with the audiophile snakeoil "nirvana".

And as any self respecting audiophile can tell you specs mean zilch when it comes to quality audio. I'd rather have high distortion LP and SET than lifeless 96/24 SS.

I'd rather have high distortion LP and SET than lifeless 96/24 SS.

Life is analog. :) Long live the LP!

I'll bet you the farm that I could hear the difference between 1.5Mbps DTS and DD at 640, though. I'm sure you could too.

Sketcha, with all due respect, it would be incredibly foolish to wager anything of real value, that you could consistently do that in a controlled setting.

With BD50 popping up left and right with volume, no one can argue BD50 has the better hardware spec with bigger capacity and higher transfer rate.

But the rant goes on. These are some logically flawed excuses I keep seeing from the HD-DVD camp:
- HD-DVD 30G is all the mankind needed and wanted. HD-DVD supporter will never need or want more and the BD camp shouldn't too. (though they are working round the clock for TL51!)
- BD production cost is too high (which can only go down in time), though end user disc selling price is similiar for both BD and HD-DVD, but HD-DVD supporter only care production cost!

And these are excuses in the funny section:
- look at 5th Element BD, BD sucks!
- Sony is evil and should die!

Oh and one more:
- we will only need LESS capacity and bitrate in the future as compression will get more efficiency! (like average joe move from CD to MP3!)

Did I miss other argument? Seriously, what has the world come to? :rolleyes:

regards,

Li On

Oh and one more:
- we will only need LESS capacity and bitrate in the future as compression will get more efficiency! (like average joe move from CD to MP3!)

Did I miss other argument? Seriously, what has the world come to? :rolleyes:

regards,

Li On
Well computers keep getting slower and HDDs keep getting smaller, don't they? ;)

Gods* bless compression!



*Sorry. Just caught the season finale of BSG. Can't believe I have to wait until 2008!

As an ex audiophile - I can assure you that I like nothing but lossless. Just that I think only accoustic music heard live without electronics is the only way to get it.

Personally I'm inclined to beleive only things that can be proven in a DBT. I'm thr' with the audiophile snakeoil "nirvana".

And as any self respecting audiophile can tell you specs mean zilch when it comes to quality audio. I'd rather have high distortion LP and SET than lifeless 96/24 SS.
Well, of course you have an affinity for the warming effects of analog tape with its natural compression qualities, as do I. So many of us grew up with it and it is pleasing to the ear, for sure. Since inception, digital has tried its darndest to somehow match that sound.

I'm a B&O man, myself. Love those ultra-light tonearms. ;)

But let's be honest; this is a bit of straw man, don't ya' think? Analog has nothing to do with anything in the HD optical forum.
All I want is the least amount of loss between what the genius behind the mixing board wants me to hear and what gets to my eardrums. Never gonna' be perfect, but any link in the audio chain that can be transparent, I want transparent.

Anyone else care to redirect instead of refuting the irrefutable? :)

Life is analog. :) Long live the LP!



Sketcha, with all due respect, it would be incredibly foolish to wager anything of real value, that you could consistently do that in a controlled setting.
I'll bear that in mind, rto.

Still...

that sucks.

Thank God we've mainly got a 3 language limit, here in Region 1.


Make it two. Most of Universal's 2007 titles will be English/French only, much to the chagrin of the Latin American market (and my fellow Spanish enthusiasts). To add insult to injury, combo titles will have Spanish dub and subtitles on the SD side, but not the HD side. How twisted is that?

:D

"HD-DVD - the perfect "good enough" 95% solution" - now this would make for a great signature line, don't you think...

Conversely if only 95% of Blu-ray releases were "good enough" - the fact is they aren't. I own both formats (mostly for work purposes) but buy releases on neither.

Like many I have little faith that HD DVD will be the prevailing format, but on the other hand I just don't think the Blu-ray product is good enough to invest in when quality is so variable. I'm not investing big bucks as an early adopter when the act of buying a movie becomes a lottery in terms of picture quality, and when there's no guarantee that disc features will be supported on all players.

Did I miss other argument?PiP! Can't forget PiP! It is the single most important technology invented in the last 1000 years and you simply must have it NOW! :D

Well I can't say the direction in which this discussion is going is all that surprising. I ask serious, legitimate questions concerning audio quality and I what I get is charts from b2b (that show lossless audio is better how?), circular arguments that beg the question from AnthonyP (it is better just because Warner wants it, because I say so, it must be, why would Dolby develop such and such? What did you test?), and the usual musings over equipment from TheLion (spend more money on gear).

I don't say this to insult anyone and I apprecaite some of the attempts at answers, but please understand that I have heard all of this before. And still, no one has addressed the issue. Darin cautions us that this is AV Science Forum--but this discussion could not be further removed from the science and I really don't understand why. Does it not exist? I don't care whether or not you personnally believe you can tell the difference between DD+, DTS, or lossless. I wasn't interested in finding out who the golden ears are on this forum. Nor am I interested in learning who among you has the fattest wallets and can therefore afford the most expensive gear. I have some expensive gear too, so what? None of that answers my questions.

I simply asked for someone to point me to some independent ABX tests. Now THAT is something I would find to be objective. If a sufficient sample of people were able to pick out the lossless track when ABXed with a lossy encoding of the same track that would actually mean something to me and would represent compelling evidence.

On the other hand, anecdotal evidence is interesting but far, far less persuasive. And because it is subjective it must be weighed as such. I'm not dismissive of it, but I don't find it especially compelling either.

If the answer is that lossless is needed because that is what the studios want, then fine. If it is argued that lossless is needed because that is what a certain market segment wants then I'm fine with that. If the argument that Blu-ray's higher bandwidth allows studios to cram more audio tracks on the disc then I have no problem with that either.

But...I will continue to reject the notions that lossless audio provides a qualitiatively better experience or that Blu-ray's higher bandwidth is responsible for it, unless and until there is compelling objective evidence to suggest otherwise.

Thanks to TheLion for pointing out that one title. I'll look into it out of curiosity

--Jerome

NOTE TO SELF: Store is sold out of $3,000 power cords. Salesman offered a step up model priced at $4,500...thinking seriously about it.

PiP! Can't forget PiP! It is the single most important technology invented in the last 1000 years and you simply must have it NOW! :D
But of course If it was the other way around and Blu-Ray had PiP it would be GREAT :rolleyes:
But BD can't , wait a matter of fact It can but it's not ready :rolleyes:

Not ready is the key words :D

Thats funny all that money for an unfinished machine :eek:

On the other hand, anecdotal evidence is interesting but far, far less persuasive. And because it is subjective it must be weighed as such. I'm not dismissive of it, but I don't find it especially compelling either.

Well, you're the one that asked for it!

Sure, if the studios only want to present video and audio and ignore any of the additional features that HD-DVD claims as a "feature", then HD-DVD is the perfect "good enough" 95% solution.

b2b
This is all i need as a regular Joe. Good picture and good audio. By the time the movie is over Im ready to pull the dvd. It is rare that I look at extras or for extras. When the movie is done its time to put the kiddies and adults to sleep :D . I keep hearing that disc capacity is BR's biggest attribute but yet they are able to fit a 3hr movie on HD DVD and maintain an excellant experience. I personally dont want to sit in front of tv for longer than 3hrs, and to be honest i would probably pause the movie a couple a times any way. If BR is the better format then I assume the movies and sound are better. If so can someone poste a link to a comparison where it clearly states that BR picture and audio is better then the same movie on HD DVD . There should be more than one.
P.S> not bashing , trying to keep an open mind.

Well, you're the one that asked for it!
I did indeed Robert and as I said I appreciated the attempts at answers. At the very least it helps to explain what other people are thinking. I don't necessarily need to agree with it to appreciate and respect what you are saying.

--Jerome

The point is that marketing will determine how many disks are used. I prefer that they use two disks myself. Put all the extras on a second disk. Which it appears, is what a lot of studios will do for blockbuster titles. Just like they do for dvd.

If that becomes standard practice, size makes no difference at all. Not that it does anyway.

This is a line from Amir, isn't it?

So you don't think that the PotC I+I releases will provide anywhere between 50GB< >100GB worth of content and therefor HAVE to use 2 discs nomatter what their marketing department suggests???

We will see BUT it is MOST likely the case - considering HD extra features and not the usual recycled SD stuff straight from the DVD release.
And it was suggested (Digital bits) that these releases will contain 2 BD50 discs (!!!) - this would be "proof" that the actual content is very likely ~75GB (depending on how much there is on disc one).

The lack of imagination that any movie release will come with something like 100GB or more of content is quite striking.
In the future (->IMHO<-) we will see high profile releases consisting of 3 BD50 or more - just like we have 4 disc DVD9 sets now. Not because marketing wants to put as many discs in the package as possible BUT because we have >100GB worth of HD content.

In the future (->IMHO<-) we will see high profile releases consisting of 3 BD50 or more
Well, IMHO, in seven to ten years tbere's a good chance that movies will no longer be distrubuted on physical media at all. It will be relegated to digital delivery via networks.

--Jerome

Well, IMHO, in seven to ten years tbere's a good chance that movies will no longer be distrubuted on physical media at all. It will be relegated to digital delivery via networks.

--Jerome

Right, MS's VC-1 master plan.

I will miss my physical media though...

who is talking 20 vs 24? the discussion is DD/DD+ good enough or should we demand lossless


Ahh, but more than a few people in the biz have suggested that they'd prefer lossy 24-bit over lossless but at a lower depth.

Right, MS's VC-1 master plan.
My opinion was based simply on an extrapolation of Moore's Law and a few personal observations about the market. Microsoft never even factored into my thinking...

