Well that depends a lot on the PiP video that is used but even in scenarios where HD PiP would be useful 720p might be used instead of 1080p because of bandwidth. I would point out that 720p does have a lot more pixels than 480p and for the two scenarios that have been mentioned would be more useful than 480p.


Fair enough ...


If the PiP stream is only to be used for a small portion of the screen than SD video would make the most sense.


Agreed ...


Just to make this clear but I think that Anthony is referring to another poster. From what I have heard there is an easy way to tell if the PiP is hard coded or a secondary video stream since with a secondary video stream you can turn it on and off while watching the movie.

I didn't think any current Blu-Ray players supported a secondary video stream at all yet? Or am I confusing that with something else?

Yes, but I'm still not clear on exacly what he meant, though it sounds like on the fly switching of the PiP window isn't possible at full resolution.

what he is saying is that PiP switching can be done in real time if you don't mind overly compressed SD for the main picture. But if you want HD for the main picture the only solution is to use branching (like the BD movies with PiP today) so you end up with 4 streams two that are simultenous one we will call Ab and the other aB so then you can watch A open the PiP and watch Ab then switch and it branches to aB (Aa, Bb are the two contents, upper case is 1080p lower case is PiP)

that is why he also makes the 60mbps joke because each one is 30mbps

Yes, but I'm still not clear on exacly what he meant, though it sounds like on the fly switching of the PiP window isn't possible at full resolution.

what he is saying is that PiP switching can be done in real time if you don't mind overly compressed SD for the main picture. But if you want HD for the main picture the only solution is to use branching (like the BD movies with PiP today) so you end up with 4 streams two that are simultaneous one we will call Ab and the other aB so then you can watch A open the PiP and watch Ab then switch and it branches to aB (Aa, Bb are the two contents, upper case is 1080p lower case is PiP)

that is why he also makes the 60mbps joke because each one is 30mbps

what he is saying is that PiP switching can be done in real time if you don't mind overly compressed SD for the main picture. But if you want HD for the main picture the only solution is to use branching (like the BD movies with PiP today) so you end up with 4 streams two that are simultenous one we will call Ab and the other aB so then you can watch A open the PiP and watch Ab then switch and it branches to aB (Aa, Bb are the two contents, upper case is 1080p lower case is PiP)

that is why he also makes the 60mbps joke because each one is 30mbps

Hmmm ... I don't think that's what he's saying. Would you mind posting this in the Insider's Thread to confirm? Or allow someone else to do so?

what he is saying is that PiP switching can be done in real time if you don't mind overly compressed SD for the main picture. But if you want HD for the main picture the only solution is to use branching (like the BD movies with PiP today) so you end up with 4 streams two that are simultaneous one we will call Ab and the other aB so then you can watch A open the PiP and watch Ab then switch and it branches to aB (Aa, Bb are the two contents, upper case is 1080p lower case is PiP)

that is why he also makes the 60mbps joke because each one is 30mbps

Hmmm ... I don't think that's what he's saying. Would you mind posting this in the Insider's Thread to confirm? Or allow someone else to do so?

It's not that menu's were or were not included; it's that it seems to be a whole separate encode of the move with the PiP window as part of the feature. That is not the same experience as one gets with HD-DVD, by a long shot -- and therefore, the consumer would notice. Don't you think?

yes it is a different encode, but how will he notice?


There are no facts that exist that lossy 'sounds better' than lossless that I'm aware of.

obviously because lossless is better thyen lossy. Measured instruments have showned it and that is why one is called lossless and the other lossy. Now if it sounds better that is subjective, it souds more like the original soundtrack. If that is sounds better is a different question. If there is a shrill earpiercing sound in a movie one can say the mangle none earpiercing sound "sounds better" , but it was not what the director and the sound guy went after and was not what was played in the movie theatre

Again, I disagree ... sure they can look at the menu and see what is being output, but they still likely won't know what they're actually listening to. What if they've connected to their reveiver via analog ports? or optical? Are they still hearing lossless just because the menu displays that's what they're getting?

and some mentaly challanged people talk to the screen trying to warn the people in the box. If they are that dumb (or young) they might not even know how to turn on the PiP.

Very interesting data. HD-DVD sales are rising nicely on Amazon.

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

Ahhh ... but HD-DVD can give you lossless in less than 8mbps of Audio using TrueHD

so can BD :) but how many disks only have one track on them. Even if you want to use 6 there is no difference, the 8 was just an easy number

6mbps for audio and the rest 4 for pip that leaves 20 for HD DVD. 20 main+ 20 main+6=46<then the max for BD



Subtitles take 1.5mbps? Wow ...
where did I say it was only subtitles? for exampele if you have a PiP directors commentary, unless the director is a mime there will need to be an audio track for him :)

And do most HD-DVD's have 1.5mbps audio tracks? I thought only the original language was done at full and the others were like 640kbps?

well it is hard to say. My understanding is Warner uses .5mbps but also has DTHD so for three lossy and a lossless it will be more. Universal is all over the place (from what I heard) and some are lower quality then DVD but some of their disks have 5 languages. I used the 1.5 because that is the holly grail for all those of the "losless is not needed" crowed

The thriller thing is a cool idea

can't take full credit, came to me after seeing (I think it was a Simpsons episode) where they told the same story from different perspectives but sequentially

I didn't think any current Blu-Ray players supported a secondary video stream at all yet? Or am I confusing that with something else?

no one knows. The most likely answer is none of the stand alones but most likely the PS3

Hmmm ... I don't think that's what he's saying. Would you mind posting this in the Insider's Thread to confirm? Or allow someone else to do so?

he won't use the same words, but go ahead and ask him.

Very interesting data. HD-DVD sales are rising nicely on Amazon.

2Channel: lol was wondering when that would infest this thread

just to give you the benefit of the doubt go look at the HD DVD forum
for Amazon and 15

2Channel: lol was wondering when that would infest this thread

just to give you the benefit of the doubt go look at the HD DVD forum
for Amazon and 15

Don't you mean the one they have in the BR and HD DVD sections?

2Channel: lol was wondering when that would infest this thread

just to give you the benefit of the doubt go look at the HD DVD forum
for Amazon and 15

Ahh, I see that someone posted a thread encouraging AVS members to go out and buy HD-DVDs from Amazon today.

What's ironic is I bought three discs earlier today (Robin Hood, Forbidden Planet and Animal House). I have guests coming next weekend and wanted to get these discs. I guess I helped pitch in without even knowing. :)

Given the price, it probably won't be a huge volume mover beyond Amazon.

Probably great demo material but limited appeal compared to features.

Can't imagine B&Ms stocking more than a handful of copies, compared to popular movies, which they would order in the dozens.

Purely a personal opinion, or do you base it on reviews of titles and/or players? I haven't seen reviewers or the trade rags express that opinion. In fact Scott Wilkinson (who's reviewed every major BD player) in The Perfect Vision had the following to say in his conclusion to his recent XA2 review.

"Despite the major improvements in Blu-ray discs and players lately, I have to say that, based on my experience with the Toshiba HD-XA2, I still think HD-DVD looks better. Not that Blu-ray looks bad these days - far from it - but after reviewing several Blu-ray players, I found myself being drawn more deeply into the HD-XA2'a high-def image. There's no notable difference in audio quality, especially between Dolby TrueHD from HD DVD and PCM from Blu-ray - all the players I've listened to sounded great."

I've heard nothing to support that BD has better PQ or AQ. It's not a software review, but just this week Cnet "editor's reviewed" the XA2 and said it offers outstanding PQ and is best of any HD player available. The only thing they really knocked was the remote.

This whole notion of trying to paint HD DVD as "Hi-def lite" is a crock of FUD. It's actually the one providing the best, and most well-rounded HD experience.

I didn't think any current Blu-Ray players supported a secondary video stream at all yet? Or am I confusing that with something else?I was actually just explaining how a consumer could tell the difference between hard coded PiP and a secondary video stream. As far as I know you are right that no current stand alone Blu-ray player is capable of Blu-ray PiP requirements though I heard a few weeks ago that Sigma Designs had begun sampling the first SoC chip that would be capable of it.


Very interesting data. HD-DVD sales are rising nicely on Amazon.

http://www.eproductwars.com/dvd/I think it might have something to do with this thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=818991). Honestly it is rather impressive how much this has affected Amazon rankings though I wonder how much it will actually affect Nielsen sales figures.

snip...

I didn't think any current Blu-Ray players supported a secondary video stream at all yet? Or am I confusing that with something else?

No, they don't. Some folks hope the PS3 will be upgradable to do this, but there's no evidence that it will. Assuming it is possible, will Sony want to canabalize the first gen and second gen BD players with PS3 feature parity? What's the motivation for anyone to buy a stand alone BD player? Unless it's something like the UP5000 from Samsung.

You have to love all of the posting about how BD has better PiP, except currently it has no PiP at all. This brings up another question. How much effort will studios put into building BD features that the current installed base can't use. Somewhere down the road it may be more appealing as the installed base matures into more full featured devices that can do these things.

This is part of why I consider it important for formats to ship with a rich feature set at launch, and not add major new elements to the format from one generation of player to the next.

You have to love all of the posting about how BD has better PiP, except currently it has no PiP at all.Just curious but when that changes should HD DVD add support for HD PiP or do you honestly think HD DVD players should just stay the way they are? In other words would you write off the entire concept of HD PiP simply because current HD DVD players are not capable of it?

2Channel: lol was wondering when that would infest this thread

just to give you the benefit of the doubt go look at the HD DVD forum
for Amazon and 15
It is significant that the HD DVD anniversary buy did jump Planet Earth up to #4 in the DVD ratings. That's even higher that Casino Royale ever got to.

It also seems to prove that the sales figure are closer than they seem and that it doesn't take much to make HD DVD competitive to Blu-ray in sales.

BTW, "infest " is an interesting choice of words. :D This is the format battle thread where almost nothing is really OT, let alone an Amazon sales spike that was loosely coordinated here that impacted noticeably on Amazon sales. Maybe even Nielson/Videoscan sales.

How significant is it, I dunno. But it kinda implies the format war isn't over.

I mean the top seller is a $70 multi disc package for HD DVD.

Just curious but when that changes should HD DVD add support for HD PiP or do you honestly think HD DVD players should just stay the way they are? In other words would you write off the entire concept of HD PiP simply because current HD DVD players are not capable of it?

I think it's a hot one that there were many "just give me the movie" BD supporters who said PIP is of no real use, that is until the idea that it's resolution might be higher if implemented. Yah, that's a tiebreaker if ever I heard one.

It follows the same logic that Samsung or "Sammy" as it was affectionatley referred to, was important as flagship premiere of BD technology and then the "entry level" player that proved the price disparity between formats was closing. That is until they went neutral, now Samsung is a "third-rate" third-rate electronics manufacturer not capable of any real impact.

I suppose if Denon releases a hybrid, it will be dubbed an, "elitist snob-appeal standalone for chumps to hook up to their Bose speakers via their Monster Cables" :rolleyes: ;)

... I just used that to show how stupid what you said was.

Dude, this is like the second or third time you've thrown that around recently. Care to tone it down a bit?

yes it is a different encode, but how will he notice?


Because in order to go from PiP, to non-PiP, he needs to start the movie over and manually forward back through the chapters. You don't need to do that with HD-DVD.


obviously because lossless is better thyen lossy. Measured instruments have showned it and that is why one is called lossless and the other lossy. Now if it sounds better that is subjective, it souds more like the original soundtrack. If that is sounds better is a different question. If there is a shrill earpiercing sound in a movie one can say the mangle none earpiercing sound "sounds better" , but it was not what the director and the sound guy went after and was not what was played in the movie theatre


Again, this is your opinion ... do you have links to the results of these measured instruments indicating that one is 'better'? This is subjective, it's impossible for anyone to say that Lossy sounds better than Lossless and vice versa. Is Coke better than Pepsi? :rolleyes:


and some mentaly challanged people talk to the screen trying to warn the people in the box. If they are that dumb (or young) they might not even know how to turn on the PiP.

Why is it that when people don't agree with you, then they're automatically 'mentually challenged' or 'dumb'? I guess that insulting people is one way to win a debate, as it's likely people will allow you to go unchallenged in the future just so that they don't need to deal with the petty insults and insinuations. :rolleyes:

no, show me when I ever said either was more then third tiere before. Many did not buy the Samsung and waited for one of the others to come to market. Some spinned that dual players was because they lost confidence in BD and I just pointed out that it was most likely the opposite and it was them trying to give people a reason to buy their BD player. Like others have pointed out the LG is not even a real HD DVD player (no logo, doesn't have all the features mandated) the whole "it is a BD player that can play HD DVD as well" is trying to give a small benefit to their player to try and get someone to buy

I think the issue is not so much how you didn't characterize Samsung previously, but that you only chose to call them 3rd-rate now, after they aren't supporting BR exclusively.

2Channel: lol was wondering when that would infest this thread

just to give you the benefit of the doubt go look at the HD DVD forum
for Amazon and 15

Yup ... so a group of HD-DVD Supporters decided to buy to celebrate the one-year anniversary of HD-DVD. And that very small group of people managed to skew the comparitive results of over 2 Million PS3's. Not only that, but they managed to get a new high water mark for Sales Rank. But, I suppose, you'll find a way to spin it as 'bad for HD-DVD'. Perhaps they used 'lossy' internet lines to make their purchases. :p

It is significant that the HD DVD anniversary buy did jump Planet Earth up to #4 in the DVD ratings. That's even higher that Casino Royale ever got to.


Wow ... it hit #4 in US? I thought it was #5 in US and #4 on amazon.ca?


It also seems to prove that the sales figure are closer than they seem and that it doesn't take much to make HD DVD competitive to Blu-ray in sales.


Exactly ... a relatively small group of HD-DVD supports completely offset millions of PS3's. It goes to show that these numbers are really really tiny when compared to DVD.


BTW, "infest " is an interesting choice of words. :D This is the format battle thread where almost nothing is really OT, let alone an Amazon sales spike that was loosely coordinated here that impacted noticeably on Amazon sales. Maybe even Nielson/Videoscan sales.


Amazon sales spikes are now irrelevent since they show higher numbers than BD. When the HD-DVD numbers slump back down or BD releases a bunch of new stuff and takes the lead back, they will become important again and won't be an 'infestation' of this thread. ;)


How significant is it, I dunno. But it kinda implies the format war isn't over.


I'd say Sony will disagree with you via a press release within a week or so.


I mean the top seller is a $70 multi disc package for HD DVD.

But ... but ... Casino Royale! :p

no, but I did between fanboys and the rest. Their blind faith makes them look dumber. Where did I say acuity had anything to do with intelligence. I just said if someone wanted to know what they are listening to all they need to do is look at what is selected in the menu. So saying there is no way for someone to know if it is lossless or not (the same way as knowing how PiP is done) assumes someone is a moron.

I believe the point being made was not focused on the technical minutiae of whether there would be a menu item on the disc to tip off the user, but rather the larger issue of:

If the logic for "The end user can't see it's fake PiP, so what's the harm?" holds true, then so does "If the end user can't hear it's lossy, so what's the harm?" likely does as well.

I believe the point being made was not focused on the technical minutiae of whether there would be a menu item on the disc to tip off the user, but rather the larger issue of:

If the logic for "The end user can't see it's fake PiP, so what's the harm?" holds true, then so does "If the end user can't hear it's lossy, so what's the harm?" likely does as well.

Exactly ... the same goes for the space difference ... if the PQ/AQ is equal, does the consumer care if they're watching an HD30 or a BD50? I'd say, likely not.

I think it might have something to do with this thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=818991). Honestly it is rather impressive how much this has affected Amazon rankings though I wonder how much it will actually affect Nielsen sales figures.Does that thread explain the catching up HD DVD sales have been doing since march 23rd? If you look at the graph, the thing I find more interesting than the current spike is that the HD DVD numbers have been trending upward and the BD numbers have been trending downward.

I think it's a hot one that there were many "just give me the movie" BD supporters who said PIP is of no real use, that is until the idea that it's resolution might be higher if implemented.I have been a supporter of interactivity and PiP since before either of the two HD formats were launched.


Yah, that's a tiebreaker if ever I heard one.Weren't you just angry over what some "BD supporters" thought of PiP and now you are going to mock the idea of HD PiP?


That is until they went neutral, now Samsung is a "third-rate" third-rate electronics manufacturer not capable of any real impact.No offense but what does this have to do with me? My opinion of Samsung has not changed simply because they decided to make a universal player.


Does that thread explain the catching up HD DVD sales have been doing since march 23rd?Well if you are referring to some of the Amazon ranking graphs I think that has to do with factors such as the slow down of sales after the Amazon Blu-ray sale, the lack of any new Fox title announcements, the lowering of HD DVD player prices, and the increase of Universal title announcements.


If you look at the graph, the thing I find more interesting than the current spike is that the HD DVD numbers have been trending upward and the BD numbers have been trending downward.Remember that those Amazon graphs can cut both ways but for now if you look at only the recent history on certain graphs that is correct.

Isn't the argument between 50GB and 30GB at this point moot? What movies have studios on either side attempted to encode, but ran out of space on the discs? Having more space on a disc presents the potential for Blu-ray disc to offer superior extras and higher bitrates, but the fact is is that it is mere potential. Blu ray has not taken advantage of the extra space, thus, all the advantages extra space offers are void. At the moment, here and now, the only benefit of 50GB versus 30GB is in computer storage, where 50>30 is an absolute rule and not nearly as subjective. Studios that support both formats will (usually) encode movies nearly the same in both formats (identical bitrates, compression codecs, etc) because it is cheaper and facilitates faster production. Thus, as long as movies will fit on a 30GB disc, 50GB will not be necessary. However, I would not be surprised to see the 30GB limit be pushed in the future, say, perhaps, if studios wish to include 7.1 uncompressed audio, instead of or in addition to 5.1; the coming integration of wider color gamuts; and doubtless, new technologies and features will be developed that will eat up more space on the discs despite the increasing efficiency of codecs.

^^
Richard, I don't think he was addressing all of his comments directly to you.

1
I have been a supporter of interactivity and PiP since before either of the two HD formats were launched.
2
Weren't you just angry over what some "BD supporters" thought of PiP and now you are going to mock the idea of HD PiP?
3
No offense but what does this have to do with me? My opinion of Samsung has not changed simply because they decided to make a universal player.


1- Then your not the one pooh-poohing it, though I quoted your suggestion that current HD DVD PIP will be inferior if BD's is higher-rez.

2- No angry isn't what I am or was, just eager to point out how quickly priorities change when ones true objective is to find fault in the format they don't support while being blissfully ignorant of the faults in their format of choice.

3- Again, there has been a lot of Samsung bashing since their neutrality, I didn't quote the main source, as they are on my ignore list, but I still see the responses to their comments.

Isn't the argument between 50GB and 30GB at this point moot? What movies have studios on either side attempted to encode, but ran out of space on the discs?So if a compressionist working for Universal is toiling away on an encode, and he finds he needs 31 GB for a good picture plus good audio, you expect a press release? :D

Due to bandwidth, King Kong has no room for lossless audio. Regardless of the debate back and forth about how important that is, it's clear that a next generation format should be able to accommodate King Kong with lossless audio if it wanted to.

Due to bandwidth, King Kong has no room for lossless audio.

Why does this always get stated as fact? It has been reported many times that they took the space they had left AFTER the decision of what audio tracks to include and used it to it's fullest for the video.

Isn't the argument between 50GB and 30GB at this point moot? What movies have studios on either side attempted to encode, but ran out of space on the discs? Having more space on a disc presents the potential for Blu-ray disc to offer superior extras and higher bitrates, but the fact is is that it is mere potential. Blu ray has not taken advantage of the extra space, thus, all the advantages extra space offers are void. At the moment, here and now, the only benefit of 50GB versus 30GB is in computer storage, where 50>30 is an absolute rule and not nearly as subjective. Studios that support both formats will (usually) encode movies nearly the same in both formats (identical bitrates, compression codecs, etc) because it is cheaper and facilitates faster production. Thus, as long as movies will fit on a 30GB disc, 50GB will not be necessary. However, I would not be surprised to see the 30GB limit be pushed in the future, say, perhaps, if studios wish to include 7.1 uncompressed audio, instead of or in addition to 5.1; the coming integration of wider color gamuts; and doubtless, new technologies and features will be developed that will eat up more space on the discs despite the increasing efficiency of codecs.


We could hope. If Warner wasn't playing favorites, for example, they could use the source PCM they used to make the True HD track for Superman Returns, for example, and have put 24bit 5.1 LPCM with the 20GB they left empty on the BD50. They could have done that in 3 languages in 5.1PCM, no less, and still had room for some other marketing fluff they could throw in (trailers, etc).

Why does this always get stated as fact? It has been reported many times that they took the space they had left AFTER the decision of what audio tracks to include and used it to it's fullest for the video.

They were probably wary of what audio tracks they could put in because of the space constraint BEFORE the decision was made.

More the argument that the current VC1 encode from the HDDVD could STILL Be used for Blu-ray BD50 with 2 or 3 LPCM 5.1 to 7.1 tracks and still have space for all the extras included on the HDDVD. Those ARE enough extras, right? :p

Why does this always get stated as fact? It has been reported many times that they took the space they had left AFTER the decision of what audio tracks to include and used it to it's fullest for the video.Could you point to a "report"? A claim from Amir doesn't count as a "report". And why would those involved be interested in reporting the truth anyway? It's not something that we could get an honest answer on.

Why would they use more bandwidth for the video than necessary, if it meant the difference between lossless or lossy audio? It doesn't make any sense. There is just no room for good quality PQ and lossless audio for King Kong with 30 GB. That's the perfectly reasonable conclusion to draw.

Could you point to a "report"? A claim from Amir doesn't count as a "report". And why would those involved be interested in reporting the truth anyway? It's not something that we could get an honest answer on.

Why would they use more bandwidth for the video than necessary, if it meant the difference between lossless or lossy audio? It doesn't make any sense. There is just no room for good quality PQ and lossless audio for King Kong with 30 GB. That's the perfectly reasonable conclusion to draw.
With the exception of two titles, Universal has chosen to use 1.5mbps DD+ at 24/48 for all of their titles. This trend was already in place when King Kong was released.

Unless you're suggesting that every title Universal's released (with the exception of End of Days and Fear & Loathing in Las Vegas) has run out of bandwidth (thus necessitating the removal of the planned DTHD track,) your argument doesn't hold water.

This reeks of Phase Hydra. A quick skim of your posts shows practically every one of them to be anti-HD DVD and pro-BD. "That's the perfectly reasonable conclusion to draw."

Great sig., Steeb! :D

Why would they use more bandwidth for the video than necessary, if it meant the difference between lossless or lossy audio? It doesn't make any sense. There is just no room for good quality PQ and lossless audio for King Kong with 30 GB. That's the perfectly reasonable conclusion to draw.

Me thinks you need to go back to 'draw'ing school ;)

We could hope. If Warner wasn't playing favorites, for example, they could use the source PCM they used to make the True HD track for Superman Returns, for example, and have put 24bit 5.1 LPCM with the 20GB they left empty on the BD50. They could have done that in 3 languages in 5.1PCM, no less, and still had room for some other marketing fluff they could throw in (trailers, etc).


Is it really "playing favorites" not to produce multiple versions of the same low-volume specialty product?

The funny thing about these tech forums is that people argue endlessly about various standards, that the studios are under no obligation to uphold, and in some cases will choose not to if the don't think the return will = the investment/effort.

I see no reason to believe that attention to detail will be any more rigorous than it has to be to obtain a consistently acceptable product. They aren't searching for ways to up their production costs to snag the 30-40 more people who actually know what's under the hood,

Is it really "playing favorites" not to produce multiple versions of the same low-volume specialty product?


Since they started with a PCM track to produce a TrueHD track that would be VERY easy to encode to the EMPTY TWENTY GIGABYTES on their BD50 release, then yes, that's really playing favorites.

Could you point to a "report"? A claim from Amir doesn't count as a "report". And why would those involved be interested in reporting the truth anyway? It's not something that we could get an honest answer on.

Why would they use more bandwidth for the video than necessary, if it meant the difference between lossless or lossy audio? It doesn't make any sense. There is just no room for good quality PQ and lossless audio for King Kong with 30 GB. That's the perfectly reasonable conclusion to draw.
Paging Rod Zuber, your King Kong argument has reared its ugly little head again. :D http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10107917&highlight=bkilian#post10107917

Is it really "playing favorites" not to produce multiple versions of the same low-volume specialty product?

...

Perhaps Warner should encode their movies for 50GB. They can release the HD DVD version when TL51 is ready.

With the exception of two titles, Universal has chosen to use 1.5mbps DD+ at 24/48 for all of their titles. This trend was already in place when King Kong was released.

Unless you're suggesting that every title Universal's released (with the exception of End of Days and Fear & Loathing in Las Vegas) has run out of bandwidth (thus necessitating the removal of the planned DTHD track,) your argument doesn't hold water.

...

Regardless of whether Universal uses 1.5Mbps audio for all of their titles or not, KK has no room for lossless audio even if Universal did wanted it. HD DVD has no "potential".

Sounds like defective SD DVDs, not BDs, to me. There wasn't a single mention of Blu-ray in the text you quoted and the player mentioned is a multi-disc DVD player.


Hey your right, I'll yank it before it causes trouble.

Regardless of whether Universal uses 1.5Mbps audio for all of their titles or not, KK has no room for lossless audio even if Universal did wanted it. HD DVD has no "potential".
That was cute. Did you come up with that all by yourself?

They were probably wary of what audio tracks they could put in because of the space constraint BEFORE the decision was made.

Curious ... going through that Studios' Releases ... how many included lossless before King Kong?

Perhaps Warner should encode their movies for 50GB. They can release the HD DVD version when TL51 is ready.

Hey, then they could use MPEG-2! Good idea. :rolleyes:

With the exception of two titles, Universal has chosen to use 1.5mbps DD+ at 24/48 for all of their titles. This trend was already in place when King Kong was released.

Unless you're suggesting that every title Universal's released (with the exception of End of Days and Fear & Loathing in Las Vegas) has run out of bandwidth (thus necessitating the removal of the planned DTHD track,) your argument doesn't hold water.

This reeks of Phase Hydra. A quick skim of your posts shows practically every one of them to be anti-HD DVD and pro-BD. "That's the perfectly reasonable conclusion to draw."

And he asks for a report, when he has none to offer other than his own spin.

Why the incessant need to post a baseless fact, and when disputed, require the opposing viewpoint to do the legwork to prove them wrong? :rolleyes:

Great sig., Steeb! :D

Except it's inaccurrate ... It actually made it to #4 (and #3 on amazon.ca). :D

Except it's inaccurrate ... It actually made it to #4 (and #3 on amazon.ca). :D
Fixed.

Fixed.

Thanks! ;)

Just curious but when that changes should HD DVD add support for HD PiP or do you honestly think HD DVD players should just stay the way they are? In other words would you write off the entire concept of HD PiP simply because current HD DVD players are not capable of it?

When releasing a platform, like DVD, HD-DVD or a game concole for that matter, it's important that developers know exactly what they're developing for. Once the first devices start to ship, you have set the standard. So my answer is no, you shouldn't be making large changes to the platform as you go.

This is not the approach that BD is taking, and I believe it is a mistake. We have players like the G2 Samsung which just started shipping recently. Many of the customers for that player will likely be upset 6 months from now when they realize their player is discontinued and to get the next level of BD functionality (which includes PiP), they'll need to buy a new premium player.

Let's say, we don't care about the early adopter. We want to develop the format as we go and forget about our installed based. Then you have to be concerned about the further complication the development community faces in dealing with a mixed installed base of players with various capabilities. The likelyhood of problems with various titles on various players will grow much worse than it is today. This encourages developers to play it safe, which means they may end up focusing around the lowest common denominator.

This all plays a part in my not wanting to touch Blu-ray until it has finished maturing. I believe that is at least a couple of years away.

Just read three pages, and can conclude the BD fanbois main argument is IF

When releasing a platform, like DVD, HD-DVD or a game concole for that matter, it's important that developers know exactly what they're developing for. Once the first devices start to ship, you have set the standard. So my answer is no, you shouldn't be making large changes to the platform as you go.


and why fix that which is not broken to begin with?

No, they don't. Some folks hope the PS3 will be upgradable to do this, but there's no evidence that it will.

2CH. The PS3 has been shown decoding multiple streams already (don't remember the actual number, but was more then 2). So the question of does it have the processing power to do it is not even in question. The only question is if or when Sony will implement the capability for BD.

I think the issue is not so much how you didn't characterize Samsung previously, but that you only chose to call them 3rd-rate now, after they aren't supporting BR exclusively.

I did not choose to call them 3rd rate. Someone asked why Samsung went dual. And I added the reason I think they did. Not just them but LG (even though I would put samsung a bit higher). I was not knocking Samsung or LG. Just pointing out the obvious. It is like that Hunday add that many people are making fun off. Where Hyundai basically compares itself to BMW and they say it is 20k cheaper. No other person will compare a Hyundai to BMW and remotely think of them as equal. I don't think Samsung and LG think they can compare and are trying to give a reason for people to buy their player. And decided to go after the niche of the niche, the "I don't want two players but worried that if I buy the wrong format I will be stuck" people.

Hey, then they could use MPEG-2! Good idea. :rolleyes:

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/covenant.html
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/missionimpossibleiii.html

http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/kingkong2005.html
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/missionimpossibleiii.html
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/excalibur.html
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/spartacus.html
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/christmasvacation.html

Isn't the argument between 50GB and 30GB at this point moot? What movies have studios on either side attempted to encode, but ran out of space on the discs? Having more space on a disc presents the potential for Blu-ray disc to offer superior extras and higher bitrates, but the fact is is that it is mere potential. Blu ray has not taken advantage of the extra space, thus, all the advantages extra space offers are void. At the moment, here and now, the only benefit of 50GB versus 30GB is in computer storage, where 50>30 is an absolute rule and not nearly as subjective. Studios that support both formats will (usually) encode movies nearly the same in both formats (identical bitrates, compression codecs, etc) because it is cheaper and facilitates faster production. Thus, as long as movies will fit on a 30GB disc, 50GB will not be necessary. However, I would not be surprised to see the 30GB limit be pushed in the future, say, perhaps, if studios wish to include 7.1 uncompressed audio, instead of or in addition to 5.1; the coming integration of wider color gamuts; and doubtless, new technologies and features will be developed that will eat up more space on the discs despite the increasing efficiency of codecs.

not at all for example Identity has several uncompressed tracks and a shitload of subtitles. King Kong could not even fit one compressed lossless track.

If the logic for "The end user can't see it's fake PiP, so what's the harm?" holds true, then so does "If the end user can't hear it's lossy, so what's the harm?" likely does as well.


because the end user can hear the difference and I did not want to get into that debate with the "I refuse to accept realty" crowd.

Exactly ... the same goes for the space difference ... if the PQ/AQ is equal, does the consumer care if they're watching an HD30 or a BD50? I'd say, likely not.

for me yes, because it means WB duid that lower common denominator crap and we got stuck ith the HD DVD lower spec :)

Why does this always get stated as fact? It has been reported many times that they took the space they had left AFTER the decision of what audio tracks to include and used it to it's fullest for the video.

because if they did make a lower grade PQ to fit lossless then you end up with lower PQ how is that better? it would be worst.

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/covenant.html
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/missionimpossibleiii.html

http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/kingkong2005.html
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/missionimpossibleiii.html
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/excalibur.html
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/spartacus.html
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/christmasvacation.html

I just posted this on 4/13, but it looks like I need to post it again.

I've said it before, but I think it bears repeating. Just because mpeg2 can deliver great results on some titles, does not mean that is not inferior to AVC and VC1.

If we look at titles that score 3/5 on PQ or lower, here's what we find.

HD-DVD - 9.76%
BD - 13.24%

If we take a closer look at BD to understand why it averages a higher rate of stinkers, we find that 16.15% of mpeg2 titles on BD score 3/5 or lower.

I believe the quantity of titles is sufficiently high at this point that this is not just a bad luck of the draw for mpeg2. It is not delivering as consistent results as AVC or VC1 and it's time to put it out to pasture. Tears of the Sun and MI:3 would not have looked worse using AVC or VC1.

because the end user can hear the difference and I did not want to get into that debate with the "I refuse to accept realty" crowd.