--Jerome

But let's be honest; this is a bit of straw man, don't ya' think? Analog has nothing to do with anything in the HD optical forum.
All I want is the least amount of loss between what the genius behind the mixing board wants me to hear and what gets to my eardrums. Never gonna' be perfect, but any link in the audio chain that can be transparent, I want transparent.

Some people - like you - somehow think all one needs is lossless for audio nirvana. This puts things in perpspective. As so many have noted higher bit death is better than low bit deapth lossless.

BTW, if you want transparent sound, you better hope the guy behind the mixing board is a genius. Personally never thought anything with a mixing board can be transparent - I'm a minimalist when it comes to audio. I think audio is so processed in movies anyway, it really doesn't matter. This is just another tool in the format war. Thats about it.

Conversely if only 95% of Blu-ray releases were "good enough" - the fact is they aren't. I own both formats (mostly for work purposes) but buy releases on neither.

Like many I have little faith that HD DVD will be the prevailing format, but on the other hand I just don't think the Blu-ray product is good enough to invest in when quality is so variable. I'm not investing big bucks as an early adopter when the act of buying a movie becomes a lottery in terms of picture quality, and when there's no guarantee that disc features will be supported on all players.

Well, bingo! For all the reservations I have about the PQ quality of the first few years of DVD (especially having been a laser collector), there was no doubt they offered more detail, convenience, and the price was reasonable. Many of the first DVDs had recent laser and tape counterparts, so simple toggling between them produced irrefutable evidence of DVD superiority.

I'm not arguing that HD media doesn't offer demonstrably more detail than SD, it does, but so many are talking about it as if it were still all Sci-fi, and it's not. HD DVD has been out a year, BD just under a year. Neither format is apples and oranges to SD the way SD was to VHS or LD. I presume the mastering and compression process will continue to improve on both, but what we now see on average may be close to what we get.

However, in the here and now I see little reason to continually speculate on what extra space will buy down the road, as if the studios were working like beavers to go that extra mile on every title. The fact is in terms of basic AQ and PQ there is little keeping them from doing so already. If BD-50 is capable of better quality than HD DVD-30, what's standing in the way at this point?

PiP! Can't forget PiP! It is the single most important technology invented in the last 1000 years and you simply must have it NOW! :D
Unless, of course, you only own a BD player - then it's "PiP is worthless! I wouldn't want it, even if my player could support it! Those grapes are sour anyway - who would want them?"


Or am I mistaken?

Right, MS's VC-1 master plan.

I will miss my physical media though...


Were so close to that already, maybe not with hi-def, but surely with standard def. It will probably kill a chunk of the rental market, which will in turn kill the numbers in which blockbuster titles are pressed.

However I have my doubts it's going to irradiate media, as with CDs you'll see smaller runs, with fewer discounts. Pressed media is still a pretty profitable medium, were it not you wouldn't see $2 DVDs of public domain releases.

Or am I mistaken?

You are. I don't watch it on Crank just like I don't watch it on Miami Vice.

You are. I don't watch it on Crank just like I don't watch it on Miami Vice.
Ah, the infamous faux-PiP. How quaint...

Still, it's kinda like me saying that I don't want/need DTS-HD MA support because I know my Panasonic will never be able to handle it. Sour grapes and all that...

iTunes won't even supplant CDs 5 years from now.

So no, video downloads aren't replacing packaged media any time soon (like 5 or even 10 years) because the broadband infrastructure in this country won't support HD downloads. At least those comparable to packaged media now, which would mean 20-45 GB per movie.

Now they may cheat and redefine HD downloads as something in a 7 GB file but then that will be a fraud.

Yesterday and today the Amazon numbers for HD DVD went up on most charts in a noticeable spike, probably because of Children of Man and Happy Feet.

For the first time all year HD DVD has just regained the lead in several charts like # of units in top 100 and is reaching parity in several of the sales rank basket charts at the dvd wars and hd game db site.

If those trends continue, when would be the first Nielson report numbers be released that would should this weeks HD DVD sales surge?

This Sunday would be the week of April 1st.

What day will will first get the first alert data and then the final data from Nielson via HMM showing those results?

Anyone want to guess if the Nielson numbers will show a tendency toward HD DVD or Blu-ray compared to what the Amazon tracking sites will show?

(posted also in Grubert's Nielson analysis thread)

PiP! Can't forget PiP! It is the single most important technology invented in the last 1000 years and you simply must have it NOW! :D Not quite.

But it is a perfect example of how HD DVD 's standardization and higher standards for common elements such as persistent storage , internet connection and dual video stream support translates into real world benefits to consumers. :)

That's is contrast to Blu-ray's mixed combination of player types and of the lack of capability of all BD players to support advanced interactivity. That obviously makes it diffficult for studios to release titles that have things like PiP, if the hardware base does not consistently support it. ;)

Its now October 2007 for mandatory support for those items in Blu-ray now? So every player sold until then doesn't have to support those things every HD DVD player does now...... That makes it easy to design things for.......not.......

Ah, the infamous faux-PiP. How quaint...

Still, it's kinda like me saying that I don't want/need DTS-HD MA support because I know my Panasonic will never be able to handle it. Sour grapes and all that...

One picture is in the little picture. Looks the same to me. Maybe your grapes are too tart? :p Interactivity in general is a disgusting overhyped buzzword for both sides. If any HDDVD players were using their mandated internet connection for ANYTHING, you might have another leg for your interactivity table.

Its now October 2007 for mandatory support for those items in Blu-ray now? So every player sold until then doesn't have to support those things every HD DVD player does now...... That makes it easy to design things for.......not.......
Not sold - built. The can still sell 1.0 players after that date - they just can't build more.

One picture is in the little picture. Looks the same to me. Maybe your grapes are too tart? :p
I've used PiP on both formats. There's a huge difference and the experience is not the same. I'm sure that once BD starts using secondary video decoders (ala 1.1,) that the PiP will be as good or better (since it supports higher resolutions for the secondary video stream) than what's available right now on HD DVD. That day hasn't come yet (and indeed was pushed back a few months.)

It does reek of sour grapes that partisans (on both sides) deride the features that their format of choice is not currently providing, yet they will embrace those same features if/when their format starts supporting them.

Right, MS's VC-1 master plan.

I will miss my physical media though... I think a lot of people would also.

Even if downloads are technically possible for everything, an optical disc with the base content may still be preferred by the majority of consumers, may of which would not trust the studios on pure downloaded content.

There is a lot to be said about having the shiny disc as a physical token of ownership and for the collectible aspect of possessing a physical movie library.

IMHO, the model may shift to a disc with DRM being supplemented with network downloaded and supplemental content, but a physical disc or created copy would still be available for consumers, even if the technology supported pure downloading or streaming of HD content.

A smaller VC-1 being shifted around the network or being downloaded is not a bad thing though. I like that part of the M$ Borg plan for world domination. ;)

A smaller VC-1 being shifted around the network or being downloaded is not a bad thing though. I like that part of the M$ Borg plan for world domination. ;)

Not for all the tea in China. :rolleyes:

Not quite.

But it is a perfect example of how HD DVD 's standardization and higher standards for common elements such as persistent storage , internet connection and dual video stream support translates into real world benefits to consumers. :)

That's is contrast to Blu-ray's mixed combination of player types and of the lack of capability of all BD players to support advanced interactivity. That obviously makes it diffficult for studios to release titles that have things like PiP, if the hardware base does not consistently support it. ;)

Its now October 2007 for mandatory support for those items in Blu-ray now? So every player sold until then doesn't have to support those things every HD DVD player does now...... That makes it easy to design things for.......not.......
I thought interactivity was a requirement that Disney had placed on HD DVD? HD DVD accomodated them with the features but yet they chose to go with BR? Somebody got paid off.
"Quote Confuscious"
Is it better to pay more to get less or
pay less to get more

Originally Posted by Kosty
A smaller VC-1 being shifted around the network or being downloaded is not a bad thing though. I like that part of the M$ Borg plan for world domination. Not for all the tea in China. :rolleyes: Better than the $ony plan for world domination using MPEG-2 being carried by sneaker net on a Blu-ray disc. :D

I thought interactivity was a requirement that Disney had placed on HD DVD? HD DVD accomodated them with the features but yet they chose to go with BR? Somebody got paid off.

"Quote Confuscious"
Is it better to pay more to get less or
pay less to get morePatience. Disney takes a long view and is in no hurry. ;)

Thanks b2b. I've corrected the chart.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10130427#post10130427

Please feel free to bring legal action against me if you feel wronged. ;)

This issue has been resolved. But it would be nice if people would honor other persons copyrighted work.

And a bit of advice. Never invite anyone to bring lawyers into your life. At sometime or another, someone will grant you your wish and you will curse the day that it comes true... ;)

b2b

So MS is no longer talking about managed copy?

Yeah why copy off discs when the future is lower bitrate downloads?

Oh and then after that it will be IPTV.

Make it two. Most of Universal's 2007 titles will be English/French only, much to the chagrin of the Latin American market (and my fellow Spanish enthusiasts). To add insult to injury, combo titles will have Spanish dub and subtitles on the SD side, but not the HD side. How twisted is that?
Dang. I think I need a shower. :(

Some people - like you - somehow think all one needs is lossless for audio nirvana. This puts things in perpspective. As so many have noted higher bit death is better than low bit deapth lossless.

BTW, if you want transparent sound, you better hope the guy behind the mixing board is a genius. Personally never thought anything with a mixing board can be transparent - I'm a minimalist when it comes to audio. I think audio is so processed in movies anyway, it really doesn't matter. This is just another tool in the format war. Thats about it.
I'm responding so you don't feel ignored, nataraj.

The last word on the subject is yours.

Movin' on.

:)

Gods* bless compression!

*Sorry. Just caught the season finale of BSG. Can't believe I have to wait until 2008!

Isn't BSG Universal, and isn't Universal supporting HD DVD? :p

Isn't BSG Universal, and isn't Universal supporting HD DVD? :p
Shut up!!! :p

:)

I guess my answer would be... for how long. ;)

BSG is pretty much the only reason I would feel compelled to go HD DVD, but, of course that's not good enough reason to spend that kind of dough on a dying format. ;)

J/K

Fortunately I have Universal HD and the episodes are beginning to wind up toward that finale so I'll get it again. Still waiting for my local Charter to give me the Moxi upgrade so I can add my own HDD. They said March. I'm keepin' an eye on it.

Even if downloads are technically possible for everything, an optical disc with the base content may still be preferred by the majority of consumers, may of which would not trust the studios on pure downloaded content.
Perhaps technophiles will prefer physical media, but consumers will almost certainly support whatever is most convenient for them. If they can pick up a remote and press a button they may perfer that over dedicating valuable space for media storage. Sure, we geeks look at our meda as badges of honor. They are testaments to our passion for this hobby. Do you really think that the average consumer really cares about that?

Assuming that the technical limitations we have today will still be with us in 10 or 15 years flies in the face of what decades of seeing Moore's Law in action has tought us about technology.

--Jerome

Taken from an interview in the 3/27 WSJ with Reed Hastings from Netflix:

WSJ: How important is renting HD-DVD and Blu-ray movies, the two new high-definition disc formats, for Netflix?

Hastings: Tragically small. We have all the titles on HD-DVD and Blu-ray. They're running neck-and-neck, but the total volume is less than 1% of our volume. Consumers want high-def, but the perception of a format war is freezing consumers out. Until that perception stops, very few consumers will try the new high-def discs.

Taken from an interview in the 3/27 WSJ with Reed Hastings from Netflix:

WSJ: How important is renting HD-DVD and Blu-ray movies, the two new high-definition disc formats, for Netflix?

Hastings: Tragically small. We have all the titles on HD-DVD and Blu-ray. They're running neck-and-neck, but the total volume is less than 1% of our volume. Consumers want high-def, but the perception of a format war is freezing consumers out. Until that perception stops, very few consumers will try the new high-def discs.
Nice find!

But wait, I thought the format war was a good thing? ;)

I must admit, I did think that Blu-ray would be leading in the rental market. Of course his words are a bit vague, but I would think if Blu-ray were renting 2:1 like they're selling, he maybe would've said so.

but the total volume is less than 1% of our volume.

I guess similar to sell-through.

But wait, I thought the format war was a good thing?

Depends on whether you want a lot of rentals or better hidef formats and better PQ. My preference would be the latter (for now) but I guess Hastings would focus on rentals.

Nice find!

But wait, I thought the format war was a good thing? ;)

I must admit, I did think that Blu-ray would be leading in the rental market. Of course his words are a bit vague, but I would think if Blu-ray were renting 2:1 like they're selling, he maybe would've said so.

At some point or another the studios will have to pick which format to support on an exclusive basis or they can kiss the profits from packaged media goodbye. I would guess that time is about 12 months away. By this time next year (2008) they will have picked their horse to bet on and barring any changes in format support between now and then Blu-ray will be the clear format of choice for Hollywood.

Nothing is certain at this point in time and maybe the hordes of Chinese HD-DVD players for $99 dollars will appear for the 2007 holiday season. But all of the realities of commerce suggest that is not possible within that time frame. One way or another, Hollywood will have to make a choice and Blu-ray is the better one for the long term if Hollywood wants to control their future without depending on networks, software and Microsoft dictating how they sell their products in the marketplace.

b2b

But all of the realities of commerce suggest that is not possible within that time frame.
b2b

What are these realities of commerce of which you speak?

Yesterday and today the Amazon numbers for HD DVD went up on most charts in a noticeable spike, probably because of Children of Man and Happy Feet.

For the first time all year HD DVD has just regained the lead in several charts like # of units in top 100 and is reaching parity in several of the sales rank basket charts at the dvd wars and hd game db site.

If those trends continue, when would be the first Nielson report numbers be released that would should this weeks HD DVD sales surge?

This Sunday would be the week of April 1st.

What day will will first get the first alert data and then the final data from Nielson via HMM showing those results?

Anyone want to guess if the Nielson numbers will show a tendency toward HD DVD or Blu-ray compared to what the Amazon tracking sites will show?

(posted also in Grubert's Nielson analysis thread)

The question becomes, if HD-DVD takes the lead again, with less players than what Blu-Ray has in market ... will the Blu-Ray folks just close up shop and throw in the towel like they suggested the HD-DVD folks do? :confused:

What are these realities of commerce of which you speak?

If you think that $99 dollar HD-DVD players will be here for the 2007 holiday season then I wish you well. ;)

b2b

The question becomes, if HD-DVD takes the lead again, with less players than what Blu-Ray has in market ... will the Blu-Ray folks just close up shop and throw in the towel like they suggested the HD-DVD folks do? :confused:
If HD DVD takes back the SI lead AND runs weekly sales shares of 2:1+ for several months straight, I would be pretty concerned, yes. ;)

Personally, I've made my opinion known that we won't, likely have a clear winner until, at least Christmastime and I, of course voted Blu-ray in the Gentleman's Wager Poll.

Here is something interesting.

http://www.thelookandsoundofperfect.com/_pdf/030207_warner.pdf

So far, WHV hasn’t used Blu-ray’s BD-Java interactivity on any of its
titles -- although studios Disney and Fox have released some. WHV
has released HD DVDs with that format’s HDi interactivity. Asked why
WHV hasn’t issued interactive Blu-ray titles, Nickerson was
circumspect. “BD-J authoring is still very early on, in what I’d describe
as only ‘hand-crafted’ tools. If you’re looking for off-the-shelf tools,
you’ll be looking for a long time.”

May be I should start a new thread with this sensational topic - "Sony : US has massive land and cheap people". But here it goes ... an interview with Sony's UK managing director Ray Maguire.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=23722

If you take what's considered to be the most expensive and the least expensive – consider the US with its massive land and cheap people.

At some point or another the studios will have to pick which format to support on an exclusive basis or they can kiss the profits from packaged media goodbye. I would guess that time is about 12 months away.
b2b
DVD? :eek:

May be I should start a new thread with this sensational topic - "Sony : US has massive land and cheap people". But here it goes ... an interview with Sony's UK managing director Ray Maguire.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=23722

I read that too, Sony's new PR strategy appears to be saying things that will cork your A$$ on regular basis. :confused:

Not quite.

But it is a perfect example of how HD DVD 's standardization and higher standards for common elements such as persistent storage , internet connection and dual video stream support translates into real world benefits to consumers. :)

That's is contrast to Blu-ray's mixed combination of player types and of the lack of capability of all BD players to support advanced interactivity. That obviously makes it diffficult for studios to release titles that have things like PiP, if the hardware base does not consistently support it. ;)

Its now October 2007 for mandatory support for those items in Blu-ray now? So every player sold until then doesn't have to support those things every HD DVD player does now...... That makes it easy to design things for.......not.......

Well put Kosty. I read the recent videobusiness article talking about the issues with multiple Blu-Ray standards.

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6427147.html

The closing portion was most interesting to me.

“The whole problem comes in when some manufacturers toe the minimum line and some others might make twice the minimum [functionality] on players,” said Ling. “In my view, I shouldn’t have to know what every single player can do. Rather than downgrade my creative vision for the lowest common denominator player, I want to create something [that fully realizes Blu-ray abilities].”

The question remains, how much effort will studios put into using the special features of BD that are still in the process of emerging? Especially when those features are only usable on a subset of players and put compatibility at risk.

The new Amazon data you mentioned was very interesting as well. I guess the BD coupons and sales are winding down.

http://www.eproductwars.com/dvd/index.cfm

The new Amazon data you mentioned was very interesting as well. I guess the BD coupons and sales are winding down.

http://www.eproductwars.com/dvd/index.cfm
I'm sure I don't have to tell you that it's very normal for sales to sag after a record breaking release.

The new Amazon data you mentioned was very interesting as well. I guess the BD coupons and sales are winding down.

http://www.eproductwars.com/dvd/index.cfmOther than the time with the sale which pushed Blu-ray up on Amazon, Blu-ray is looking strong compared to just about any other time. It is just that HD DVD is doing better than I've ever seen them do on there. At least as far as average for their top 10. As far as number in the top 1000, they've been higher than they are currently quite a bit in the past (around October or so).

--Darin

Unless, of course, you only own a BD player - then it's "PiP is worthless! I wouldn't want it, even if my player could support it! Those grapes are sour anyway - who would want them?"


Or am I mistaken?Well your mistaken at least when it comes to me. I personally believe that PiP could be a big draw for consumers and that is in fact one of the reasons I prefer Blu-ray over HD DVD. While HD DVD required PiP decoding from the beginning they really limited it in terms of what it could do so that cheaper decoding chips could be used. Blu-ray on the other hand allows for much higher data rates when it came to PiP decoding, which is why they didn't require it in Blu-ray players until later. Personally I care more about the long term potential of a video format and in my opinion Blu-ray took the harder but better path. Or to put it another way there was good reason why the same Microsoft employees on this forum who have been promoting SD PiP actually argued against HD PiP. If someone truly cares about PiP maybe they should ask themselves which HD format really picked the better long term path for it. Just my thoughts on the matter of PiP decoding.