Yes. You keep stating that. Categorically.

Folks have simply asked for some emprical studies showing that is the case.

not at all for example Identity has several uncompressed tracks and a shitload of subtitles. King Kong could not even fit one compressed lossless track.

Why all the concern over King Kong. It scored a 5/5 PQ and 4.5/5 AQ. Is it the conviction that AQ can't be any good if it's not lossless? There are plenty of movies with lossless tracks that scored lower for AQ.

Conviction that lossless wouldn't fit on KK HDDVD unless:
1) PQ bitrate is turned down and/or compressed further
2) Extras are removed

The same conviction that the existing VC1 encode could be used as-is on BD50, retaining all extras, with at least 3+ 16/48 5.1 LPCM tracks. You could well have a primary 24 bit 7.1 LPCM and multiple language TrueHD tracks.

This isn't a mutually exclusive thing that those of us who want lossless tracks have to think KK's current audio sucks (Well having it gimped by my add-on isn't the best experience in the world, but hopefully that fix is coming soon). It IS pretty good. To deny that it could be better is an interesting argument if that's the one you're making.

1- Then your not the one pooh-poohing it, though I quoted your suggestion that current HD DVD PIP will be inferior if BD's is higher-rez.Based on two of the usage scenarios that the studios have discussed HD PiP would be more useful than SD PiP. Are you suggesting that is not true for those two scenarios?


When releasing a platform, like DVD, HD-DVD or a game concole for that matter, it's important that developers know exactly what they're developing for.Well actually the Xbox 360 has an optional hard drive so a game developer has to design their games run without it though the games can take advantage of it if the hard drive is there. Personally I think this is worse than the Blu-ray player profiles since it directly affects the design of Xbox 360 games. On the other hand an extra feature that requires BD-Video 1.1 will work on a BD-Video 1.1 player but wouldn't even be seen in the menu on a BD-Video 1.0 player. Also remember that internet connectivity is a feature that has to be designed to be optional on both HD formats since you can never count on the player actually being connected to the internet.


So my answer is no, you shouldn't be making large changes to the platform as you go.I would agree with you if newer discs didn't work on the first Blu-ray players, but considering that the main movie and many of the extras will work fine on all Blu-ray players it isn't like you are replacing the format. Personally speaking though I would recommend waitng for a BD-Live player to those who are interested in extra features.


Let's say, we don't care about the early adopter. We want to develop the format as we go and forget about our installed based. Then you have to be concerned about the further complication the development community faces in dealing with a mixed installed base of players with various capabilities.Which personally speaking I think is one of the most overblown fears of the Blu-ray player profiles since the disc can always check to see what the player is capable of doing. If the feature is not possible on that player the user will never even see that feature show up on the menu.


This all plays a part in my not wanting to touch Blu-ray until it has finished maturing. I believe that is at least a couple of years away.In terms of Blu-ray players I think it will be done by this fall with a full featured BD-Live player. As for seeing all the features put to good use that may take longer but I think that can be said for both HD formats unless you believe that HD DVD has already done everything possible in terms of interactivity.

One thing to remember. If a Blu-ray disc has a program in the mux intended for PIP, it can still be played by a version 1.0 player as a stand-alone program. So you can view all the content on the disc, just not at the same time.

Ron

Based on two of the usage scenarios that the studios have discussed HD PiP would be more useful than SD PiP. Are you suggesting that is not true for those two scenarios?



I see now where I'm getting into trouble, unfortunately I believe the scenarios may have been contributed by a participant I have placed on my ignore list for excessive use the words stupid, idiot, moron etc., direct both in general and specificly at those with which they do not agree. I just have no use for that type of discourse, typing is a conscious act, and there are other ways to passionately defend ones position.

Yes. You keep stating that. Categorically.

Folks have simply asked for some emprical studies showing that is the case.
Some people have binary logic. If it's there you must be able to hear it, if it's not you can't. No amount of testing can prove otherwise, so it's irrelevant. Maybe there is a market for 14k gold cables :rolleyes:

If we take a closer look at BD to understand why it averages a higher rate of stinkers, we find that 16.15% of mpeg2 titles on BD score 3/5 or lower.

If you're really analyzing this stasticially, have you adjusted due to Blu-ray's greater number of titles? (10.7% at 216 to 195 I'm seeing currently available)? YTD and after 8/06 would be interesting, too. My spreadsheet is only about half compiled, though, or i'd check myself. ;)


I believe the quantity of titles is sufficiently high at this point that this is not just a bad luck of the draw for mpeg2.

Is it your position that's the case for each title that received the PQ score 3/5 or lower? And are you drawing a distinction between quality of masters of said titles? Especially in the case of The Fifth Element, paidgeek gave us the reason why the encode was bad and how it slipped through. If/when the better encode comes out... and if it's still MPEG2 yet scores 4/5, 4.5/5, or 5/5, wouldn't it stand to reason that there's similar causation for at least the other launch titles?


It is not delivering as consistent results as AVC or VC1 and it's time to put it out to pasture.

One thing the lemons HDDVD has should show us that there are numerous factors pertaining to PQ and that codec is one of the least likely to have an effect on overall PQ. The differentiation at this point is near statistically meaningless.



Tears of the Sun and MI:3 would not have looked worse using AVC or VC1.[/I]

Indeed and with MI3 we have a direct example to compare, It's interesting to note that MI3 does NOT look better in VC1, either, and this would likely hold true for AVC, as well.

not at all for example Identity has several uncompressed tracks and a shitload of subtitles. King Kong could not even fit one compressed lossless track.

Stop with King Kong already ... man ... is it the *only* argument anyone has anymore? It's already been debunked a dozen times or more ... they decided on the audio and extras before they did the video encode so they new what they hard to work with. King Kong wasn't supposed to get lossless audio. It was never dropped because it was never supposed to be there. Several Insiders (and the Studio Track Record) confirms this.

Yet, this statement keeps coming up over and over and over and over as if it were fact. C'mon already ... the horse died in version I of this thread! :rolleyes:

I know, let's keep bringing up TFE as the 'Standard' for Blu-Ray. :rolleyes:

because the end user can hear the difference and I did not want to get into that debate with the "I refuse to accept realty" crowd.

And how do you know the end user can hear the difference? Or are you just guessing? Because I can think of quite a few people that have their optical playback gear hooked up to their TV speakers or a HTIAB via analog RCA's. Will they hear the difference too? I didn't know the 'lossless' encode could transcend the physical and technological limitations of the hardware. :rolleyes:

for me yes, because it means WB duid that lower common denominator crap and we got stuck ith the HD DVD lower spec :)

Ahhh ... but the PQ/AQ is roughly the same overall, even for titles that have used BD50 ... in fact, the nod tends to go to HD-DVD.

So, if the 'lower spec' is getting the nod in terms of PQ/AQ ... does that say that the 'higher spec' is needed just to stay on par? Kinda like the way it took 10x the amount of hardware players on the market to catch up to HD-DVD disc sales? :p

And how do you know the end user can hear the difference? Or are you just guessing? Because I can think of quite a few people that have their optical playback gear hooked up to their TV speakers or a HTIAB via analog RCA's. Will they hear the difference too? I didn't know the 'lossless' encode could transcend the physical and technological limitations of the hardware. :rolleyes:

Obviously not them. Are you as condenscending regarding people using composite for their HD video, as well? Can YOU see the difference? :rolleyes: Been to the eye doctor recently? :o

because if they did make a lower grade PQ to fit lossless then you end up with lower PQ how is that better? it would be worst.

Speculation, and Opinion ... they could have worked the encode a little longer to work on the trouble spots so that it would be lower bandwidth and yet have the same reference quality. Besides, how much more space would be needed to replace the existing track with TrueHD?

Well actually the Xbox 360 has an optional hard drive so a game developer has to design their games run without it though the games can take advantage of it if the hard drive is there. Personally I think this is worse than the Blu-ray player profiles since it directly affects the design of Xbox 360 games. On the other hand an extra feature that requires BD-Video 1.1 will work on a BD-Video 1.1 player but wouldn't even be seen in the menu on a BD-Video 1.0 player. Also remember that internet connectivity is a feature that has to be designed to be optional on both HD formats since you can never count on the player actually being connected to the internet.

I agree with you on this ... it would have been stellar if the Xbox 360 had the HDD standard across all revisions. That said, I understand that the API for the Devkits is built for this in that the developer doesn't really need to do anything 'extra' to allow for the HDD. Basically, it'll stream to the HDD if the drive is there and it won't stream if the drive is not. This way, the developer's dont have to assume it's not there from a code perspective, nor do they need to do a bunch of 'work' if it is. So ... I don't think it's necessarily worse than the profile issue (no games [yet] require the HDD to be played completely with all features whereas some features will likely be unavailable for access with older profile-based players). ;)

I still think not standardizing the HDD was silly, and I think the cost they're asking for the accessory is ludicrous. ;)

Also, fwiw, it is widely speculated that the only reason the PS3 included a standard HDD at all (because it wasn't going to) was because of the decision to include the Blu-Ray drive which would result in pretty horrible load times.

Conviction that lossless wouldn't fit on KK HDDVD unless:
1) PQ bitrate is turned down and/or compressed further
2) Extras are removed

The same conviction that the existing VC1 encode could be used as-is on BD50, retaining all extras, with at least 3+ 16/48 5.1 LPCM tracks. You could well have a primary 24 bit 7.1 LPCM and multiple language TrueHD tracks.


Have any 3+ hour movies on BD50 come with 3+ 16/48 5.1 LPCM tracks or one 24 bit 7.1 LPCM and multiple language TrueHD tracks?

Some people forget that blu-ray does have a bandwidth limit too. When people carve up the 20GB in their heads do they think the bandwidth available to blu-ray is infinite?

If King Kong was released by Sony, it would have been mpeg2 and 16/48 5.1 LPCM. With no more additional extras or multiple language tracks than the HD-DVD version. Therefore the PQ would have been inferior and AQ pretty much identical. But the extra bandwidth and disk space would have been cancelled out.

I wonder if the blu-ray crowd will finally shut up about the superior BD spec when LOTR comes out on HD30 with 7.1 DTHD and the same top PQ we've come to expect from HD-DVD?

Especially in the case of The Fifth Element, paidgeek gave us the reason why the encode was bad and how it slipped through. :eek:

Please, do you really believe TFE slipped through. This was pure Sony arrogance. They thought it was good enough for their loyal blu-ray supporters period. If HD-DVD never existed this is the sort of quality you would have got for every title. You would have no BD50, AVC or DTHD on blu-ray without HD-DVD.

I just posted this on 4/13, but it looks like I need to post it again.

I've said it before, but I think it bears repeating. Just because mpeg2 can deliver great results on some titles, does not mean that is not inferior to AVC and VC1.

If we look at titles that score 3/5 on PQ or lower, here's what we find.

HD-DVD - 9.76%
BD - 13.24%

If we take a closer look at BD to understand why it averages a higher rate of stinkers, we find that 16.15% of mpeg2 titles on BD score 3/5 or lower.

I believe the quantity of titles is sufficiently high at this point that this is not just a bad luck of the draw for mpeg2. It is not delivering as consistent results as AVC or VC1 and it's time to put it out to pasture. Tears of the Sun and MI:3 would not have looked worse using AVC or VC1.

A repeated incorrect statement is still an incorrect statement. It is as incorrect after being repeated for the millionth time as it is the first time.

MPEG2 is perfectly capable of producing 5/5 results, just as VC1 or AVC. Similarly, VC1 is perfectly capable of producing 2/5 results, just as MPEG2 and AVC.

To state or to imply that MPEG2 is not capable of producing 5/5 is incorrect.

Obviously not them. Are you as condenscending regarding people using composite for their HD video, as well? Can YOU see the difference? :rolleyes: Been to the eye doctor recently? :o

I only re-iterated it that way because he wouldn't comment on it prior. But, my point is, what % of the marketplace is using connections that won't allow them to appreciate lossless even if they could tell the difference? Add to that the people that can't tell the difference and I think it's a pretty large share.

And I'm not being condescending at all ... if you're happy watching TV with composite cables and listening with analog RCA's, then more power to you. *shrug*. I wouldn't presume to tell you what you would appreciate more on your hardware, regardless of what I would like for mine. Though, I suppose that's one of the differences in the 'quest for lossless'. *shrug*

From this post: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10317000&&#post10317000

Regardless of whether Universal uses 1.5Mbps audio for all of their titles or not, KK has no room for lossless audio even if Universal did wanted it. HD DVD has no "potential".

And then from this post: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10322061&&#post10322061

A repeated incorrect statement is still an incorrect statement. It is as incorrect after being repeated for the millionth time as it is the first time.


:confused:

A repeated incorrect statement is still an incorrect statement. It is as incorrect after being repeated for the millionth time as it is the first time.

MPEG2 is perfectly capable of producing 5/5 results, just as VC1 or AVC. Similarly, VC1 is perfectly capable of producing 2/5 results, just as MPEG2 and AVC.

To state or to imply that MPEG2 is not capable of producing 5/5 is incorrect.

Please read my post again. If you'd like to actually address what I posted I'd be happy to discuss it.

How significant is it, I dunno. But it kinda implies the format war isn't over.



I'd say Sony will disagree with you via a press release within a week or so.


Told ya so ... ;)

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10321071&&#post10321071


Fight for next-generation DVD industry-wide standard U.S. entertainment market "BD victory" Sony movie section CEO interviews

I did not choose to call them 3rd rate. Someone asked why Samsung went dual. And I added the reason I think they did. Not just them but LG (even though I would put samsung a bit higher). I was not knocking Samsung or LG. Just pointing out the obvious. It is like that Hunday add that many people are making fun off. Where Hyundai basically compares itself to BMW and they say it is 20k cheaper. No other person will compare a Hyundai to BMW and remotely think of them as equal. I don't think Samsung and LG think they can compare and are trying to give a reason for people to buy their player. And decided to go after the niche of the niche, the "I don't want two players but worried that if I buy the wrong format I will be stuck" people.Re: Hyundai vs BMW. Why would people not compare them? Let's look at the numbers:
Concerning reliability: Hyundai #2, BMW #6 (link) (http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2003-03-11-cr-picks_x.htm)
Price: We don't even need to talk about that, do we?
Safety ratings are a wash: BMW 5 series (http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/safety.aspx?year=2007&make=BMW&model=5-Series) | 2006 Sonata (http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/safety.aspx?year=2006&make=Hyundai&model=Sonata)
Warranty: BMW - 4y/50k miles | Hyundai - 5y/60K bumper to bumper, 10y/100K powertrain. Hyundai crushes the BMW with that one.
Fuel Economy: BMW: 20-21/29-30 | Hyundai 20/30 (Again a wash)
What else is there? Both vehicles get you where you're going, the hyundai does it more reliably, with the same safety and fuel usage, and half the price. And it'll cost you less over 10 years than the BMW because of those warranties.


Now let's look at your denigration of Samsung. They are today considered to be the #1 electronics brand in the world, beating out Sony. (ref (http://www.ameinfo.com/66004.html)). They are also the #1 seller of digital televisions in the US (and the world) (ref (http://www.videsignline.com/products/197000960)), as well as being the 3rd largest electronics manufacturer in the world (behind Sony and Matsushita), and are the 4th most admired (http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/globalmostadmired/2007/snapshots/10340.html) company in the electronics industry, beating out Phillips, Sony and Sharp.

So... uh... what makes them third rate?

Methinks your prejudices are showing...

(Disclaimer: I drive a Hyundai Tiburon, and I've always considered BMWs to be overpriced yuppie vehicles that are more status symbols than actual vehicles. Like a Rolex watch, it doesn't tell time any more accurately than a $100 watch, but it costs 10 times as much.)
And just for fun, a tiburon smoking a BMW (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYJtjfezpGk) (looks like a M3 to me)

Both vehicles get you where you're going, the hyundai does it more reliably, with the same safety and fuel usage, and half the price.But with half the fun. :) Disclaimer: after having sport cars for many years, I almost wrecked umpteen times getting used to poorer-handling, less-powerful cars. :)

So... uh... what makes them third rate?Samsung is actually very picky about video quality on their upcoming players. Picky to the extreme would be more accurate...

bkilian, do you prefer Tivo to Windows Media Center?

Or the UI used in MS IPTV and other products from the MS television group?

Tivo UI is fine but the speed is a huge drag. I recall MS always touting how responsive their UI was.

But with half the fun. :) Disclaimer: after having sport cars for many years, I almost wrecked umpteen times getting used to poorer-handling, less-powerful cars. :)

Samsung is actually very picky about video quality on their upcoming players. Picky to the extreme would be more accurate...Oh, I didn't bother pointing out that the Hyundai in that comparison had a more powerful engine, producing 20 more HP than the BMW 5 series. It was stated in the ad. Sorry :)

As for driving small sporty cars over the lumbering land barges and SUV's that americans seem to prefer, I'm with you on that. The extra acceleration and excellent handling on my car has saved my life a number of times.

One of these days a mascara-applying, cell-phoning, 115 lb. SUV driver may crush you :(

bkilian, do you prefer Tivo to Windows Media Center?

Or the UI used in MS IPTV and other products from the MS television group?

Tivo UI is fine but the speed is a huge drag. I recall MS always touting how responsive their UI was.This is kinda getting a bit off-topic :), but I prefer the Tivo UI over pretty much any of the other options. It's intuitive and responsive. I don't notice the slowness so much, and there are a number of improvements I'd make (They really need a way to access a season pass from the recorded program itself, for example), but all in all, it made television actually watchable for me. I haven't watched "live TV" in 6 years.

Media center looks nice, but I never really got into it, I prefer my PCs in the office, not the TV room.

Certainly (to get back on topic ;)) Tivo UI is no more slugglish than most of the BD menus I've used :p

I see now where I'm getting into trouble, unfortunately I believe the scenarios may have been contributed by a participant I have placed on my ignore list for excessive use the words...I believe you may be confusing this discussion with another poster since the two usage scenarios were actually confirmed by Keith (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10300751&&#post10300751).


Also, fwiw, it is widely speculated that the only reason the PS3 included a standard HDD at all (because it wasn't going to) was because of the decision to include the Blu-Ray drive which would result in pretty horrible load times.Though I see a good number of posters spreading this rumor I have never actually seen any evidence for it. In fact from what I have read (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=8725187&&#post8725187) on this issue the average read rate of a Blu-ray disc at 2x is a bit faster than the average read rate of a dual layer DVD at 8x. Personally I don't know what factors eventually led Sony to make the hard drive mandatory with the PS3 but I get the feeling that some posters try to find reasons to dislike the PS3 because they dislike Sony.

I believe you may be confusing this discussion with another poster since the two usage scenarios were actually confirmed by Keith (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10300751&&#post10300751).


Though I see a good number of posters spreading this rumor I have never actually seen any evidence for it. In fact from what I have read (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=8725187&&#post8725187) on this issue the average read rate of a Blu-ray disc at 2x is a bit faster than the average read rate of a dual layer DVD at 8x. Personally I don't know what factors eventually led Sony to make the hard drive mandatory with the PS3 but I get the feeling that some posters try to find reasons to dislike the PS3 because they dislike Sony.

ty, will do some reading! ;)

My Direct Tivo is unuseable at times waiting for a Season Pass to be added.

Anyways, I would think the UI for disc players is run by the SoC?

Eh, I'll take Honda over Hyundai if I want to own the car (I do like having an appreciable resale value), though have considered leasing a BMW (owning an out of warranty Kraut car scares me silly). Noone can deny there's a... panache... to BMW and other luxury marques that Hyundai just doesn't have. People shopping a 5 series would probably either laugh or sneer if you offered them a Sonata...

On a similar note, I'll take Denon over Sony over Toshiba over Samsung.

Apple pretty much pwns all comers in the UI category... too bad the Apple TV is gimped. I imagine what they COULD have done and can only sigh. Imagine a DVR with Front Row functionality and user swappable 3.5" SATA drives (similar to how the PS3 has an easily accessible 2.5" SATA). But no, DRM had to rear it's ugly head yet again. To say nothing of 720p. :(

Eh, I'll take Honda over Hyundai if I want to own the car (I do like having an appreciable resale value), though have considered leasing a BMW (owning an out of warranty Kraut car scares me silly). Noone can deny there's a... panache... to BMW and other luxury marques that Hyundai just doesn't have. People shopping a 5 series would probably either laugh or sneer if you offered them a Sonata...

On a similar note, I'll take Denon over Sony over Toshiba over Samsung.

Apple pretty much pwns all comers in the UI category... too bad the Apple TV is gimped. I imagine what they COULD have done and can only sigh. Imagine a DVR with Front Row functionality and user swappable 3.5" SATA drives (similar to how the PS3 has an easily accessible 2.5" SATA). But no, DRM had to rear it's ugly head yet again. To say nothing of 720p. :(
Wow, nothing like a racial slur to spice up the discussion... :rolleyes:


FWIW - give me a good Toyota any day of the week and I'll probably end up happy. I'm lame like that.

Wow, nothing like a racial slur to spice up the discussion... :rolleyes:


FWIW - give me a good Toyota any day of the week and I'll probably end up happy. I'm lame like that.

Does Lexus Count? The IS350 is nice ;)

I still think not standardizing the HDD was silly.

MS had the standardized hdd in Xbox 1 while PS2 did not. Consumers made a loud & clear statement with their $ about how much that mattered in that generation.

MS had the standardized hdd in Xbox 1 while PS2 did not. Consumers made a loud & clear statement with their $ about how much that mattered in that generation.

Technology has advanced quite a bit since then though ... HDD's drop in cost pretty quickly compared to some of the other technologies in a console platform so I still think they could have done it ... they just wouldn't be profitable as quickly. At the end of the day, they are a business though and they need to make money. And I suppose with the benefits of the dev kits, it really hasn't hurt them.

I guess the flip side, like you said, is the $$ ... if you start stuffing too many extra things into a console, you get something that no one wants to buy (or can afford).

MS had the standardized hdd in Xbox 1 while PS2 did not. Consumers made a loud & clear statement with their $ about how much that mattered in that generation.There are many factors that determine whether a game console does well. For instance how do you know that the Xbox would have done better, or even sold as well, had the hard drive been made optional? Personally speaking I think making the hard drive optional on the Xbox 360 was a step back while making the hard drive mandatory in the PS3 was a step forward.

This is related to DVD as opposed to HD-DVD and BD, but I find movie DRM related news of interest as there is a lot of new DRM technology in the new formats (especially BD). The more you tighten security, the more risk of running into problems like this.

Sony Pictures DVD’s have a new a copy protection that makes the movies unplayable on some Sony (& other makes) DVD players!
http://sonystrikesagain.wordpress.com/2007/03/19/hello-world/

YES ! It appears that Sony have done it again. In their zeal to make their DVD movies copyproof (yeah right) they have in fact made their latest releases unplayable on some DVD players, including my Sony DVP-CX995V DVD player. I recently rented “Stranger than Fiction” (2 copies) and “The Holiday” ( please no comments on my choice of movies) both by Sony Pictures. Both load up to the splash title screen and then load no further, then after about 60 secs the player turns itself off!

ALL my other DVD’s and new releases from other movie companies play perfectly

I called Sony Electronics help line and they said to call Sony Pictures 1-800-860-2878 which I did.

The following is a compression of our discussion:

Sony Tech: We know about this problem. Its our new copy protection that’s making these discs unplayable in some players including our own, we do not intend to change the copy protection. The only correction to this problem is a firmware update to your player. The electronics division know about this and should have given you this information.

Me: OK send me the firmware update.

Sony Tech: We do not have one as yet.

Me: OK (a bit frustrated) when will it be available?

Sony Tech: It could be 2 weeks it could be a month, we don’t know.

Why all the concern over King Kong. It scored a 5/5 PQ and 4.5/5 AQ. Is it the conviction that AQ can't be any good if it's not lossless?

because I want 5/5 :)

There are plenty of movies with lossless tracks that scored lower for AQ.
and that does not tell you there is something wrong with the reviewer?

And how do you know the end user can hear the difference? Or are you just guessing? Because I can think of quite a few people that have their optical playback gear hooked up to their TV speakers or a HTIAB via analog RCA's. Will they hear the difference too? I didn't know the 'lossless' encode could transcend the physical and technological limitations of the hardware.

well then why go with HD at all, I am sure we can find someone that still watches on a small B&W TV from 30 years ago.

Your Sony player won't play a new Sony movie because of a new DVD copy protection scheme? :eek:

...for DVD's...... root kit anyone?


People should expect the gaming console division (PS3) and the studio (movie authoring and release scheduling) and the consumer electronics division (stand alone Blu-ray players) to be movng in the same direction..

Sony has a bit of a reputation for not coordinating across its divisions andfor being a stove piped organization , but that's a recent DVD player.

You would have thought someone would have checked...... ;)

Yes. You keep stating that. Categorically.

Folks have simply asked for some emprical studies showing that is the case.

I will show it to you when you show me an empirical study that shows the sun is still there on a cloudy day when it can't be seen.

No body makes studies for self evident stuff. Why would a codec be lossy, sold as lossy if it was lossless?

that some people conned a hand full of guys on a forum that lossy means lossless minus some dog whistles, just shows how far some people fanboy attitude has gone.

Why all the concern over King Kong. It scored a 5/5 PQ and 4.5/5 AQ. Is it the conviction that AQ can't be any good if it's not lossless? because I want 5/5 :)There are plenty of movies with lossless tracks that scored lower for AQ.and that does not tell you there is something wrong with the reviewer?No.

It may be that the audio experience was exceptional and contributed to the enjoyment of the movie, and that lossless audio is not a absolute requirement in a movie soundtrack.

...even when it conflicts with your worldview..... ;)

And I'm not being condescending at all ... if you're happy watching TV with composite cables and listening with analog RCA's, then more power to you. *shrug*. I wouldn't presume to tell you what you would appreciate more on your hardware, regardless of what I would like for mine. Though, I suppose that's one of the differences in the 'quest for lossless'. *shrug*

but that is the difference. I say I want lossless you are saying we don't need it and studios should not use it. It would be the same as that composite guy saying I use composite the disks should not be HD.

No.

It may be that the audio experience was exceptional and contributed to the enjoyment of the movie, and that lossless audio is not a absolute requirement in a movie soundtrack.

...even when it conflicts with your worldview.....

It does not conflict with my world view. Do you think a better PQ and AQ will make a really bad movie good? These are reviews, if the guy is judging the movie, then PQ/AQ have nothing to do with it. If the guy is judging the actual quality of the encoding then giving a higher grade to lossy is insane. The issue is some people are using A thinking it proves B

I will show it to you when you show me an empirical study that shows the sun is still there on a cloudy day when it can't be seen.

No body makes studies for self evident stuff. Why would a codec be lossy, sold as lossy if it was lossless?

that some people conned a hand full of guys on a forum that lossy means lossless minus some dog whistles, just shows how far some people fanboy attitude has gone.

Anthony, you keep throwing the "fanboy" comment around as if it could only apply to someone else, and you are somehow immune from the charge. The fact that you regularly devolve into irrationality when any aspect of your quasi-religious fervor for a freaking technology :rolleyes: is legitimately critiqued, strongly suggests that you have no sense of either irony, or hypocrisy.

because I want 5/5 :)


and that does not tell you there is something wrong with the reviewer?

Garbage in, garbage out. Lossless won't produce a better product than you started with.

I've done blind testing, and I know I loose the ability to detect the difference between lossy and lossless at about 192kb/sec. Have you ever tried this out to find the limits of what you can detect?

Garbage in, garbage out. Lossless won't produce a better product than you started with.

I've done blind testing, and I know I loose the ability to detect the difference between lossy and lossless at about 192kb/sec. Have you ever tried this out to find the limits of what you can detect?


Oooh, I'd buy a ticket to see that!

It does not conflict with my world view. Do you think a better PQ and AQ will make a really bad movie good? These are reviews, if the guy is judging the movie, then PQ/AQ have nothing to do with it. If the guy is judging the actual quality of the encoding then giving a higher grade to lossy is insane. The issue is some people are using A thinking it proves BChill out dude. This is a enthusiast site. Don't take it too seriously. :)

If the guy is judging the actual quality of the encoding then giving a higher grade to lossy is insane No he is doing his job as a reviewer.

On the subject, a reviewer is not comparing a lossless to lossy version of the same encode. He is subjectively evaluating how the soundtrack renders sound and how it enhances the movie experience.

Since DD+ on a HD DVD soundtrack is superior in most cases to anything that ever appeared on a DVD, it is quite possible that a modern DD+ codec can render a superior audio experience quite nicely and that a soundtrack in DD+ that matches the movie and is well mastered can be a more impressive and better sounding experience than a not so great sounding piece of soundtrack and lousy musical score that is rendered in PCM.

Its seems that your blind faith in PCM because it is on Blu-ray may make you forget the fact that the reviewer is seeing how the sound fits the movie experience. He's not just saying a PCM track is always better. He comparing content, not codecs.

In this case, despite your gnashing of teeth , the modern yet still lossy codec may be more than adequate to sound great for a movie soundtrack.

A poor musical score or sound design that his done in a lossless codec or PCM soundtrack on one title is not always superior to a well done academy award winning soundtrack more than adequately rendered in DD+.

This discussion is pointless. It's clear that some HDDVD folks are tied to a dogmatic and religious viewpoint that says that anything that HDDVD can't do isn't necessary. It's stunning that AV aficionados would think it is OK for a next generation format, which might last ten years or more, to not have the bandwidth for lossless audio or numerous audio tracks to allow for multiple languages.

This discussion is pointless. It's clear that some HDDVD folks are tied to a dogmatic and religious viewpoint that says that anything that HDDVD can't do isn't necessary. It's stunning that AV aficionados would think it is OK for a next generation format, which might last ten years or more, to not have the bandwidth for lossless audio or numerous audio tracks to allow for multiple languages.

Ah, but we hear a constant refrain from BD aficionados that extra features are completely unnecessary, and they don't care about them: "Just show me the movie." Drop all the extra features.......problem solved.......right? ;)

Ah, but we hear a constant refrain from BD aficionados that extra features are completely unnecessary, and they don't care about them: "Just show me the movie." Drop all the extra features.......problem solved.......right? ;)

And let's not forget all of the baggage that comes with BD. SuperDuper DRM, region coding, lots of mpeg2 titles with a higher rate of poor PQ (compared to AVC and VC1) and of course the vast majority of the catalog on BD-25.

This is related to DVD as opposed to HD-DVD and BD, but I find movie DRM related news of interest as there is a lot of new DRM technology in the new formats (especially BD). The more you tighten security, the more risk of running into problems like this.True, but movie studios have been playing around with the DVD file structure for a while now in an attempt to mess up DVD rippers. From what I have read (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10326538&&#post10326538) Sony messed up and used a file structure that wouldn't work on certain DVD players.


Your Sony player won't play a new Sony movie because of a new DVD copy protection scheme? :eek:He was quoting that from the blog he linked to.

And just for fun, a tiburon smoking a BMW (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYJtjfezpGk) (looks like a M3 to me)

Isn't that a Z3 or a Z4 Roadster? the M3 is a 2 door sedan.

Apple pretty much pwns all comers in the UI category... too bad the Apple TV is gimped. I imagine what they COULD have done and can only sigh. Imagine a DVR with Front Row functionality and user swappable 3.5" SATA drives (similar to how the PS3 has an easily accessible 2.5" SATA). But no, DRM had to rear it's ugly head yet again. To say nothing of 720p. :(

Why would Apple want to cannibalize their iTunes TV show sales by releasing a DVR ?

Isn't that a Z3 or a Z4 Roadster? the M3 is a 2 door sedan.

All of the above mentioned are chick cars.

All Japanese and European cars are chick cars to you Red Blooded Americans. :D

But seriously the M3s are awesome cars, pratical everyday cars too.

Just to tag on the end of the "HD PiP" discussion we had here a bit back:

Ben posted (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10328241&&#post10328241) in the insider's thread a link to some 720p24 content he did for NAB. It's bitrate is 2Mbs. Given that you can use 4Mbs for VC-1 in HD DVD, I suspect the "Green-screened director pointing out stuff in the video frame behind him" scenario might be pretty darn doable even at HD resolutions.