For the first time all year HD DVD has just regained the lead in several charts like # of units in top 100 and is reaching parity in several of the sales rank basket charts at the dvd wars and hd game db site.Well HD DVD is certainly doing better at Amazon, which is not surprising following the sale on Blu-ray titles and the HD DVD pre-order for the Matrix trilogy, but at the moment the only chart I see it leading in is the top 100 chart.

DVD? :eek:

That's good news for b2b. He owns lots of DVD players, but no BD or HD-DVD players. ;)

Or has that changed b2b?

Other than the time with the sale which pushed Blu-ray up on Amazon, Blu-ray is looking strong compared to just about any other time. It is just that HD DVD is doing better than I've ever seen them do on there. At least as far as average for their top 10. As far as number in the top 1000, they've been higher than they are currently quite a bit in the past (around October or so).

--Darin

You're correct Darin, my mistake. That's good news for HD in general, and another positive indicator for universal players.

Well HD DVD is certainly doing better at Amazon, which is not surprising following the sale on Blu-ray titles and the HD DVD pre-order for the Matrix trilogy, but at the moment the only chart I see it leading in is the top 100 chart.
Is Children Of Men doing well? I thought it might be one of those sleepers that did better biz on disk than in the theaters.

May be I should start a new thread with this sensational topic - "Sony : US has massive land and cheap people". But here it goes ... an interview with Sony's UK managing director Ray Maguire.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=23722
I resemble that remark, thats why im waiting for the April 1st price reduction . :D

Is Children Of Men doing well? I thought it might be one of those sleepers that did better biz on disk than in the theaters.
Rotten Tomatoes gives it a 90 something. That's pretty stellar. I picked it up today (DVD), well, rented it; exchanged a mailer disc for it at my local BB. I might watch it tonight, if I can find the time.

Is Children Of Men doing well? I thought it might be one of those sleepers that did better biz on disk than in the theaters.Well on HD DVD it is doing rather well and has reached an Amazon ranking of 18 at the moment. Also something to note is that you can track how well an individual disc is doing by going to the hdgamedb website (http://www.hdgamedb.com/amazon/history.aspx) and choosing "custom movie vs movie comparison" for the Comparison Type. All you do is only select one movie to track and you can see how well it has been doing in terms of Amazon ranking. Also personally I haven't seen the movie yet but I will probably rent it sometime in the future.

I am surprised at how well many of the HD DVD's are doing. I wonder what will happen next week when the HD DVD stand alone players drop $100 and the X360 add on drops $70. I would expect this should help increase HD DVD sales as well.

Rotten Tomatoes gives it a 90 something. That's pretty stellar. I picked it up today (DVD), well, rented it; exchanged a mailer disc for it at my local BB. I might watch it tonight, if I can find the time.

Give us a review.

Ahh, but more than a few people in the biz have suggested that they'd prefer lossy 24-bit over lossless but at a lower depth.


I would not dissagree with them, have I ever said I want remastered to lowewr quality lossless?

I am surprised at how well many of the HD DVD's are doing. I wonder what will happen next week when the HD DVD stand alone players drop $100 and the X360 add on drops $70. I would expect this should help increase HD DVD sales as well.Note if you map Happy Feet, despite the HD DVD being $4 more expensive, it's still selling better than the BD. Maybe it's just a movie that PS3 owners wouldn't normally watch.
It'll be interesting to watch the next couple of months as the tables turn and HD DVD releases more movies than BD for a while, especially with all the mysterious BD title delays (Poor Fox... anyone want to lay odds on "Night at the museum" making their date? It's the only one left ;))

I'm responding so you don't feel ignored, nataraj.


Thanks a lot.

Makes you wonder about new posters who are strident fan boys ...

http://slashdot.org/articles/07/03/27/2153205.shtml

"PayPerPost venture capitalist and board member Dan Rua defends the ethics of paid editorials. He claims PayPerPost is 'good for the internet' and is not simply blackhat SEO. Rua states that PayPerPost has blown past its milestone of 15,500 bloggers, and is earning hundreds of thousands in monthly revenue. He describes PayPerPost's most viral product yet — ReviewMyPost — which pays people to link to paid posts. The LA Times accuses PayPerPost of paying bloggers to make up fictional testimonials. For instance, the Times reports that a law firm is using PayPerPost to pay bloggers to write that a certain birth control patch is killing and injuring young women. Rua does not deny these claims, but simply states they are the exception and not the rule. How long before the FTC follows through on their promise to enforce blogger disclosure?"

Makes you wonder about new posters who are strident fan boys ...

http://slashdot.org/articles/07/03/27/2153205.shtml


This is puke-making news :( :mad: :( :mad:

Rotten Tomatoes gives it a 90 something. That's pretty stellar. I picked it up today (DVD), well, rented it; exchanged a mailer disc for it at my local BB. I might watch it tonight, if I can find the time.


The HD DVD is headed my way, though with "Super Saver" shipping it could take it's time.

I wonder what will happen next week when the HD DVD stand alone players drop $100 and the X360 add on drops $70.Just curious but why do you believe that the HD DVD add-on will be selling for $130 MSRP next week? I have been keeping up on the news about the Xbox 360 Elite and I haven't heard anything about a price decrease for the HD DVD add-on.


Note if you map Happy Feet, despite the HD DVD being $4 more expensive, it's still selling better than the BD. Maybe it's just a movie that PS3 owners wouldn't normally watch.bkilian, it is a bit early to say that since we don't know yet which version will sell better in the first week.


It'll be interesting to watch the next couple of months as the tables turn and HD DVD releases more movies than BD for a while, especially with all the mysterious BD title delays (Poor Fox... anyone want to lay odds on "Night at the museum" making their date? It's the only one left ;))bkilian, you might not know that Studio Canal delayed their second wave of HD DVD titles (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10059013&&#post10059013) until this May because of the AACS break. With that in mind it seems rather likely that Fox might be delaying their Blu-ray titles for the same reason.

bkilian, you might not know that Studio Canal delayed their second wave of HD DVD titles (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10059013&&#post10059013) until this May because of the AACS break. With that in mind it seems rather likely that Fox might be delaying their Blu-ray titles for the same reason.

It does seem sort of unlikely that either format will release a wave of prime properties before the AACS fix is out.

- Tom

May be I should start a new thread with this sensational topic - "Sony : US has massive land and cheap people". But here it goes ... an interview with Sony's UK managing director Ray Maguire.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=23722

I believe he was misquoted ... probably due to the fact that "journalists are lazy" ... :p

I'm sure I don't have to tell you that it's very normal for sales to sag after a record breaking release.

How come this pass wasn't given to the HD-DVD camp? :confused:

I believe he was misquoted ... probably due to the fact that "journalists are lazy" ... :p

Link pls ... or is it just your belief with no backing ?

Link pls ... or is it just your belief with no backing ?

From the same article:


Nowadays, with how the media works, not only does information fly around at the speed of light, so does mis-information. With blogs on the increase, people's thought processes are transferred from one place to another and picked up by people who might be lazy when it comes to finding out whether something is true or not. The old adage of never let the truth get in the way of a good story is probably more prevalent than it has been before.


Interesting how he mentions bloggers and misinformation side-by-side like that ... when that's been one of their marketing strategies forever. :rolleyes:

any word of where that profile logo/education document is? Is it's release likewise pushed back?I don't recall that this was ever committed to, just that it was a desire on your part?
Finally, while we are on the subject of profiles, any comments on the implications for BD-Live players? Does it remain optional? If -Video1.1 is delayed 4 months, any ideas how long before we see Live players?BD-Video delays are due primarily to the new chipsets required to support the enhanced secondary video requirements. I don't anticipate additional delays for BD-Live (which remains optional), I'd expect to see players this year.

I'll ask one more time, show me the BR titles that clearly bear out BRs bandwidth advantage. I'll make it easy...name one in which we can attribute these differences to bandwidth.Nine Inch Nails. It has seamless branching on Blu-ray, it doesn't on HD DVD, for reasons referred to as technical limitations on the HD DVD side by the disc producers.

- Talk

Do we know that POTC is not two 50GB disks?50GB + 25GB discs.

- Talk

Not sold - built. The can still sell 1.0 players after that date - they just can't build more.They can build more. They just can't build a new model which still only complies with 1.0.

They can build more. They just can't build a new model which still only complies with 1.0.
Really? What a scumbag loop-hole that is. Way to go, BDA. Way to go.

Strange that this is the first time this particular detail has been mentioned - or am I wrong and missed the other posts where this was discussed? Have you known about this loop-hole all this time? If so, why wasn't it brought up when everyone was discussing the profiles?

I don't recall that this was ever committed to, just that it was a desire on your part?
So educating potential customers is still pretty low on the BDA's list of priorities? At least they're consistent...

If you think that $99 dollar HD-DVD players will be here for the 2007 holiday season then I wish you well. ;)

b2b

If you read my rather short post thoroughly, you'll note that I didn't say they would. I didn't even imply it. I simply asked a question. I tend to want to hear the details of people's opinions when they make (what I consider to be) overly broad, all-encompassing statements about a topic I'm interested in.

So, to re-ask my question in perhaps a less ambiguous way:

"Although I'm not disagreeing with you, can you share your perspective on these 'realities' to which you refer? Specifically, what prevents this (or something like this -- i.e., not $99, but maybe $149) from happening?"

Makes you wonder about new posters who are strident fan boys ...

http://slashdot.org/articles/07/03/27/2153205.shtml
Yeah. That is kinda' funny.

I'm laughin' all the way to the bank! :D

How come this pass wasn't given to the HD-DVD camp? :confused:
To what "record breaking release" are you referring?

To what "record breaking release" are you referring?
Maybe he's referring to all of the "record-setting" releases from the HD DVD format. Or did you think the records that CR broke were set by BD titles?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsaliga
I'll ask one more time, show me the BR titles that clearly bear out BRs bandwidth advantage. I'll make it easy...name one in which we can attribute these differences to bandwidth.

Nine Inch Nails. It has seamless branching on Blu-ray, it doesn't on HD DVD, for reasons referred to as technical limitations on the HD DVD side by the disc producers.

- Talk

Is branching effected by bandwidth? Just a technical question and not a slice at your answer. I don't know the details about how branching works in the bitstream and how much bandwidth branching would eat up if it was in the stream.

If you read my rather short post thoroughly, you'll note that I didn't say they would. I didn't even imply it. I simply asked a question. I tend to want to hear the details of people's opinions when they make (what I consider to be) overly broad, all-encompassing statements about a topic I'm interested in.

So, to re-ask my question in perhaps a less ambiguous way:

"Although I'm not disagreeing with you, can you share your perspective on these 'realities' to which you refer? Specifically, what prevents this (or something like this -- i.e., not $99, but maybe $149) from happening?"

DVD & HD-DVD IP royalties = $40
SoC = $40
HD-DVD drive = $100

With those three costs (estimates, YMMV), you are way past where $149 supplies any profit for building the device.

b2b

From the same article:



Interesting how he mentions bloggers and misinformation side-by-side like that ... when that's been one of their marketing strategies forever. :rolleyes:


Amen, they reap what they've sewn. Poor misunderstood Sony :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

DVD & HD-DVD IP royalties = $40
SoC = $40
HD-DVD drive = $100

With those three costs, you are way past where $149 supplies any profit for building the device.

b2b
Where did those prices come from?

Yeah. That is kinda' funny.

I'm laughin' all the way to the bank! :D

Now, just so I'm not misreading you, your not really condoning Viral Marketing right?

I don't care who's side does this, it moves any arena from one where a dose of healthy skepticism is required, to one where you can't attach any credibility to anything you read. It ought to be illegal IMO.

Where did those prices come from?

All estimates, YMMV.

Maybe Kjack would comment if he thinks any of those numbers are way out of line.

b2b

I don't recall that this was ever committed to, just that it was a desire on your part?


Well, as you said here (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9285620&&#post9285620) back in late December:

I'm not drawing a distinction between knowing about network support versus knowing about BD-Live. Whether or not a consumer knows what BD-Live is, if they know that some content will make use of a network connection and that some players don't support a network connection, I think that qualifies as an educated consumer.

As has been reported elsewhere activity is taking place within the BDA to help better educate consumers as to the profiles, so we're on the right track.

At the time, you were referring to his post of Alex's in the News thread:

-- There's a formal Blu-ray Disc LOGO GUIDE available now for BDA members...lots of pretty graphics and such...and there's a Blu-ray Disc Indication Guide, which "define(s) common indications related to Blu-ray Disc to help consumers distinguish the types of medias and its compatibility with the hardware"...so, the BDA is finally stepping up to the plate to help the consumer figure out BD-Video vs. BD-Live and the such...about time...the helpful consumer guide is available for download at http://www.blu-raydisc.info/license...censee_page.htm, but I think limiting its access to BDA members only will cut into its usefulness a bit...

So, committed? No. But you said it was "on track" several months ago already. To the best of my knowledge it's never seen the light of day. And now there's more confusion as dated are getting pushed around.

Incidentally, it seems like more than a desire on MY part... as you said (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9382071&&#post9382071):

As I've said before, I would have preferred to see more transparency in how player and format specs are publicized.

So I was rather hoping that when you said "... activity IS taking place... to educate consumers" that this was much more that a non-committal stance by the BDA.

They can build more. They just can't build a new model which still only complies with 1.0.

Which means without any logo'ing/consumer education, along with not-really-published deadlines that are subject to change, and finally completely optional profile levels, it continues to be a real crapshoot.

Been away, so this is late to the audio/BW debate.

For the multiple language fans - how does BD support the ~25 official EU languages? You want lossless too? How many users have >$5k audio systems to hear a difference? How many masters deserve anything more than DTS? How many listening environments are free of extraneous noise that masks any difference? How many "seniors" who can hear a difference? How many can tell the difference if they hear it?

HD-DVD - 99.99% movie perfect; BD - perfect for computer storage

Which means without any logo'ing/consumer education, along with not-really-published deadlines that are subject to change, and finally completely optional profile levels, it continues to be a real crapshoot.
And it's not like the date can't change. It already has once. Who's to say that in August or September they won't push it back to January or February of 2008? I'm certainly not willing to take Bill's word for it, seeing as how he told you (us) in no uncertain terms back in December that there were no discussions going on about pushing the date back (even though Amir knew what was really happening.)

That Slash Dot post about PayPerPost mentions neither Sony nor Microsoft.

Or did I miss something?

Well both sides do it and we know about MS giving HD-DVD equipped laptops to "influential bloggers" earlier this year.

Is that what we're referring to?

All estimates, YMMV.

Maybe Kjack would comment if he thinks any of those numbers are way out of line.

b2b

Thanks for the estimates . . . that's the kind of information I'm looking to understand. I guess my thoughts were more along the lines of: the HD DVD group could reduce/subsidize/eliminate the licensing fees in the short run for market penetration (poof, there goes $40 of cost per player), in much the same way that it has been speculated that Sony might have done with BR I/P licensing. I would also be curious to know what the "made in China" costs were for the other items listed, or if they can even be made in China (thinking the SOC is a "no", but the drive . . . maybe). If one or either of these major components could be made in China, then a $149 player might not be out of reach, especially when one considers China's built in currency subsidy . . .

I'd really like to see the impact of a $149 Chinese made HD DVD player in the marketplace. Would it actually accelerate adoption? Would it make more clear the impact of studio alliances? I think there are a lot of dynamics being assumed, and I'd just like to see them play out sooner rather than later.

Where is the installed base for HDTVs?

The mainstream brands, 40 inches or greater priced above $2500?

Or no-name brands and Costco/Walmart specials like Vizios for under $2000?

If the former, how many people want to hook up their nice Panasonics or even Samsungs to a cheap $150, no-name Chinese player, as opposed to a name-brand player which will still be closer to $500?

bkilian, it is a bit early to say that since we don't know yet which version will sell better in the first week.I meant mapping it at hdgamedb.com. Go to http://www.hdgamedb.com/amazon/history.aspx, choose "custom movie vs custom movie", select the Happy Feet HD DVD combo for red, select the Happy Feet BD for blue, and select "past 7 days" for timespan. You will see that at all times in the past 7 days, the HD has had a higher rating than the BD, and we're not talking in the thousands here, we're talking top 100. If you go to 14 days, then there is a single day when the BD was doing better. The graph says nothing about the actual numbers sold, just that according to Amazon, at each point hdgamedb polled them, the HD was selling better than the BD.
This was a surprising result to me, since it's mostly been the other way around for recent Warner titles.

bkilian, you might not know that Studio Canal delayed their second wave of HD DVD titles (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10059013&&#post10059013) until this May because of the AACS break. With that in mind it seems rather likely that Fox might be delaying their Blu-ray titles for the same reason.Unlike Studio Canal, Fox has given no reasons for their delays, thus "mysterious". For what it's worth, I agree that AACS is probably the reason Fox is delaying, they've always been one of the most risk-averse studios.

Thanks for the estimates . . . that's the kind of information I'm looking to understand. I guess my thoughts were more along the lines of: the HD DVD group could reduce/subsidize/eliminate the licensing fees in the short run for market penetration (poof, there goes $40 of cost per player), in much the same way that it has been speculated that Sony might have done with BR I/P licensing. I would also be curious to know what the "made in China" costs were for the other items listed, or if they can even be made in China (thinking the SOC is a "no", but the drive . . . maybe). If one or either of these major components could be made in China, then a $149 player might not be out of reach, especially when one considers China's built in currency subsidy . . .

I'd really like to see the impact of a $149 Chinese made HD DVD player in the marketplace. Would it actually accelerate adoption? Would it make more clear the impact of studio alliances? I think there are a lot of dynamics being assumed, and I'd just like to see them play out sooner rather than later.

Actually the IP royalties costs are the line item that are least likely to drop. Hundreds of companies have patents in the various things that go into these products. There are separate royalty pools for MPEG2, H.264 (AVC) and VC-1. And that's just for the video codecs. The MPEG-LA group is working on a Blu-ray pool also.

http://www.mpegla.com/pid/bluray/

A tremendous amount of negotiations go into forming a patent pool to determine the cost and what the cut for each company will be. Once those agreements are made and a license cost is determined, they don't have tendency to change (get cheaper) very often.

b2b

Where is the installed base for HDTVs?

The mainstream brands, 40 inches or greater priced above $2500?

Or no-name brands and Costco/Walmart specials like Vizios for under $2000?

If the former, how many people want to hook up their nice Panasonics or even Samsungs to a cheap $150, no-name Chinese player, as opposed to a name-brand player which will still be closer to $500?

I gotta' believe that the highest penetration (volume) is in the latter group of "HDTVs" (in quotes because some of these so-called HDTVs look just awful to me) purchased primarily at Wal-Mart, Target or the like. But that's just my gut feeling. Maybe the volume is at the high end of the market . . . If it is in the latter group, then cheap Chinese players are indeed the right complement to cheap HDTVs.