Why would Apple want to cannibalize their iTunes TV show sales by releasing a DVR ?


Plus they make money on the hardware, not those TV and movies downloads.

It's probably more about placating and courting the studios, by not offering DVRs.

I will show it to you when you show me an empirical study that shows the sun is still there on a cloudy day when it can't be seen.

No body makes studies for self evident stuff. Why would a codec be lossy, sold as lossy if it was lossless?

that some people conned a hand full of guys on a forum that lossy means lossless minus some dog whistles, just shows how far some people fanboy attitude has gone.

Oh c'mon. Just about everything A/V delivered to your senses involves some degree of perceptual modeling.

Do you really have a problem with 3-primary color systems, because they don't deliver the actual wavelengths for other colors, but instead rely on how your eye perceives color?

Are you stating that there were NO studies done, because it was self evident that a "3-color" system was NOT the same as an "actual wavelength" system, and therefore no data exists?

OK. :rolleyes:

This discussion is pointless. It's clear that some HDDVD folks are tied to a dogmatic and religious viewpoint that says that anything that HDDVD can't do isn't necessary. It's stunning that AV aficionados would think it is OK for a next generation format, which might last ten years or more, to not have the bandwidth for lossless audio or numerous audio tracks to allow for multiple languages.


Mmm, I'm not so sure. At least from my standpoint, the viewpoint is to balance the "can it deliver well enough for the majority of cases" with the "manufacturing & consumer practicality/cost".

I tend to dislike "it can go to 11, so it must be better" type quality perceptions. Manufacturers tend to cater to it, and people often fall for it. I prefer to understand the implications behind the numbers and make my decision accordingly.

Anthony, here's (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10327264&&#post10327264) a response to my post on the Insider's thread regarding getting lossless out of encode/decode scenarios (with a formatting correction):



Amongst the (many) discussions in the "Battle" thread, the issue of the potential for decoding a lossless audio stream to render a non-lossless result was brought up. This was in the context of why PCM might be preferable to lossless codecs.

The contention was that given a particular encoding path/optimization on the front end, the decoder on the back end might find itself out of MIPS under some set of circumstances, and therefore you were in danger of not really getting identical bits back.

Dolby TrueHD certification requires bit exact decoding of the content. Here is the exact wording from Dolby FAQ on TrueHD:

"The Dolby TrueHD decoder circuit actually verifies the output is lossless as it is decoding."


My thoughts are:
- the behavior of the encode/decode is deterministic for all of the sample formats/data rates within the spec

- conformance tests exist to test pathological cases such that these extremes are already exercised prior to certification/logo'ing, etc...

Yes, even in the case of lossy codecs, there are certification tests and PSNR levels to meet. In case of lossless, you have to be bit exact or you don't get to ship the technology.


- multi-core SoC designs that contain many functional blocks (i.e. audio decode, video decode, video plane scaling, CPU core, etc...) are built/tested such that individual blocks are not allowed to step on each other's toes (i.e.- max data rate video decode doesn't saturate the memory pipeline such that you can't get samples in/out of the audio decoder)

Indeed. There are always dedicated audio DSPs/CPUs that are not impacted by other work loads. But if there is interference, it is job of the system designer to make sure everything works. Otherwise you will have issues with displaying the logo (and in some cases, licensing the technology at all).


Furthermore, I've NEVER heard of CE equipment being widely criticised for it's codecs (be they lossy or otherwise) not outputting the correct bitstream due to lack decoder horsepower.

Indeed.


Finally, I'd suspect that the error condition in such a case would be a an audible glitch in the output (not some graceful degradation), such that if this were an issue, it would be pretty darn noticeable.

That is what I would expect. And the exact same thing happens to PCM audio .

__________________
Amir
Microsoft (HD DVD insider)
VC-1 video codec insider in BD/HD DVD
Ask me questions about HD DVD here

Anthony, do you disagree with any of this?

Why would Apple want to cannibalize their iTunes TV show sales by releasing a DVR ?

To go for the giant market that is not interested in iTunes (particularly those old school "grognards" who don't want a durned computer in their AV rack)?

Mmm, I'm not so sure. At least from my standpoint, the viewpoint is to balance the "can it deliver well enough for the majority of cases" with the "manufacturing & consumer practicality/cost".

I tend to dislike "it can go to 11, so it must be better" type quality perceptions. Manufacturers tend to cater to it, and people often fall for it. I prefer to understand the implications behind the numbers and make my decision accordingly.

Agree completely . . . which is why I bought a 720p Plasma recently. Sure the LCD folks want you to believe that resolution is king, and that washed out colors, greyish blacks, and ghosting due to response times "aren't important" . . . and I must admit, when I was "spec shopping" LCDs did seem to have a commanding advantage . . . that is, until I saw the best available LCD next to generally accepted best 720p Plasma -- no contest. All the specs in the world cannot describe the actual experience. It is not surprising to me that in a techie-esque product such as next generation HD video discs (especially in the early adopter marketplace) that specs seem to hold a lot of weight, when in the "normal", "real" or "mass market" world, people pretty much look at two available options, look at the price and do the consumer math of "does that picture LOOK $300 better?"

On paper BR has (when it has been completely developed, that is) a long list of advantages. In use, having seen BR and HD content side by side, I can't say that I'd pay a premium for BR discs/players. That may change 3, 5, 7, 10 years from now, but by then (at least the 10 year time frame) I doubt physical media will be "the thing".

(Disclaimer: I drive a Hyundai Tiburon, and I've always considered BMWs to be overpriced yuppie vehicles that are more status symbols than actual vehicles. Like a Rolex watch, it doesn't tell time any more accurately than a $100 watch, but it costs 10 times as much.)
And just for fun, a tiburon smoking a BMW (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYJtjfezpGk) (looks like a M3 to me)

Look again. That's a Tiburon GT with a 2.7L V6 against a BMW Z3 with a 1.9L straight 4. An M3 would have eaten the Hyundai for lunch and asked for dessert. Take them off the drag strip and put them on a road course and the BMW is in a league of its own.

Being proud of the brand of car you own is one thing, stretching the truth to bash somebody else's choice is another, even when you pass it off as "just for fun."

When you boil it down to essentials, all a car does is go, turn and stop. A BMW does all those things extremely well and manages to make them all a lot of fun.

But I think we're in the middle of the wrong format battle.

Let's see. HD DVD took the lead after Blu-ray spun its wheels at the starting line. But HD DVD missed a gear and allowed Blu-ray to pass at the halfway mark. HD DVD just pulled ahead by a nose as they enter the stretch. It's anybody's race and the fans are out of their seats and screaming ....

Anthony, here's (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10327264&&#post10327264) a response to my post on the Insider's thread regarding getting lossless out of encode/decode scenarios (with a formatting correction):

{snip}



And further, Keith's response (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10330499&&#post10330499) :

Yes, Amir is 100% correct on what's needed to pass conformance testing. It's really pretty straightforward. At the SoC level, it is our responsibility to ensure it still works 100% correctly no matter what else our chip is doing. For example, we made the audio DSP caches large enough to minimize DRAM memory bandwidth so that video processing isn't affected.

__________________
Keith Jack
Director Product Marketing
Sigma Designs
BD and HD-DVD decoder supplier

Anthony, do you still maintain that there's the likely possability that lossless decoders will not in actuality return the identical bits under some circumstances?

Let's see. HD DVD took the lead after Blu-ray spun its wheels at the starting line. But HD DVD missed a gear and allowed Blu-ray to pass at the halfway mark. HD DVD just pulled ahead by a nose as they enter the stretch. It's anybody's race and the fans are out of their seats and screaming ....

The better analogy would Blu-ray getting as much as 3 car lengths llead after that "missed shift." Then there was a slick that both slowed down for (AACS key exploit). The Fox team called for a pit stop (new AACS keys and/or BD+) and out the pit stop Blu-ray still leads at least car length (assuming 2:1 disc sales)...

This is almost as fun as the Shakespearean angle we were doing a week or two back. :D

Not sure this has been discussed here. The news is on the news thread but misses a critical piece.

Sonic Teams Up With Microsoft on Professional VC-1 Encoding
Sonic Unveils CineVision PSE, a New Parallel Stream Encoder Based on Microsoft Technology
...
Depending on the configuration, CineVision PSE may be used to encode multiple simultaneous streams of the highest quality VC-1 delivered in near real-time.
...

Is this the first multiple simultaneous near realtime HD encoding system ? This should make putting out more HiDef DVDs easier ...

...
Sony Pictures DVD’s have a new a copy protection that makes the movies unplayable on some Sony (& other makes) DVD players!
http://sonystrikesagain.wordpress.com/2007/03/19/hello-world/

...

Sony Tech: We know about this problem. Its our new copy protection that’s making these discs unplayable in some players including our own, we do not intend to change the copy protection. The only correction to this problem is a firmware update to your player. The electronics division know about this and should have given you this information.

Me: OK send me the firmware update.

Sony Tech: We do not have one as yet.

Me: OK (a bit frustrated) when will it be available?

Sony Tech: It could be 2 weeks it could be a month, we don’t know.[/I]I believe the system Sony is using actually makes the discs non DVD spec conformant. So it really is the disc, and not the player's fault. Theoretically, the DVD forum could require that Sony remove the DVD ROM logo from those discs. (I doubt it would though :))

If the guy is judging the actual quality of the encoding then giving a higher grade to lossy is insane. The issue is some people are using A thinking it proves B
I have an example of a reviewer who claims that the lossy core of the DTS-HD MA track on Night At the Museum is better than any other title's uncompresed or losslessly-encoded track. Personally, I can't see how that's possible, but I'm interested to read your comments.

The post can be found here. (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10331962&&#post10331962)
This will be my last post on this issue, as you yourself have admitted in this thread as being the "minority." I completely stick-by the score of 5/5 in audio for this release. It is stunning to say the least. The best I have heard thus far in HD, lossless or not. End Of Story.

~Josh

I believe the system Sony is using actually makes the discs non DVD spec conformant. So it really is the disc, and not the player's fault. Theoretically, the DVD forum could require that Sony remove the DVD ROM logo from those discs. (I doubt it would though :))Lots of DVDs hack the spec big time to accomplish what they do. The studios ran into the limit of what DVD spec can do a few years ago, so have been continually figuring out ways around the spec limitations.

if you guys can get any hddvd to spike higher then #9. I'll personally destroy my ps3 on youtube.
4/15/07 - Planet Earth reaches #4
Waiting for link to video on youtube.

His last post was on 15th. Purely co-incidental ;)

I won't be surprised if he has registered under a new name and trolling in HD DVD forums ...

God will the car analogies never end?

Usually analogy is a tool to understand a more complicated and unfamiliar set of circumstances by drawing parallels to the familiar.

There is nothing particularly mystifying about all this.

Oh c'mon. Just about everything A/V delivered to your senses involves some degree of perceptual modeling.

Do you really have a problem with 3-primary color systems, because they don't deliver the actual wavelengths for other colors, but instead rely on how your eye perceives color?

Are you stating that there were NO studies done, because it was self evident that a "3-color" system was NOT the same as an "actual wavelength" system, and therefore no data exists?

OK. :rolleyes:
This isn't about science you know, it's religion :confused:

...

I've done blind testing, and I know I loose the ability to detect the difference between lossy and lossless at about 192kb/sec...

192kbps for 2 channels is roughly equivalent to 640kbps for 5.1. Have you petitioned all the studios using 1.5Mbps audio to stop using so much BW because you won't be able to hear the difference?

Please read my post again. If you'd like to actually address what I posted I'd be happy to discuss it.

For efficiency sake, I'd refer you to the feedbacks that you received from the AVS members when you posted your statement the first time for the details. Your rationale that any codec, which can deliver a 5/5 PQ result, is somehow inadequate PQ wise is incorrect.

Out of curiosity, does anyone have the PQ numbers for the Paramount VC1 encodes in comparision to their equivalent MPEG2 encodes? I'd like to see the results since Nov 2006 and since inception.

Just to tag on the end of the "HD PiP" discussion we had here a bit back:

Ben posted (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10328241&&#post10328241) in the insider's thread a link to some 720p24 content he did for NAB. It's bitrate is 2Mbs. Given that you can use 4Mbs for VC-1 in HD DVD, I suspect the "Green-screened director pointing out stuff in the video frame behind him" scenario might be pretty darn doable even at HD resolutions.Well besides the fact that 720p clip looked rather overcompressed to me there is one fatal flaw with this idea. The HD DVD player requirements are designed only to allow for a SD PiP video stream. For the same reason you can't put a 720p video stream on a DVD you can't simply put a 720p PiP video stream on a HD DVD. The hardware simply isn't designed for it. Of course I would understand if you want to ask Amir about this to see what he would say about your idea. Also just to mention this but 4 Mbps is the peak bitrate and 2 Mbps is the maximum average bitrate for a secondary video stream on HD DVD using an advanced video codec.

but that is the difference. I say I want lossless you are saying we don't need it and studios should not use it. It would be the same as that composite guy saying I use composite the disks should not be HD.

I'm not saying studios should not use it ... I'm saying that PQ is most important, first ... and I'm saying that Studios, (1) knowing what the mass market consumer will likely be using to playback these titles and (2) knowing that the perceptible difference of lossy vs lossless is minimal (if at all), will probably not want to use it. They would much rather spend their time adding some deleted scenes, that everyone can see versus some audio that the majority will not even know is there. ;)

Well besides the fact that 720p clip looked rather overcompressed to me there is one fatal flaw with this idea. The HD DVD player requirements are designed only to allow for a SD PiP video stream. For the same reason you can't put a 720p video stream on a DVD you can't simply put a 720p PiP video stream on a HD DVD. The hardware simply isn't designed for it. Of course I would understand if you want to ask Amir about this to see what he would say about your idea. Also just to mention this but 4 Mbps is the peak bitrate and 2 Mbps is the maximum average bitrate for a secondary video stream on HD DVD using an advanced video codec.

I was making a point about what could be accomplished for given bit budget, not particularly stating that you could do arbitrary resolutions on secondary decoder HW.

I'd bet that for green-screened talking-head type stuff, you could get away with a pretty low bitrate.

I was making a point about what could be accomplished for given bit budget, not particularly stating that you could do arbitrary resolutions on secondary decoder HW.No offense but your earlier post looked like it was implying that possibility and I just wanted to point out that there was more involved in decoding a HD video stream than the bit rate.


I'd bet that for green-screened talking-head type stuff, you could get away with a pretty low bitrate.If it is something simple with little motion than I would agree with you on that.

Technology has advanced quite a bit since then though ... HDD's drop in cost pretty quickly compared to some of the other technologies in a console platform so I still think they could have done it ... they just wouldn't be profitable as quickly. At the end of the day, they are a business though and they need to make money. And I suppose with the benefits of the dev kits, it really hasn't hurt them.

I guess the flip side, like you said, is the $$ ... if you start stuffing too many extra things into a console, you get something that no one wants to buy (or can afford).

Yeah, not being profitable is considered a problem by some businesses. :)

I loved the built-in hdd on Xbox 1, custom soundtracks, tons of save memory, improved load times but the bottom line is MS sunk 4+ billion dollars and decided they wouldn't do it again.

Another issue with hdd though was that it limited their ability to reduce the form factor on the Xbox the way the PS2 did coming out with smaller units as well as cheaper as time went on. Mass market loves those smaller, inexpensive PS2's as the console cycle went on. This is another hurdle the PS3 may face as it may prove very difficult to ever shrink the unit size on a PS3 with HDD and blu-ray drive included. MS may have some wiggle room with a core 360 and Wii is already quite small.

There are many factors that determine whether a game console does well. For instance how do you know that the Xbox would have done better, or even sold as well, had the hard drive been made optional? Personally speaking I think making the hard drive optional on the Xbox 360 was a step back while making the hard drive mandatory in the PS3 was a step forward.

Sure there are many factors. I never say Xbox would have done better w/o the hdd sales wise, but MS does know what the affect was on cost/price and form flexibility and decided not to go that way this time.

Can't forget we're talking mass market consoles here, where BD/HD is a secondary function. Wii has no hdd, how's that selling? The hdd is nice but price apparently still trumps it for most.