Actually the IP royalties costs are the line item that are least likely to drop. Hundreds of companies have patents in the various things that go into these products. There are separate royalty pools for MPEG2, H.264 (AVC) and VC-1. And that's just for the video codecs. The MPEG-LA group is working on a Blu-ray pool also.

http://www.mpegla.com/pid/bluray/

A tremendous amount of negotiations go into forming a patent pool to determine the cost and what the cut for each company will be. Once those agreements are made and a license cost is determined, they don't have tendency to change (get cheaper) very often.

b2b

Understand you point, and I don't really know much about this topic area (you seem to), but if I were Toshiba, or quite frankly even Microsoft and I wanted to "win" the format war, I could see how it would be to my advantage to reduce, relax or temporarily waive I/P, licensing, royalties to gain market penetration, especially when the manufacturers in question are Chinese and I may be able to get a foothold in that market (irrespective of the fact that the Chinese have their own HD format now) or at least "play nice" with the people who are going to be manufacturing my stuff for me. Even the consortium or pool of I/P owners aside, seems to me that Toshiba and Microsoft alone/together, have enough skin in this game (don't know how much I/P they have in it though) to want to get market penetration for the long-term. Having said that, I'm ignorant as to what % of which technologies in HD DVD are owned by who and how expensive they are to license. Maybe Toshiba and M/S own 80% of the I/P, but it's mostly "cheap" (on a relative scale) I/P to begin with? Or maybe the two own 25% of the I/P, but its the critical, expensive portion of the I/P that makes HD DVD what it is. I really don't know the answer to those questions though . . . if you do, I'd appreciate your input.

I think this idea has been bandied (sp?) about a bit RE: Sony and BR. If Sony owns most or a significant portion of the BR I/P, however, it certainly facilitates them waiving such royalties, as it's far easier to manage. Again, don't know and am not certain. Just sorta' thinking out loud here.

Now, just so I'm not misreading you, your not really condoning Viral Marketing right?

I don't care who's side does this, it moves any arena from one where a dose of healthy skepticism is required, to one where you can't attach any credibility to anything you read. It ought to be illegal IMO.
No Tim. Just my sense of humor.

This news may be confirmation, but it's certainly not surprising. I've seen plenty of B.S. posts from low count posters to be completely certain of it's existence, nay prevalence.

In fact, I brought it up in a thread, then some PMs with Kosty. I was trying to propose methods to combat it. At the time I was pretty steamed. He reminded me of just how good the Mods are at cleaning things up so I dropped it.

I pretty well take it in stride these days. It certainly is a terrible thing, but there isn't much we can do to eradicate it. It's something that will be with us for a long time. We all just need to be diligent and call it when we see it.


EDIT: BTW, the aforementioned post that got me "steamed" was one where the poster was pro Blu-ray.
.

Maybe he's referring to all of the "record-setting" releases from the HD DVD format. Or did you think the records that CR broke were set by BD titles?
Sorry Steeb. Must've missed 'em.

Personally, until recently, I thought the main focus of discussion was just how low down the Amazon rankings chain, HD optical was.

I can also tell you, with absolute certainty, that I, personally never discounted the fact that ANY spike in sales due to a big hit, would likely result in a sag thereafter. Though I would certainly not be surprised if some fanboys did... on either side of the debate.

That Slash Dot post about PayPerPost mentions neither Sony nor Microsoft.

Or did I miss something?

Well both sides do it and we know about MS giving HD-DVD equipped laptops to "influential bloggers" earlier this year.

Is that what we're referring to?
Thanks for that little reminder.

DVD & HD-DVD IP royalties = $40
SoC = $40
HD-DVD drive = $100

With those three costs (estimates, YMMV), you are way past where $149 supplies any profit for building the device.

b2bThanks for the estimates . . . that's the kind of information I'm looking to understand. I guess my thoughts were more along the lines of: the HD DVD group could reduce/subsidize/eliminate the licensing fees in the short run for market penetration (poof, there goes $40 of cost per player), in much the same way that it has been speculated that Sony might have done with BR I/P licensing. I would also be curious to know what the "made in China" costs were for the other items listed, or if they can even be made in China (thinking the SOC is a "no", but the drive . . . maybe). If one or either of these major components could be made in China, then a $149 player might not be out of reach, especially when one considers China's built in currency subsidy . . .

I'd really like to see the impact of a $149 Chinese made HD DVD player in the marketplace. Would it actually accelerate adoption? Would it make more clear the impact of studio alliances? I think there are a lot of dynamics being assumed, and I'd just like to see them play out sooner rather than later.
I think those estimates of IP Royalties and HD DVD drive are high. Or at least they soon will be.

The HD DVD drive may be at that price now but will certainly fall later this year or early next year. AFAIK that a bit high also for the IP/Royalty costs. I don't think those are $40 per player for those licenses.

I don't know about the SoC and basic hardware cost, but that seems in the ballpark although DVD players in quantity are below that in cost now. There's extra memory and more CPU/computational power needed for HD DVD over DVD so there is some incremental hardware cost over a DVD box and components.

Its almost a given that the Chinese players need to come in at least $100 below the Toshiba HD A2 to be marketable, and probably close to that at the street price. The HD A2 MSRP is/will be $399 and street will soon be $349. The Chinese players probably need to MSRP for $299 or less and street for below that to be marketable.

We'll see soon when the Chinese SoC player price points come in. :)

Sorry Steeb. Must've missed 'em.

Personally, until recently, I thought the main focus of discussion was just how low down the Amazon rankings chain, HD optical was.

I can also tell you, with absolute certainty, that I, personally never discounted the fact that ANY spike in sales due to a big hit, would likely result in a sag thereafter. Though I would certainly not be surprised if some fanboys did... on either side of the debate.
I was just busting your chops. If you think about it, the first releases had to be record-setting, since they were the first... :D

Where is the installed base for HDTVs?

The mainstream brands, 40 inches or greater priced above $2500?

Or no-name brands and Costco/Walmart specials like Vizios for under $2000?

If the former, how many people want to hook up their nice Panasonics or even Samsungs to a cheap $150, no-name Chinese player, as opposed to a name-brand player which will still be closer to $500? If I have a Wal-Marty bought Vizio brand HDTV most would not mind a Wal-Mart bought Venturer branded HD DVD player. Wal-Mart, Costco , Sam's Club or CC or BB becomes the mega brand bringing the risk protection of a mega brand and their return policy to reduce consumer risk. The retailer brand name has replaced the CE brand name in the consumers mind for a lot of those purchases.

If they don't like buying a lessor brand the $399 Toshiba MSRP on the HD A2 is that $99 step up.

In fact, I brought it up in a thread, then some PMs with Kosty. I was trying to propose methods to combat it. At the time I was pretty steamed. He reminded me of just how good the Mods are at cleaning things up so I dropped it.

I pretty well take it in stride these days. It certainly is a terrible thing, but there isn't much we can do to eradicate it. It's something that will be with us for a long time. We all just need to be diligent and call it when we see it.


EDIT: BTW, the aforementioned post that got me "steamed" was one where the poster was pro Blu-ray.
.

Glad to hear it.

I think we all have to remember that even when we do the "viral" posts for free, that HDM (using that term ;)) is really an election, not a war, and too much vitriol is only gonna drive away the electorate, which in this case could easily choose (C) None of thee above

I was just busting your chops. If you think about it, the first releases had to be record-setting, since they were the first... :D
Well, Blu-ray didn't really turn on until this year, though.

I admit, I thought it was pretty funny, but I didn't want to be too disrespectful, JIC. I am pretty conscious of the ability for we Blu-ray guys to come of as gloating these days and I try pretty hard, most of the time, to bear that in mind before posting. It's almost like a whole new form of PC.

Anyone who's overconfident, on either side, is fair game, though. ;)

Glad to hear it.

I think we all have to remember that even when we do the "viral" posts for free, that HDM (using that term ;)) is really an election, not a war, and too much vitriol is only gonna drive away the electorate, which in this case could easily choose (C) None of thee above
Roger that.

From the same article:

I'm a bit confused. You said the Sony guy was misquoted (about Americans being cheap). I asked you where is the link ... and you quote something totally different.

He wasn't misquoted. That is exactly what he said ...

Its almost a given that the Chinese players need to come in at least $100 below the Toshiba HD A2 to be marketable, and probably close to that at the street price. The HD A2 MSRP is/will be $399 and street will soon be $349. The Chinese players probably need to MSRP for $299 or less and street for below that to be marketable.

I think a $199 player is eminently possible this year. May be on black friday ....

The HD DVD drive may be at that price now but will certainly fall later this year or early next year. AFAIK that a bit high also for the IP/Royalty costs. I don't think those are $40 per player for those licenses.

Does anyone know what the DVD royalty costs are ? Do they have any $ caps per year ?

I think a $199 player is eminently possible this year. May be on black friday ....

MSRP? Sale prices need not apply as the floodgates are then open on all sorts of rewards, rebates, giveaways, financing incentives, etc...

MSRP? Sale prices need not apply as the floodgates are then open on all sorts of rewards, rebates, giveaways, financing incentives, etc...

Street - without having to get a credit card or some such stupid scheme.

BTW, those who think Blu-ray has won because of 2:1 sales advantage should check PS3 status in Japan. Wii has just crossed 2M and PS3 stands at 829,000. Ofcourse the weekly sales show a near 4:1 advantage for Wii.

http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/7805/jpweeklyfo7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Well if Toshiba sells their players for $199, then FTC might wonder about dumping.

Really? What a scumbag loop-hole that is. Way to go, BDA. Way to go.Though CE manufacturers may continue selling their inventory of BD-Video 1.0 players you are being very pessimistic if you think they are going to keep on making them after October 31st. By that point I think they will be far more interested in making and selling BD-Video 1.1 and BD-Live players.


Strange that this is the first time this particular detail has been mentioned - or am I wrong and missed the other posts where this was discussed?It has been discussed a few times before as can be seen in this post (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=8705242&&#post8705242).


BTW, those who think Blu-ray has won because of 2:1 sales advantage should check PS3 status in Japan.When it comes to Blu-ray status in Japan wouldn't it make a lot more sense to check on how well Blu-ray and HD DVD are selling there?


I meant mapping it at hdgamedb.com. Go to http://www.hdgamedb.com/amazon/history.aspx, choose "custom movie vs custom movie", select the Happy Feet HD DVD combo for red, select the Happy Feet BD for blue, and select "past 7 days" for timespan. You will see that at all times in the past 7 days, the HD has had a higher rating than the BD, and we're not talking in the thousands here, we're talking top 100.Just to point this out but you are talking about pre-order ranking and the actual movie came out only yesterday. Even for checking only on Amazon rankings it might make a bit more sense to see how Happy Feet sells in the first week of its release.

Well if Toshiba sells their players for $199, then FTC might wonder about dumping.

What for ? We don't have any US DVD (let alone HD DVD) manufacturers.

If a $35 DVD player doesn't attract dumping charges, why should $199 hd dvd player attract such charges ?

When it comes to Blu-ray status in Japan wouldn't it make a lot more sense to check on how well Blu-ray and HD DVD are selling there?

Nice try. I was talking about PS3 status.

And it's not like the date can't change. It already has once. Who's to say that in August or September they won't push it back to January or February of 2008? I'm certainly not willing to take Bill's word for it, seeing as how he told you (us) in no uncertain terms back in December that there were no discussions going on about pushing the date back (even though Amir knew what was really happening.)

I don't think they'll miss the opportunity of the Holiday 2007 Season. Perhaps that's just one more reason to be less-than-forthcoming on the details though. Get more people to buy without knowing what they're really buying. :(

Nice try. I was talking about PS3 status.I see, so you just decided to post how well the PS3 was selling in Japan. Just curious but are you going to do that for the Xbox 360 as well?

I'm a bit confused. You said the Sony guy was misquoted (about Americans being cheap). I asked you where is the link ... and you quote something totally different.

He wasn't misquoted. That is exactly what he said ...

Ohh ... I should have thrown in a /sarcasm or a /smiley tag.

My point was that he also mentioned that journalists/media/bloggers were lazy. I know he wasn't misquoted ... I was just envisioning a 'future statement' where he would say he was misquoted by those lazy misguided journalists and bloggers. ;)

It was just he seemed to be blaming Sony's Bad Press on the journalists ... that's all ... ;)

Nine Inch Nails. It has seamless branching on Blu-ray, it doesn't on HD DVD, for reasons referred to as technical limitations on the HD DVD side by the disc producers.

- Talk

Can you tell us anything about what the seamless branching is used for on the Blu-ray disc?

DVD & HD-DVD IP royalties = $40
SoC = $40
HD-DVD drive = $100

With those three costs (estimates, YMMV), you are way past where $149 supplies any profit for building the device.

b2b


Can you tell us how you derived your estimates?

I'm doubtful we'll see even a $199 player this year (but you never know). At the same time I'm skeptical of your numbers though.

I could see how it would be to my advantage to reduce, relax or temporarily waive I/P, licensing, royalties to gain market penetration, especially when the manufacturers in question are Chinese and I may be able to get a foothold in that market
I think it is huge the Chinese are going for their own (HD-DVD like) format. This will create muscle against piracy there, that can and will be used to slow HD and BD piracy there too. The studios get a huge new market, and we get the basis of low cost HD-DVD machines. MS can waive VC-1 royalties, can anyone waive AVC? MPEG-2 isn't even a runner-up.

I think it is huge the Chinese are going for their own (HD-DVD like) format. This will create muscle against piracy there, that can and will be used to slow HD and BD piracy there too. The studios get a huge new market, and we get the basis of low cost HD-DVD machines. MS can waive VC-1 royalties, can anyone waive AVC? MPEG-2 isn't even a runner-up.

I'm not sure MS can "waive" VC-1 royalties. Afterall several people have patents that go into VC-1.

But, HD DVD group is banking heavily on cheaper players and thus higher adoption. Their strategy is "content will follow adoption".

With that in mind it seems rather likely that Fox might be delaying their Blu-ray titles for the same reason.In the insider thread, paidgeek said Fox is "...working extremely hard to resolve the security issues that have stalled some of their releases" and that it is related to "AACS and BD+".

And rdjam tried to claim that the AACS security breach was an anti-HD-DVD plot! :D

I'm a bit confused. You said the Sony guy was misquoted (about Americans being cheap). I asked you where is the link ... and you quote something totally different.

He wasn't misquoted. That is exactly what he said ...
He did say that but after reading it a few times I think he was refering to cost of living. These Sony spokespeople really do have a way with words.

I'm not sure MS can "waive" VC-1 royalties. Afterall several people have patents that go into VC-1.

But, HD DVD group is banking heavily on cheaper players and thus higher adoption. Their strategy is "content will follow adoption".

16 are listed on the MPEG-LA site, including (gasp!) Sony.. :)
Q: Who are the essential patent holders ("Licensors") to the VC-1 Patent Portfolio License?

A: The VC-1 Patent Portfolio License currently includes essential patents owned by DAEWOO Electronics Corporation; France Télécom, société anonyme; Fujitsu Limited; Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V.; LG Electronics Inc.; Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. (Panasonic); Microsoft Corporation; Mitsubishi Electric Corporation; Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corporation (NTT); Pantech&Curitel Communications, Inc.; Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.; Sharp Corporation; Sony Corporation; Telenor ASA; Toshiba Corporation; and Victor Company of Japan, Ltd. (JVC).

There may be others not participating in the MPEG-LA (VC-1) pool also..

b2b

"waive" is the right word, even if MS can't do it. No need for quotes.

I think it is huge the Chinese are going for their own (HD-DVD like) format. This will create muscle against piracy there, that can and will be used to slow HD and BD piracy there too. The studios get a huge new market, and we get the basis of low cost HD-DVD machines. MS can waive VC-1 royalties, can anyone waive AVC? MPEG-2 isn't even a runner-up.

The Chinese are using their own codec - AVS.

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6423230.html

THE ONLY SIGNIFICANT difference between the China-only HD DVD and the version used in the rest of the world is the codec used to encode content.

In the rest of the world, HD DVD supports VC-1, H.264 and MPEG2. The China-only version supports only the Chinese-developed Advanced Video System (AVS).

In nearly every other respect, including the physical specifications of the disc, the interactive layer and the optics, the two versions are identical.

The purpose of the China-only version is to spare Chinese manufacturers the licensing fees associated with the global codecs on decks sold in China and to help propel China into the ranks of technology developers, rather than simply manufacturers.

But manufacturing HD DVD players they will be. And once those production lines are up and running, swapping out the codecs for their outside OEM clients is no big deal.

In other words, HD DVD just secured the inside track on a potentially vast new market. The economies of scale that could result from China’s embrace of HD DVD is likely to have significant impact on retail prices in every market that sources its electronics from China—that is, the rest of the world.

I knew that - but forgot :o Anyway, the prospect of China actively opposing piracy is good for us all

Though CE manufacturers may continue selling their inventory of BD-Video 1.0 players you are being very pessimistic if you think they are going to keep on making them after October 31st. By that point I think they will be far more interested in making and selling BD-Video 1.1 and BD-Live players.
"Pessimistic" as it may be, it's a loophole. It wouldn't be there if the thought of exploiting it wasn't considered.

Who knows - maybe they'll decide to keep putting out the 1.0 players at lower price points to try to combat the HD DVD pricing.

Besides, it's not like they couldn't release 1.1 or BD-Live players now, if they wanted to. The cutoff date is mandatory (sort of - see loophole.) If the CE manufacturers are so excited about releasing these new players, why haven't they? What's holding them back that will magically be fixed on October 31st?
It has been discussed a few times before as can be seen in this post (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=8705242&&#post8705242).
Yeah, but in that post, Talk says:
Can you point me to that reference, please? The specification says that players which are designed, manufactured, and shipped prior to June 2007 may continue to ship based on their original configuration. Who would reasonably expect a company to take existing players off the shelf and destroy them as of June, 2007?
Where does he say that they can continue to manufacture them after the cutoff date? He said ship, not manufacture. Big difference. This was the point of contention - why wasn't it made clear that the companies could keep building 1.0 players after the "cutoff date?"

I see, so you just decided to post how well the PS3 was selling in Japan. Just curious but are you going to do that for the Xbox 360 as well?

X360 03/25/07 3,500 368,500

:eek: :D

PS2 03/25/07 14,500 22,109,000

:o

"Pessimistic" as it may be, it's a loophole. It wouldn't be there if the thought of exploiting it wasn't considered.

Who knows - maybe they'll decide to keep putting out the 1.0 players at lower price points to try to combat the HD DVD pricing.

Besides, it's not like they couldn't release 1.1 or BD-Live players now, if they wanted to. The cutoff date is mandatory (sort of - see loophole.) If the CE manufacturers are so excited about releasing these new players, why haven't they? What's holding them back that will magically be fixed on October 31st?

Yeah, but in that post, Talk says:

Where does he say that they can continue to manufacture them after the cutoff date? He said ship, not manufacture. Big difference. This was the point of contention - why wasn't it made clear that the companies could keep building 1.0 players after the "cutoff date?"