No offense but your earlier post looked like it was implying that possibility and I just wanted to point out that there was more involved in decoding a HD video stream than the bit rate.

No offense taken. But just to point out that I thought I'd mention that I'd just like to say I hope you sleep better now that you know what I meant.

Yeah, not being profitable is considered a problem by some businesses. :)

I loved the built-in hdd on Xbox 1, custom soundtracks, tons of save memory, improved load times but the bottom line is MS sunk 4+ billion dollars and decided they wouldn't do it again.

Another issue with hdd though was that it limited their ability to reduce the form factor on the Xbox the way the PS2 did coming out with smaller units as well as cheaper as time went on. Mass market loves those smaller, inexpensive PS2's as the console cycle went on. This is another hurdle the PS3 may face as it may prove very difficult to ever shrink the unit size on a PS3 with HDD and blu-ray drive included. MS may have some wiggle room with a core 360 and Wii is already quite small.



Sure there are many factors. I never say Xbox would have done better w/o the hdd sales wise, but MS does know what the affect was on cost/price and form flexibility and decided not to go that way this time.

Can't forget we're talking mass market consoles here, where BD/HD is a secondary function. Wii has no hdd, how's that selling? The hdd is nice but price apparently still trumps it for most.

Flash Memory has also gotten so inexpensive, I wouldn't be surprised if later consoles come with 20GB built in via some sort of in-series Compact Flash Cards and the HDD would be an extension to that. I think the 4GB CF cards are like $30 now so we're talking about $150 retail. The 20GB HDD is $100 Retail. And, no moving parts. ;)

Wishful thinking, perhaps.

Flash Memory has also gotten so inexpensive, I wouldn't be surprised if later consoles come with 20GB built in via some sort of in-series Compact Flash Cards and the HDD would be an extension to that. I think the 4GB CF cards are like $30 now so we're talking about $150 retail. The 20GB HDD is $100 Retail. And, no moving parts. ;)

Wishful thinking, perhaps.

I don't think bandwidth will expand as fast as fall in CF prices - so even if the memory in players is very high - we won't be able to download fast enough for us to have a seemless optical + internet download experience.

Just to tag on the end of the "HD PiP" discussion we had here a bit back:

Ben posted in the insider's thread a link to some 720p24 content he did for NAB. It's bitrate is 2Mbs. Given that you can use 4Mbs for VC-1 in HD DVD, I suspect the "Green-screened director pointing out stuff in the video frame behind him" scenario might be pretty darn doable even at HD resolutions.

steve, ask for the specs on the PiP

Oh c'mon. Just about everything A/V delivered to your senses involves some degree of perceptual modeling.



agree, we are already not getting 100%, that is why we talk of 16/48 or 24/48 or 24/192 (the highest grade master that these media can support). I just want ot make sure my senbses and my attention is the issue and not because some pencil pusher does not want quality

the issue is this is what Dolby has to say



19. What are the sonic differences between a 3 Mbps 7.1-channel Dolby TrueHD signal and the same signal supported at 5 Mbps?

None. If a stream can be encoded losslessly at 3 Mbps, then the same stream encoded at 5 Mbps will sound identical.


7. How does a lossless audio format differ from a lossy audio format?
….
The lossless version always sounds like the source. The lossy version may sound like the source, but this is not guaranteed. ……


if 1.5mbps was enough for all encoding (or what ever value some pencil pusher at the studio decided to use) why the hell is DTHD need up to 3mbps for 16/48 and 5 mbps 24/48 for 5.1? 3.5mbps 2-4x as much BW needed is a lot of information that is missing. Not garbage but useful information that should not be missing.

http://www.dolby.com/assets/pdf/tech_library/TrueHD_FAQ_10925_Final.pdf

Anthony, do you still maintain that there's the likely possability that lossless decoders will not in actuality return the identical bits under some circumstances?


Steave: that is not what I said. I said I can understand why someone would prefer PCM because there is always the possibility that some players might have some issues with some decoding. Unlike you I live in the real world. DL DVD was in the disk specs and especially early on there were many players that had issues with them. HD DVD fan boys whine about BD profiles and how they will cause issues, but even though there is only one HD DVD spec and one HD DVD CE manufacturer there is at least one HD DVD movies that won’t play on the 1G Toshiba players (Plazman and Grubert were discussing it in an other thread). Sh!t happens. DTHD is in the HD DVD specs but by the simple fact that someone can build an HTPC with an HD DVD drives make this whole conversation moot. None of them (especially because you did not ask) have talked about why every player at every time must decode flawlessly or what will be the ramification if it does not (except that it would be audible). You asked if machines/designs are tested, well d'uh. But everything has tolerances and everything does not go right 100%.

I am sure Keiths chips are of the highest quality, does that mean every player will get the same? how about those cheap Chinese ones?

PS you had asked me all those questions before and I had agreed with you, so don’t know hwt it is suppose to mean.

agree, we are already not getting 100%, that is why we talk of 16/48 or 24/48 or 24/192 (the highest grade master that these media can support). I just want ot make sure my senbses and my attention is the issue and not because some pencil pusher does not want quality

the issue is this is what Dolby has to say




if 1.5mbps was enough for all encoding (or what ever value some pencil pusher at the studio decided to use) why the hell is DTHD need up to 3mbps for 16/48 and 5 mbps 24/48 for 5.1? 3.5mbps 2-4x as much BW needed is a lot of information that is missing. Not garbage but useful information that should not be missing.

http://www.dolby.com/assets/pdf/tech_library/TrueHD_FAQ_10925_Final.pdf

You seemed to have snipped my questions to you in this post, as well as having avoided answering them.

Well besides the fact that 720p clip looked rather overcompressed to me there is one fatal flaw with this idea

but richard if someone is looking at it on their 5" TV they can't tell the difference :)

You seemed to have snipped my questions to you in this post, as well as having avoided answering them

Steve do they need an answer? :)

well if you want one. Luckily unlike lossless audio you can search the internet and get it because in 1st grade science teachers teach this stuff.

suffice it to say there are three primary colours
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/c2/AdditiveColor.svg/200px-AdditiveColor.svg.png

red green and blue these are called the additive primary colours. putting them together in different proportions can give you any colour. Many colours (like Magenta) don't even have a wavelength and most objects get their colours from absorbing several wavelengths.

Now that you learnt what you should have back in grade 1 we can continue the discussion.

You seemed to have snipped my questions to you in this post, as well as having avoided answering them.

http://www.asahi-net.or.jp/~ch2m-nitu/koorogie.htm

Anthony, do you still maintain that there's the likely possability that lossless decoders will not in actuality return the identical bits under some circumstances?

Steave: that is not what I said. I said I can understand why someone would prefer PCM because there is always the possibility that some players might have some issues with some decoding.

Horse hockey. That's exactly what you said: (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10254511&&#post10254511)

even though I am not asking for PCM (Lossless is OK) what ytou are saying is not right. You are forgetting that with any encode you have two week points that you don't with PCM.

1) an encoder
2) a decoder

just because all the information is there to get back a lossless rendition does not mean it will happen. For example (reason) the processor might not be powerful enough and it messes up on decoding. Have you ever had a PC where while watching something/playing a game it slows down or stops?

Just look at the guys that did a review between the BD and HD DVD and heard some differences between the two.

The reason I don't care as much (PCM or other lossless) is that if the data can be recompiled it is up to the buyer to get a machine that does it right.

And then again: (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10266248&&#post10266248)


Someone stated that a lossless encode necessarily meant a lossless decode. And that is not true. It might always happen in all players, but it is not necessarily so. I clearly stated in each of the posts that lossless encodes are good enough for me, but that I can understand why someone could want PCM and I decided to give an example. An other reason (mentioned before is the guy might not have a player that can decode every lossless).

As to your test, that is a stupid comment. I won't go with HTPCs or anything else. But none of these players have separate audio and decoding chips. So there is literally no way to test all systems.


Back to your reply above...


Unlike you I live in the real world. DL DVD was in the disk specs and especially early on there were many players that had issues with them. HD DVD fan boys whine about BD profiles and how they will cause issues, but even though there is only one HD DVD spec and one HD DVD CE manufacturer there is at least one HD DVD movies that won’t play on the 1G Toshiba players (Plazman and Grubert were discussing it in an other thread). Sh!t happens. DTHD is in the HD DVD specs but by the simple fact that someone can build an HTPC with an HD DVD drives make this whole conversation moot. None of them (especially because you did not ask) have talked about why every player at every time must decode flawlessly or what will be the ramification if it does not (except that it would be audible). You asked if machines/designs are tested, well d'uh. But everything has tolerances and everything does not go right 100%.

I am sure Keiths chips are of the highest quality, does that mean every player will get the same? how about those cheap Chinese ones?

PS you had asked me all those questions before and I had agreed with you, so don’t know hwt it is suppose to mean.

So let me get this straight... you are concerned that somehow players are gonna flub up lossless decoding. What about MPEG2? And AVC? And VC-1? And scaling? And compositing? And their TCP/IP stack? etc, etc... Yet they'll get PCM right. They won't round it incorrectly for DAC's that don't take 24 bits in. They won't cross stereo pairs. They won't resample.

And you are questioning whether I live in the real world?

Steve do they need an answer? :)

well if you want one. Luckily unlike lossless audio you can search the internet and get it because in 1st grade science teachers teach this stuff.

suffice it to say there are three primary colours
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/c2/AdditiveColor.svg/200px-AdditiveColor.svg.png

red green and blue these are called the additive primary colours. putting them together in different proportions can give you any colour. Many colours (like Magenta) don't even have a wavelength and most objects get their colours from absorbing several wavelengths.

Now that you learnt what you should have back in grade 1 we can continue the discussion.

Before I respond to this, let me be absolutely clear. Are you claiming that a 3-color primary model is how "real life" works, and not simply a perceptual model we use in display technology?

Is that your "1st grade" basic teaching claim?

I'm not saying studios should not use it ... I'm saying that PQ is most important,
agree with you on that

and I'm saying that Studios, (1) knowing what the mass market consumer will likely be using to playback these titles and
but that is the thing losless audio adds more in this respect then anything else. There was a thread in the BD forum where someone set-up his PS3 incorrectly and was getting SD out of it. He said BD looks just slightly better then DVD but sounds much better. Whe he realized and switched to HD he responded "now I understand"

Lossless audio (unless you gave a 360 add-on) adds more then you think. Even if some connects a player to an old SD set using RCA connectors (analog audio and composite) he can hear the benefits of lossless, he can't watch HD (his set is SD and only accepts SD over component) so it is SD just not as over compressed as DVD, he can't hear the surround (and 5.1 is nothing new) but those analog cables bring out the lossless (from PCM ordecoded DTHD) to his speakers



(2) knowing that the perceptible difference of lossy vs lossless is minimal (if at all), will probably not want to use it.

that is the issue the difference is much bigger then you think. It is similar to someone saying the difference between SD and HD is minimal (after all it won't change the acting and most people don't count freckles to see if one is missing due to resolution)

They would much rather spend their time adding some deleted scenes, that everyone can see versus some audio that the majority will not even know is there.
but what they want is what sells. What sells should be what we want. This is what is most annoying with this discussion we are telling studios we would rather have garbage on the disk then quality. why? because some overzealous fanboys decided that that cheerleading is more important.

192kbps for 2 channels is roughly equivalent to 640kbps for 5.1. Have you petitioned all the studios using 1.5Mbps audio to stop using so much BW because you won't be able to hear the difference?

Let me first answer your question.......No. My speakers extend to 29Khz. I'm not calling the manufacturer to ask them to change their design. At the same time I don't believe I'm able to hear anywhere close to a 29Khz frequency.

Now I'll ask my question from the post you qouted.

I've done blind testing, and I know I loose the ability to detect the difference between lossy and lossless at about 192kb/sec. Have you ever tried this out to find the limits of what you can detect?

Horse hockey. That's exactly what you said:

no it is not

Anthony, do you still maintain that there's the likely possability that lossless decoders will not in actuality return the identical bits under some circumstances?

there is a world of difference between that and

Anthony, do you still maintain that there's the likely possability that some lossless decoders will not in actuality return the identical bits under some circumstances?

the first one is no the second one is yes. The first one assumes I think it for all devices. I alreaduy said that I assume it to be an exception. But for all I know that guy wanted to watch his movies on an old PC that can't process DTHD correctly and he would get the glitches.

Are you claiming that a 3-color primary model is how "real life" works, and not simply a perceptual model we use in display technology?

not at all. what I am saying (might this might be high school science) is that the eye has a retina, the retina has rods and cones. Rods are not important in this discussion since they are not colour sensitive. Cones are divided into three categories red, green and blue (wow what a coincidence they match the primary colours) depending on the wavelengths they react to, these reactions are then sent to the brain and we see colour. if the eye gets yellow wavelength the green and red react and send a signal, if the eye gets red and green wavelength the red and green cones react and send a signal to the brain. In both cases it is the exact same signal that reaches the brain and we see the exact same thing.

For efficiency sake, I'd refer you to the feedbacks that you received from the AVS members when you posted your statement the first time for the details. Your rationale that any codec, which can deliver a 5/5 PQ result, is somehow inadequate PQ wise is incorrect.

Out of curiosity, does anyone have the PQ numbers for the Paramount VC1 encodes in comparision to their equivalent MPEG2 encodes? I'd like to see the results since Nov 2006 and since inception.

Maybe I missed it, but yours was the only significant feedback I saw.

Let me see if I follow your point. Mpeg2 has delivered some titles that score a 5/5, therefore Mpeg2 is just as good as AVC and VC1. Is this correct? If so, are the studios wasting their time with AVC and VC1? Is it a statistical anomaly that Mpeg2 titles average lower PQ scores on both BD-25 and BD-50 (vs. AVC and VC1)?

Maybe my theory is wrong. Maybe there's some other logical explanation, and all this effort to create new codecs has been a big waste of time that does nothing but add more licensing costs to all of these players.

I find it ironic that you're in favor of lossless audio, but when it comes to video you're very supportive of a 12 year old codec vs. two newer more advanced codecs.

Before I respond to this, let me be absolutely clear. Are you claiming that a 3-color primary model is how "real life" works, and not simply a perceptual model we use in display technology?

Is that your "1st grade" basic teaching claim?


Alert the media I'm going to support Anthony. Yes, RGB additive color is pretty-much the way light and color work in nature. Subtractive color systems (like CMYK) have much narrower spectrum, and approximations/simulations of RGB.

That's why you get colors on your (RGB) monitor that cannot be reproduced in printed (CMYK) form.

It's very counter-intuitive, in that for example an orange Jack O Lantern, is actually every color that compliments orange, because that is the color(s) it cannot absorb, and that's how RGB works. If you intersect a Red, Blue, and Green beams of light, you get pure "white light"

I don't think bandwidth will expand as fast as fall in CF prices - so even if the memory in players is very high - we won't be able to download fast enough for us to have a seemless optical + internet download experience.

That's a very good point ... the new SDHC cards are > 9mbps I believe ... what do you think it would take? 2x that? 3x?

I did say wishful thinking. ;)

That's a very good point ... the new SDHC cards are > 9mbps I believe ... what do you think it would take? 2x that? 3x?

Actually I was talking about internet bandwidth.

Let us say you have a huge CF memory in the player. What would you use it for - probably the extras - which will then seemlessly be played along with the movie on the disc. But the problem is they have to be downloaded everytime you load a new disc. And if you have even 4GB of memory that would take a long time to fill up through Internet - and nobody will have the patience to wait ...

Alert the media I'm going to support Anthony. Yes, RGB additive color is pretty-much the way light and color work in nature. Subtractive color systems (like CMYK) have much narrower spectrum, and approximations/simulations of RGB.

That's why you get colors on your (RGB) monitor that cannot be reproduced in printed (CMYK) form.

It's very counter-intuitive, in that for example an orange Jack O Lantern, is actually every color that compliments orange, because that is the color(s) it cannot absorb, and that's how RGB works. If you intersect a Red, Blue, and Green beams of light, you get pure "white light"
You mean we have a sun that radiates only red, green and blue in the visible spectrum? That was the point.

no it is not



there is a world of difference between that and



the first one is no the second one is yes. The first one assumes I think it for all devices. I alreaduy said that I assume it to be an exception. But for all I know that guy wanted to watch his movies on an old PC that can't process DTHD correctly and he would get the glitches.