I would expect that we will continue to see 1.0 players manufactured. As you pointed it out they serve as a lower price tier for entry into Blu-ray. The original Samaung has broken under the $500 mark on Amazon.

New players that are 1.1 compliant can serve as the new high end tier. They in turn will migrate down the price ladder once the Live compliant players come to market. That's how I see this playing out. Maybe Talk can chime in and offer his input.

X360 03/25/07 3,500 368,500

:eek: :D

PS2 03/25/07 14,500 22,109,000

:o

I think it's pretty clear that BD will dominate in Japan just as HD-DVD/AVS will dominate in China. North America and Europe are still up for grabs.

As for the console wars in Japan, this pretty much tells the whole story.

http://www.vgcharts.org/japconscomps.php?name1=Wii&name2=PS3&type=2&align=1

I found a very informative article today regarding the current state of the optical HD (High Def) format war.

Read [H]ere (http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTMxNSwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==)

The article maintains objectivity by comparing the two formats (HD-DVD & Blu-Ray) in
4 categories:

Quality
Studio Support
Porn
The Future
Including Ability to Author Content (Soon to be important due to Standard Def resolution home video looks like fried crap on an HDTV)

For me this article contains the type of information needed to make an intelligent purchase.

And it's not like the date can't change. It already has once. Who's to say that in August or September they won't push it back to January or February of 2008? I'm certainly not willing to take Bill's word for it, seeing as how he told you (us) in no uncertain terms back in December that there were no discussions going on about pushing the date back (even though Amir knew what was really happening.)

And while I don't think Talk was being deceitful, without some specific BDA-sanctioned outlet for this info, it illustrates how difficult it is to really know what is going on currently, or what to bank on. If even Talk doesn't know this, I'm really, REALLY, more then aver flabbergasted that his opinion is that "The customer should do their research and know what they are buying." (paraphrase mine)

His response to my query above regarding the "profile document" Alex originally alluded to last year just seems to be indicative of the way the BDA is running the whole show.

And while I don't think Talk was being deceitful, without some specific BDA-sanctioned outlet for this info, it illustrates how difficult it is to really know what is going on currently, or what to bank on. If even Talk doesn't know this, I'm really, REALLY, more then aver flabbergasted that his opinion is that "The customer should do their research and know what they are buying." (paraphrase mine)

His response to my query above regarding the "profile document" Alex originally alluded to last year just seems to be indicative of the way the BDA is running the whole show.

Likely because if there really was full disclosure, less people would buy at current pricing. ;)

Likely because if there really was full disclosure, less people would buy at current pricing. ;)

That is probably the absolute brutal truth.

Any bets on how much marketing we'll see once all the new features are released? Lots, I'd imagine.

That is probably the absolute brutal truth.

Any bets on how much marketing we'll see once all the new features are released? Lots, I'd imagine.

Including the "not so important- - - for now" PiP :D

I found a very informative article today regarding the current state of the optical HD (High Def) format war.

Read [H]ere (http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTMxNSwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==)

The article maintains objectivity by comparing the two formats (HD-DVD & Blu-Ray) in
4 categories:

Quality
Studio Support
Porn
The Future
Including Ability to Author Content (Soon to be important due to Standard Def resolution home video looks like fried crap on an HDTV)

For me this article contains the type of information needed to make an intelligent purchase.


Can't say I found it all that objective or informative since they left out a lot of variables that are coming to bare. Just the usual highlight of studio support for BD as if it were etched in stone. In fact it seemed like every BD setback they did managed bother to mention got the pass of "for now."

It quite frankly struck me as an article that was built around a foregone conclusion.

That is probably the absolute brutal truth.

Any bets on how much marketing we'll see once all the new features are released? Lots, I'd imagine.

I'm sure tons ... and I'm sure you'll see cheap v1.0 players next to them, playing demo discs touting all the features of the newer players. ;)

Can't say I found it all that objective or informative since they left out a lot of variables that are coming to bare. Just the usual highlight of studio support for BD as if it were etched in stone. In fact it seemed like every BD setback they did managed bother to mention got the pass of "for now."

It quite frankly struck me as an article that was built around a foregone conclusion.

Well sorry the article did not inform you. As for my self its good info to weigh a future purchase.

However I would like to know what "variables that are coming to bare" that were left out? - Please elaborate.

Also - Do you have any info or articles that compare?

X360 03/25/07 3,500 368,500

PS2 03/25/07 14,500 22,109,000



Since you guys don't get it, let me explain.

If you think 2:1 ratio kills a format, PS3 is dead in Japan.

Well sorry the article did not inform you. As for my self its good info to weigh a future purchase.

However I would like to know what "variables that are coming to bare" that were left out? - Please elaborate.

Also - Do you have any info or articles that compare?

OK, your making a lot of work for me aren't you ;) :)

As far as storage space, Blu-ray is the clear winner as it holds 25 gigabytes on a single layer, and 50 gigabytes in a dual-layer format.
Listed under “Quality,” it cannot be denied that BD-50 holds an extra 15 GB, but nobody has proved it relates to any perceptible difference in AQ or PQ. The implication is that it does.

The initial edge that HD-DVD had over Blu-ray in video quality has quickly diminished.Both formats have had their so-so releases, but BD continues to rank lower than HD DVD. He at least mentions that VC-1 can be used on BD, but doesn't point out the barrier of Sony/Fox being MPEG-2 diehards.
Universal Studios may be stubbornly behind HD-DVD, but if more desired films are available on Blu-ray than HD-DVD, consumers may be willing to temporarily forego Universal films in order to invest in Blu-ray technology. If this becomes the case and Universal withdraws its “HD-DVD only” stance, that could quickly spell the end for that format.Why is Universal “stubborn” while BD only studios are not? He admits the recent months lack of HD DVD releases have affected sales, but makes no mention that it is was a temporary lull, and as this week has pointed out new releases equal better numbers.
PornHow many times are people going to cling to the single porn US porn Blu-ray as if the BD-porn floodgates have been thrown open. Common it's one title people. Also I see no reason why porn won't sell in HDM as it does just fine on DVD and at the same price-point.
HD-DVD players which run around $300-$500. Sony’s plan to release a $600 player will do much to close this gap, but, presently, HD-DVD wins on the cost front.The difference between $300 and $600 is closing a gap!? That's 100% more!
Now for Sony’s edge in the console market, that’s another story.
You and I know what he's talking about, but why not come out and say that PS3 is selling at fraction of what was predicted, how about meat with those potatoes?
Stripped away of all the hype, both formats offer excellent quality, but when we take a hard look to see which format currently has the most going for it, the answer is obvious.Not to me. This would have been a good place to talk about extras and interactivity, on HD-DVD releases compared to BD, also looming BDJ issue which may not work on some player and is slowing down BD releases. He might have mention the FOX release schedule going on hiatus as well. But, not a word. This sounds like someone who doesn't really own both or either formats.
We feel that Blu-ray best shows that potential.
Dual-format players may make it possible to enjoy both types of discs with no worries, but at the moment, that option is limited and cost prohibitive.
If BD can drop in price and has the most “potential” then why not Dual format players?
This is my problem in a nutshell. Anyone can cherry-pick between future possibility and current reality wherever it lends support to their speculations.

It's like I said iMO it feel like he was working back from his prediction. It's not the most biased thing I've read by a long shot, but it's not the most revelatory or informed either.

The difference between $300 and $600 is closing a gap, that's 50% more!



Actually, it's 100% more. ;) ;)

Since you guys don't get it, let me explain.

If you think 2:1 ratio kills a format, PS3 is dead in Japan.

What's that make the 360, which is down more than 3:1 to the PlayStationTWO? Stillborn? :eek: PS3 passed the 360 before 2006 was out! :o There's room for two game consoles in Japan. Counterevidence: PSP still lives despite the same apparent 'disadvantage.' Nintendo and Sega traded places regularly... It's the 3rd place that tends to go away...

If you really need some numbers, they're also readily available from VGCharts, as well...

Now video formats OTOH... HDDVD is as good as DEAD in Japan. UK & Europe will be the next to close the door on HDDVD and North America will be the last hold out...

.
You and I know what he's talking about, but why not come out and say that PS3 is selling at fraction of what was predicted, how about meat with those potatoes?


How about PS2 and PS3 combined still maintaining a ~80k lead over the Wii for NA for Febuary? That's Sony's place in the console market: 1st. Nintendo: 2nd. Microsoft: 3rd.

Source: vgcharts.org:

Wii Feb 07 379,250 2,107,500
PS2 Feb 07 323,500 43,709,000
X360 Feb 07 257,500 5,692,750
PS3 Feb 07 133,750 1,160,500


Sony is obviously playing a balancing act between milking the golden PS2 goose while nuturing the PS3 on the side. PS2 long ago returned on it's investment and is pure profit right now... Meanwhile BD opticals continue to shrink in price...

There's room for two game consoles in Japan.

And there is room for two HD formats (and downloads too) :p

And there is room for two HD formats (and downloads too)

Not in Japan,. apparently, since the DVR recorder sales are even more lopsided.

How about PS2 and PS3 combined still maintaining a ~80k lead over the Wii for NA for Febuary? That's Sony's place in the console market: 1st. Nintendo: 2nd. Microsoft: 3rd..


Has a firmware update suddenly enabled the PS2 to play BD? That would would be impressive. Otherwise ganging it with PS3 as force in the format war seems like a pretty desperate stretch.

I would argue that the president set by PS2 should have made the sales of the PS3 a no-brainer, but so far it appears gamers think it's too much buck for your bang.