Well, there's a good reason to suggest we should have PCM on discs. I'm sure the video looks stellar at 8fps too.

not at all. what I am saying (might this might be high school science) is that the eye has a retina, the retina has rods and cones. Rods are not important in this discussion since they are not colour sensitive. Cones are divided into three categories red, green and blue (wow what a coincidence they match the primary colours) depending on the wavelengths they react to, these reactions are then sent to the brain and we see colour. if the eye gets yellow wavelength the green and red react and send a signal, if the eye gets red and green wavelength the red and green cones react and send a signal to the brain. In both cases it is the exact same signal that reaches the brain and we see the exact same thing.

And what you have described is how humans PERCIEVE color.

Now, do you recognize that is NOT how bodies radiate color?

We may be getting somewhere.

Alert the media I'm going to support Anthony. Yes, RGB additive color is pretty-much the way light and color work in nature. Subtractive color systems (like CMYK) have much narrower spectrum, and approximations/simulations of RGB.

That's why you get colors on your (RGB) monitor that cannot be reproduced in printed (CMYK) form.

It's very counter-intuitive, in that for example an orange Jack O Lantern, is actually every color that compliments orange, because that is the color(s) it cannot absorb, and that's how RGB works. If you intersect a Red, Blue, and Green beams of light, you get pure "white light"

Perhaps we are on different pages here, Timothy. I was not challenging the additive versus subtractive nature of color system, but rather asking Anthony if he thought that a "primary color system" was actually how light is physically radiated from a body, as opposed to it being the perceptual model used by display devices to exploit our visual perception.

IOW: Did he recognize that orange is physically radiating off the fruit as a 590nm wavelength in real life, not as a combination of 570nm (Yellow) and 650nm (Red) wavelengths that our eyes perceive as orange.

You mean we have a sun that radiates only red, green and blue in the visible spectrum? That was the point.

Yes, that's what I was getting at.

Ultimately I'm challenging the notion that for self-evident truths (i.e.- a perceptual model != physical mechanism) that studies are not done to determine the degree to which the perception is accurate to the original.

I think maybe Timothy thought I was challenging additive vs. subtractive, which I was not. Both are perceptual models for different applications.

agree with you on that


Woohoo! We agree on something! :D


but that is the thing losless audio adds more in this respect then anything else. There was a thread in the BD forum where someone set-up his PS3 incorrectly and was getting SD out of it. He said BD looks just slightly better then DVD but sounds much better. Whe he realized and switched to HD he responded "now I understand"


And how many other 'average consumers' are going to hook up there gear incorrectly and not have the benefit of AVS to help them fix it?


Lossless audio (unless you gave a 360 add-on) adds more then you think. Even if some connects a player to an old SD set using RCA connectors (analog audio and composite) he can hear the benefits of lossless, he can't watch HD (his set is SD and only accepts SD over component) so it is SD just not as over compressed as DVD, he can't hear the surround (and 5.1 is nothing new) but those analog cables bring out the lossless (from PCM ordecoded DTHD) to his speakers


Sooo ... we want lossless because it is closest to the master ... but even a lossless encode piped over analog connections is going to sound better than a lossy encode piped over the same analog RCA's? I'm gonna have to try this myself, because I don't see how I could tell a difference.


that is the issue the difference is much bigger then you think. It is similar to someone saying the difference between SD and HD is minimal (after all it won't change the acting and most people don't count freckles to see if one is missing due to resolution)


Perhaps ... but this is where you and I largely disagree. Your opinion, which you state as fact, is that the difference is large. My opinion, which I state as opinion, is that I don't notice a difference and I don't think the average consumer will either.


but what they want is what sells. What sells should be what we want. This is what is most annoying with this discussion we are telling studios we would rather have garbage on the disk then quality. why? because some overzealous fanboys decided that that cheerleading is more important.

Again, it's up to the studios, like you said. They feed us extra content that many BD-advocates say they could care less about (I kinda like having them, though I must confess I rarely watch anything other than deleted scenes and bloopers, if that).

And, please, can we stop with the 'overzealous fanboy' stuff? You can make your point without calling those people who disagree with you stupid, dumb, ignorant, fanboy, etc. :(

Actually I was talking about internet bandwidth.

Let us say you have a huge CF memory in the player. What would you use it for - probably the extras - which will then seemlessly be played along with the movie on the disc. But the problem is they have to be downloaded everytime you load a new disc. And if you have even 4GB of memory that would take a long time to fill up through Internet - and nobody will have the patience to wait ...

I was thinking more as a replacement for HDD's and things like that ... wrt Consoles, etc.

But, couldn't a second disc be used to load up the CF storage for separate audio tracks or perhaps a separate PiP encode or something? Then the secondary decoder would have full bandwidth available for that content and HD-DVD could theorhetically provide every language on the planet without sacrificing bw?

But for all I know that guy wanted to watch his movies on an old PC that can't process DTHD correctly and he would get the glitches.

If the guy has an old PC, then he probably doesn't have the equipment to hear loseless.

And this should be taken differently since I thought that the players made have to pass specs in order to have the logo's and be licensed for the technology. People with PC's don't have this to worry about.

If the guy has an old PC, then he probably doesn't have the equipment to hear loseless.

And this should be taken differently since I thought that the players made have to pass specs in order to have the logo's and be licensed for the technology. People with PC's don't have this to worry about.

Indeed they do. You are spot on.

And although AnthonyP would like us to forget that in this post (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10266248&&#post10266248) he wasn't talking about PC's at all, but the hardware within dedicated decks, much of the converstation was indeed about exactly the sort of hardware testing/compliance to which you refer.

But, couldn't a second disc be used to load up the CF storage for separate audio tracks or perhaps a separate PiP encode or something? Then the secondary decoder would have full bandwidth available for that content and HD-DVD could theorhetically provide every language on the planet without sacrificing bw?

That is possible.

Does anyone know what this really says?

Something about Wal-Mart and Chinese Players ...

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10344181&&#post10344181

Does anyone know what this really says?

Something about Wal-Mart and Chinese Players ...

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10344181&&#post10344181

It seems WalMart has ordered 2M HD DVD drives for the holiday season. Possibly they will get someone else to build the player using the drives and sell the players at an attractive price during the holiday season.

This can be a decisive event is the format war.

Does anyone know what this really says?

Something about Wal-Mart and Chinese Players ...

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10344181&&#post10344181

Well, we know the Chinese have officially adopted HD-DVD as their high def format for domestic use. Of course their version uses their own home grown AVS codec instead of the standard three.

I believe the article relates to their beginning production of HD-DVD drive mechanisms. That's good news in that the increased production volumes will help drive further cost reductions. I'm not sure how Walmart factors in unless they plan to be the retail distribution arm for a lot of these players.

Did anyone else catch the new SoC announcement Intel made at the Beijing IDF?

Intel integrated media SoC boosts A/V processing
http://www.edn.com/article/CA6434434.html

The Intel CE 2110 media processor is a complete system-on-a-chip (SoC) architecture that Intel said combines a 1GHz processing core with powerful A/V processing and graphics, and I/O components, onto a single chip. The SoC includes a 1 GHz Intel XScale CPU, MPEG-2 and H.264 hardware video decoders, DDR2 memory interface, 2D/3D graphics accelerators, and is supported by a modular software development environment. Intel also said that its platform architecture also allows CE developers and manufacturers to deliver pure IP or hybrid set top boxes designed to receive content from IP and digital broadcast pipes.

They don't mention VC1, but if it can handle that as well, it seems like it might be handy for building high def players. Perhaps there's a different flavor of this chip coming soon.

I noticed recently that the last two encodings from Universal, The Jerk (http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/jerk.html) and The Game (http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/game.html), were rated pretty low in video quality at High-Def Digest. Not that it matters much but I am a bit surprised at the hypocrisy that a few posters have when it comes to the two HD formats. A Blu-ray disc with a 3 star rating in picture quality causes them to make mocking posts against Blu-ray in this thread, but I never hear a peep from those same posters when discs like these are released on HD DVD. Maybe it is just me but I think if someone is going to mock an entire video format simply because of an encoding that was made for it they should at least be consistent about it.

I bet you were on the edge of investing in an HD DVD player until this setback, huh Richard? :)

I noticed recently that the last two encodings from Universal, The Jerk (http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/jerk.html) and The Game (http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/game.html), were rated pretty low in video quality at High-Def Digest. Not that it matters much but I am a bit surprised at the hypocrisy that a few posters have when it comes to the two HD formats. A Blu-ray disc with a 3 star rating in picture quality causes them to make mocking posts against Blu-ray in this thread, but I never hear a peep from those same posters when discs like these are released on HD DVD. Maybe it is just me but I think if someone is going to mock an entire video format simply because of an encoding that was made for it they should at least be consistent about it.

Thank you Richard. I've updated my spreadsheet. The current percentage of stinkers (3/5 or lower PQ) stands at

HD-DVD = 10.65%
BD = 13.04%

It is certainly dissapointing as this is the first time I've seen HD-DVD go above 10%.

It seems WalMart has ordered 2M HD DVD drives for the holiday season. Possibly they will get someone else to build the player using the drives and sell the players at an attractive price during the holiday season.

This can be a decisive event is the format war.

http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/04/20/the-wal-mart-299-hd-dvd-player-on-the-way/

I noticed recently that the last two encodings from Universal, The Jerk (http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/jerk.html) and The Game (http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/game.html), were rated pretty low in video quality at High-Def Digest. Not that it matters much but I am a bit surprised at the hypocrisy that a few posters have when it comes to the two HD formats. A Blu-ray disc with a 3 star rating in picture quality causes them to make mocking posts against Blu-ray in this thread, but I never hear a peep from those same posters when discs like these are released on HD DVD. Maybe it is just me but I think if someone is going to mock an entire video format simply because of an encoding that was made for it they should at least be consistent about it.
Shouldn't your superior format have 1/10th the number of duds? This just helps prove they are about the same, notwithstanding the fanatical ranting.

Without the competition they'd both be worse.

It seems WalMart has ordered 2M HD DVD drives for the holiday season. Possibly they will get someone else to build the player using the drives and sell the players at an attractive price during the holiday season.

This can be a decisive event is the format war.

I would say, 2 million HD-DVD players at about $149, they will fly off the shelves.

Thank you Richard. I've updated my spreadsheet. The current percentage of stinkers (3/5 or lower PQ) stands at

HD-DVD = 10.65%
BD = 13.04%

It is certainly dissapointing as this is the first time I've seen HD-DVD go above 10%.

It can probably be blamed on poor master transfers that 'fell through the cracks'. :p

I would say, 2 million HD-DVD players at about $149, they will fly off the shelves.

The engadget article says $299 ... which is only like $30 less than the A2 ... wonder if they'll be logo'd? There's a lot of things that could happen here. Guess we'll have to wait and see ;)

Just saw this on cdrinfo. Not worth including in the News section but interesting in view of the recent developments:

Microsoft and Samsung to Share Technologies (http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/News/Details.aspx?NewsId=20245)

Microsoft and Samsung announced a deal on Thursday to share patented technologies related to hardware and software products, including Linux.

The US software giant and the South Korea-based electronics titan have a "broad patent cross-licensing agreement" that they say will accelerate development of new products at both companies.

"Patent collaboration agreements like this expand access to ideas and lead to even more desirable products," said Samsung senior vice president Shung-Hyun Cho.

Under the terms of the deal, Samsung will get Microsoft technology that can be used for such products as computers, digital media players, camcorders, televisions, printers, home appliances and television set-top-boxes. Samsung will also obtain coverage from Microsoft for its customers' use of certain Linux-based products.

Microsoft will gain access to Samsung?s patent portfolio relating to digital media and computer devices.

Financial details of the agreement were not disclosed but both parties will be paid for use of proprietary technology.

"We are always looking for new opportunities to work collaboratively within the industry and Samsung was a natural fit," said Microsoft vice president Horacio Gutierrez.

"Companies that collaborate are in the best position to deliver the products and service that their customers demand."

In the past 12 months, Microsoft has announced similar agreements with companies such as Novell, NEC, Fuji-Xerox, Seiko-Epson and Nortel.

The engadget article says $299 ... which is only like $30 less than the A2 ... wonder if they'll be logo'd? There's a lot of things that could happen here. Guess we'll have to wait and see ;)

It's kind of hard for me to imagine they would be that high, because you know Toshiba is going to be matching that price or below for the holidays.

There is actually some speculation that the article was mis-translated and the players in question are BD. If this is true it's really bad news for HD DVD and fairly bad news for SONY, because in no way could they be ready for that undercut this soon.

It's kind of hard for me to imagine they would be that high, because you know Toshiba is going to be matching that price or below for the holidays.

There is actually some speculation that the article was mis-translated and the players in question are BD. If this is true it's really bad news for HD DVD and fairly bad news for SONY, because in no way could they be ready for that undercut this soon.

Who is doing the "speculating?"

The Wal-Mart thread on the HD DVD section is a must read. If what is being said is true, it may render all comments on this thread and all other threads here moot! As far as pricing is concerned we may be heading to the lowest common denominator very quickly. If the quality is good then this may establish high definition as commonplace (a good thing) and make HD DVD the format to beat! This is going to be very interesting.

Cheers,

Grant

Who is doing the "speculating?"


So far the schmoes in the Endgadjet forum, which I know is far from official, but it would explain $299 pricing.

Don't get me wrong, I want it to be HD DVD, but I think we need to proceed with caution. Currently there is too much conflicting information.

Update; Not looking good for HD DVD
Update: Pull back the reigns HD DVD fanboys, Akihabara now says that they've made a "huge mistake" with their translation: the original source called it "藍光 HD DVD and 藍光 means Blu-RAY." In other words, Blu-ray HD DVD. Huh? Word to the wise: since both formats use blue lasers, it's best to wait for an English press release before either camp celebrates.

Update Two,

Apearantly the article also mentions using DVD production lines, which sounds more HD DVD.

So either side, don't count this chicken, until it's fully, reliably translated/hatched!

Sounds like it's HD DVD from the 4th paragraph translation...

"Deng Hongmo Kyrgyzstan also mentioned that Blue HD DVD Player for the core of high capacity, high definition, high-resolution vision. images can be more realistic, more beautiful images. Its advantages are easier to maintain compatibility with existing DVD discs, and can continue using existing DVD production equipment. facilitate the expansion of the distance between lens and CD, no CD-creator. DVD transition from the existing to substantially reduce the cost of HD-DVD, Disks made by the manufacturers of DVD to HD DVD at the cost of conversion to an absolute minimum. In addition, although smaller capacity HD DVD movies recorded, but proof, decontamination capability, without vacuum. Therefore the production process easier and less costly. "


http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ettoday.com%2F2007%2F04%2F16%2F 320-2082635.htm&langpair=zh%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools

I bet you were on the edge of investing in an HD DVD player until this setback, huh Richard? :)Not really, as I have said before I am willing to wait about 2 years to see if Universal will start supporting Blu-ray. Just my opinion but the entire idea of universal players seems like a waste of money to me. After all if universal players do become standard than consumers will get the honor of paying extra for them for the next 20+ years.


Shouldn't your superior format have 1/10th the number of duds? This just helps prove they are about the same, notwithstanding the fanatical ranting.The point of my earlier post was that there are a few posters who would have attacked Blu-ray as a video format if two titles with similar picture quality scores had come out on it.


Update; Not looking good for HD DVD
...Engadget just used a source (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10348954&&#post10348954) that made a translation error.

--- Sorry for the previous News but we were lost in the transaltion , We had to read Blu-Ray HD DVD... an in Chinese it is 藍光 = blue ray ---


Akihabara News (http://www.akihabaranews.com/en/news-13678-2+millions+of+Blu-Ray+players+for+Walmart.html)

So far the schmoes in the Endgadjet forum, which I know is far from official, but it would explain $299 pricing.

Don't get me wrong, I want it to be HD DVD, but I think we need to proceed with caution. Currently there is too much conflicting information.

Update; Not looking good for HD DVD

Update Two,

Apearantly the article also mentions using DVD production lines, which sounds more HD DVD.

So either side, don't count this chicken, until it's fully, reliably translated/hatched!

Yup ... messy ... better to just wait for the dust to settle and see what pans out. Great arguments for both sides here. ;)

Well information has been leaking out about what exactly Fuh Yuan is making and apparently it is one of the components that will be used in the cheap Chinese HD DVD player that Microsoft and Broadcom have been working on. A poster whose first language is Chinese (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10349945&&#post10349945) said that of the 2 million HD DVD players ordered by Wal-Mart all will be shipped by the end of next year. From what Kosty has heard (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10351259&&#post10351259) the loader is by Fuh Yuan, the laser head by TDK, and the SoC decoder chip by Broadcom. He also says that mass production will begin in August with initial delivery beginning in 2007.

The engadget article says $299 ...Based on how the HD-D1 seemed to sell at Wal-Mart, I can't imagine them ordering 2 million players and expecting to sell them at even close to $299. If they are under $200 and coming this year, then I think the Blu-ray camp better respond in some way, or seriously risk losing.

--Darin

I think the anticipated price point is well below $299.

I think the anticipated price point is well below $299.

Here's looking forward to $149 ;)

If they are under $200 and coming this year, then I think the Blu-ray camp better respond in some way, or seriously risk losing.
--Darin


Not neccessarily on the player side, BDA already have millions of players in the market. But they better be prepared on the replication side once the demand catch up.

Based on how the HD-D1 seemed to sell at Wal-Mart, I can't imagine them ordering 2 million players and expecting to sell them at even close to $299. If they are under $200 and coming this year, then I think the Blu-ray camp better respond in some way, or seriously risk losing.As optimistic as some are about this news there is a limit to how cheaply even a Chinese CE company can make a HD DVD player and still make a profit. Also from the sounds of it Wal-Mart ordered 2 million HD DVD players but the order is for both this year and for next year. In other words only a fraction of that number is likely to be made and sold this year.


I think the anticipated price point is well below $299.An anticipated price point though means little if it is not a realistic price point based on actual hardware costs.

As optimistic as some are about this news there is a limit to how cheaply even a Chinese CE company can make a HD DVD player and still make a profit. Also from the sounds of it Wal-Mart ordered 2 million HD DVD players but the order is for both this year and for next year. In other words only a fraction of that number is likely to be made and sold this year.


An anticipated price point though means little if it is not a realistic price point based on actual hardware costs.

Keep in mind though, the 2 million order is just for these players.

There is still the Alco SHD-7000 and the Shinco HD-A100 amoung other discount Chinese HD-DVD players coming this year.

....


An anticipated price point though means little if it is not a realistic price point based on actual hardware costs.

Not if their strategy is to provide cheap hardware to drive software sales.
People who buy their player at Wallmart are buying software at Wallmart too.

Keep in mind though, the 2 million order is just for these players.Well assuming this new Wal-Mart HD DVD player sells well this is likely to be the biggest surprise we are going to see in terms of a HD DVD player announcement for the rest of the year.


There is still the Alco SHD-7000 and the Shinco HD-A100 amoung other discount Chinese HD-DVD players coming this year.Maybe, though I haven't heard much about those two outside of the occasional CE trade show and have they even announced official dates, or specs, for those two players yet?


Not if their strategy is to provide cheap hardware to drive software sales.I personally doubt that Wal-Mart is going to subsidize their HD DVD player just so they could sell more software for it.

As optimistic as some are about this news there is a limit to how cheaply even a Chinese CE company can make a HD DVD player and still make a profit. Also from the sounds of it Wal-Mart ordered 2 million HD DVD players but the order is for both this year and for next year. In other words only a fraction of that number is likely to be made and sold this year.


An anticipated price point though means little if it is not a realistic price point based on actual hardware costs.


Even if they only get 500,000 of those players on the market, by the end of the year, that equals millions of discs sold. If those players hit the market at $149, I am going to buy 2, if they are $99, I will pick up 3. Wal-Mart has a great 4 year warranty and it's very inexpensive. If they are buying the drive for $50, I don't see the shelf price being anymore than $149, or $148.88, whatever wacky price Wal-Mart comes up with. By the end of the year, you will probably be able to buy a Toshiba player for $249.

Well assuming this new Wal-Mart HD DVD player sells well this is likely to be the biggest surprise we are going to see in terms of a HD DVD player announcement for the rest of the year.


Maybe, though I haven't heard much about those two outside of the occasional CE trade show and have they even announced official dates, or specs, for those two players yet?


I personally doubt that Wal-Mart is going to subsidize their HD DVD player just so they could sell more software for it.

Wal-Mart loses money on a lot of items, when they are on ad. It's a "lost leader", get more people in the door to buy the advertised special and they pick up several other items while they're in the store. I used to work for Coke, Coors and 7-Up, all of the retail stores did that with our products. Do you think the store makes any money by selling a 12 pack of Coke for $1.99? They don't, they lose money. When I worked for Coke, it cost the store about $4.50 to buy a case (2-12 packs), they lost .50 cents, to draw people into their store. Not to say they didn't get kick-backs from Coke, for running that advertised sale.

Who's not to say Wal-Mart isn't going to get a kickback from the makers of HD-DVD, to sell these at a lower price, or get a discounted pricepoint on discs?

Not neccessarily on the player side, BDA already have millions of players in the market. But they better be prepared on the replication side once the demand catch up.

This is the problem I see for BD - I highlighted that in the Nielsen thread.

The BD movie sales are flat. But BD player ownership is already high and slowly increasing. At this current movie sales rate - BD will become a small niche player.

DVDs sell about 100M a month. Current BD sales are around 250K a month, HD DVD is about 125K.

We know and see HD DVD's strategy. What is BD's strategy to grow movie sales ?

This is the problem I see for BD - I highlighted that in the Nielsen thread.

The BD movie sales are flat. But BD player ownership is already high and slowly increasing. At this current movie sales rate - BD will become a small niche player.

DVDs sell about 100M a month. Current BD sales are around 250K a month, HD DVD is about 125K.

We know and see HD DVD's strategy. What is their strategy to grow movie sales ?

Right, and it's 2:1 Disc Sales with a 10:1 Lead in Players ... what happens if the player lead shrinks down to 5:1 ?

We know and see HD DVD's strategy. What is their strategy to grow movie sales ?

Sell movie players, there is still some doubt how many PS3 owners care to own more than a couple Casino Royalle style movies.

HD DVD's strategy is to be the hi-definition DVD player for your hi-definition TV.

This is where the ease of it's name recognition will come into play, ya buy the HDTV and for an extra $200 you buy the HDTV DVD player.

The software will have to come down a bit, but it can if enough hungry players are out there.

If these players are the real deal, there is just no way this isn't going to be a mega boost to the format. So, spin away it's going to take more than nay-saying to burst this bubble.

What if the lead in players goes to 15:1?

HDDVD only led in players 52-48 when there was a huge disparity in price (from $500-1000 USD as I'm thinking of original pricing of the A1 versus that of the Pioneer Elite, if not the Panny, as well). According to Robert at VE his margins were much better, as well, so we know they were profitable at that pricing scheme.

2nd gen Blu-ray players are 40-50% off of those original prices, shrinking the price disparity to ~$300 or so, while equalling the performance of the high end Toshiba (the new Sammy is only $50 more than the XA2 with the same capability and a larger library).

Meanwhile more and more PS3 are still being pumped out every month. Even if you stick with minimal sales (~150k/month) and Paramount's rate of adoption (22%), do you really think Toshiba is selling that many players per month? What are you going to do when the PS3 sales 500k+ towards the holidays and if percentage shoots towards 50% (which is probably where I think it is now)?

I guess I don't know the point of trying to act as if this will have no effect, because it's not going to make much difference to the converted, these will sell to people who don't know a thing about this forum, or probably what studio supports what format, they'll see the words HD DVD, they'll price, and home they will go. BD isn't even going to have a dramatic lead in the number of disks on the market by the time these show up.

Most medium small town don't have a Best Buy or Circuit City, but for better or worse they all have Walmarts.

If those players hit the market at $149, I am going to buy 2, if they are $99, I will pick up 3.Okay, though in your zeal for HD DVD support you basically are planning to buy one or more of these players from Wal-Mart without even having a clue how good of a HD DVD player it actually is.


Who's not to say Wal-Mart isn't going to get a kickback from the makers of HD-DVD, to sell these at a lower price, or get a discounted pricepoint on discs?Well I would expect Wal-Mart to sell their HD DVD player above its actual cost but obviously that could change if the HD DVD companies subsidize it.


The BD movie sales are flat.Blu-ray sales don't look that bad to me (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10351321&&#post10351321).


BD isn't even going to have a dramatic lead in the number of disks on the market by the time these show up.For someone who goes around calling other people "the converted" simply because you disagree with them you don't seem to recognize that you often treat your personal opinions as though they were facts.

What if the lead in players goes to 15:1?

HDDVD only led in players 52-48 when there was a huge disparity in price (from $500-1000 USD as I'm thinking of original pricing of the A1 versus that of the Pioneer Elite, if not the Panny, as well).

At either of those price points, I think it's reasonably safe to assume that standalones appeal to a relatively finite market of videophiles. PS3 also plays games, so the consumer value calculus isn't equivalent, though some enthusiasts have clearly purchased it primarily for BD playback.

2nd gen Blu-ray players are 40-50% off of those original prices, shrinking the price disparity to ~$300 or so, while equalling the performance of the high end Toshiba (the new Sammy is only $50 more than the XA2 with the same capability and a larger library).

$300 is an enormous disparity at the lower end of the market. Will other BD CEs cannibalize potential PS3 ( as a standalone ) sales by significantly undercutting its' price point, or will the presumed reduction this fall define the lower limit of BD hardware pricing, since even those consumers purchasing PS3 primarily as a standalone, might also be tempted to purchase a few more lucrative interactive titles?

Meanwhile more and more PS3 are still being pumped out every month. Even if you stick with minimal sales (~150k/month) and Paramount's rate of adoption (22%), do you if percentage shoots towards 50% (which is probably where I think it is now)?

I think 50% is pie-in-the-sky right now, and it seems to me that $200 HD DVD players at Wally World this fall might put some serious FUBAR on the BDA's strategy.

For someone who goes around calling other people "the converted" you don't seem to recognize that you often treat your personal opinions as though they were facts.

My, my this news is bringing the best out in everyone isn't it? I was under the impression that Fox and Warner delays along with Universal's new schedule was evening the playing field for a bit.

Oh and by the way, by "The Converted" I meant those who are already HDM owners (either format), and not those who have given it little thought.

Relax it's Friday :D

$200 HD DVD players at Wally World this fall might put some serious FUBAR on the BDA's strategy.

What's FUBAR?

Okay, though in your zeal for HD DVD support you basically are planning to buy one or more of these players from Wal-Mart without even having a clue how good of a HD DVD player it actually is.
Probably the same drive and SoC that Pioneer will use.

Blu-ray sales don't look that bad to me (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10351321&&#post10351321).
If Fozziwig didn't use a distorting 3D perspective, and included linear regression lines, it might look different.

Blu-ray sales don't look that bad to me (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10351321&&#post10351321).


Thats because you are not following that thread closely and I'm not sure what is numbers really are. In any case how "good" does this sound.

DVD : 100,000,000 per month

Blu-ray : 250,000 per month.

Yes, 0.25% of DVD sales.

What's FUBAR?


http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fubar

FUBAR
1. (WWII military slang) F**ked up beyond all recognition (or repair).

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fubar

FUBAR
1. (WWII military slang) F**ked up beyond all recognition (or repair).

What a gruesome origin for such a fun sounding word.

thanks, sometimes i get lost in the acronym hell that is the AVS board :)

You know you would think if they're going to ship in these volumes and at these price points, they'd be aggressively courting the studios to flip and have HD-DVD product at the same time as these players.

So we should see Disney and Fox annoucing a bunch of HD-DVD titles this Xmas some time this year, right?

And really, for cut rate players, they need to cut HD-DVD pricing for new releases to under $25 and maybe within $5 of the street price of DVD.

I was under the impression that Fox and Warner delays along with Universal's new schedule was evening the playing field for a bit. That could be true and I said something similar in a recent post (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10325806&&#post10325806).


Relax it's Friday :DI guess I could give that a try.


Probably the same drive and SoC that Pioneer will use.Maybe, but maybe not. We simply don't know enough about the new Wal-Mart HD DVD player at the moment to know what it will be like.


Yes, 0.25% of DVD sales.And is that supposed to be bad for a new video format competing with another new video format less than a year after it launched? As I say again Blu-ray sales don't look that bad to me and from what I can see it is currently the top selling HD video format.

You know you would think if they're going to ship in these volumes and at these price points, they'd be aggressively courting the studios to flip and have HD-DVD product at the same time as these players.

So we should see Disney and Fox annoucing a bunch of HD-DVD titles this Xmas some time this year, right?

And really, for cut rate players, they need to cut HD-DVD pricing for new releases to under $25 and maybe within $5 of the street price of DVD.

Ya that would all be nice, but even as an HD DVD supporter I gotta say, lets wait til we have more to go on. For one, just because Walmart ordered these, doesn't mean there are no cheapo BD players on the horizon.

I don't think anyone will change their spots to stripes until they are here and selling.

And is that supposed to be bad for a new video format competing with another new video format less than a year after it launched? As I say again Blu-ray sales don't look that bad to me and from what I can see it is currently the top selling HD video format.

As long as you concentrate on the pygmies war it looks rosy. But when you consider the context of my original comment you will see that it is not rosy. Where and how is the growth needed going to come from ?

Not neccessarily on the player side, BDA already have millions of players in the market. But they better be prepared on the replication side once the demand catch up.

http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/4939/nielsenestsf1.gif (http://imageshack.us)

We would still need to see it in the context of DVD sales. Even if the estimate for this dip is accurate, it's still very interesting that both formats peak and trough with each other. It's jsut as likely the current estimated dip is not as steep (as with the previous dip). I would definitely be interested to see if DVD is following a similar pattern.

$300 is an enormous disparity at the lower end of the market. Will other BD CEs cannibalize potential PS3 ( as a standalone ) sales by significantly undercutting its' price point, or will the presumed reduction this fall define the lower limit of BD hardware pricing, since even those consumers purchasing PS3 primarily as a standalone, might also be tempted to purchase a few more lucrative interactive titles?

AT this stage of the game, I don't agree. Mass adoption is not only dependent on price, but on the current state/age/maturity of the format(s). j6p doesn't jump en masse into new formats, even if they're dirt cheap. While we're not precisely tied into HDTV penetration, that's a maximum reasonable expectation for 100% saturation of either format right now IMO. As HDTV's proliferate, so too will the HD formats, and the price will become more important.

The $300-500 is the current sweet spot and the HD-A2 should occupy it nicely, as will the A20 and XA2 as time wears on. I just think it's rather extremely partisan to not expect the Sony BDP-S300 and new Sammy to slide in at the mid/upper end of that scale, as well. We have yet to presented any evidence to justify any expectation that indicates HDDVD will far outpace the 52-48 standalone performance when the price advantage in their favor was nearly double what it will be in Summer 07 than it was in Summer 06 that even the smallest percentage of PS3 adoption compensates for favorably to Blu-ray's advantage.

We would still need to see it in the context of DVD sales. Even if the estimate for this dip is accurate, it's still very interesting that both formats peak and trough with each other. It's jsut as likely the current estimated dip is not as steep (as with the previous dip). I would definitely be interested to see if DVD is following a similar pattern.

Yes, it would be interesting to check. Is there a place that posts weekly DVD sales data ?

AT this stage of the game, I don't agree. Mass adoption is not only dependent on price, but on the current state/age/maturity of the format(s). j6p doesn't jump en masse into new formats, even if they're dirt cheap.While we're not precisely tied into HDTV penetration, that's a maximum reasonable expectation for 100% saturation of either format right now IMO. As HDTV's proliferate, so too will the HD formats, and the price will become more important.

HD media are at a disadvantage relative to what occurred with DVD in terms of compatible extant displays, but DVD hardware/software sales exploded when sub $200 players became available. Over the first three quarters last year, HDTV sales increased over 50% relative to the same period the year before, and prices have plummeted even faster this year, particularly on LCD and Plasma flat panels. $200 HD DVD players would be a no-brainer loss leader to help move even more of them this holiday season.

$300-500 is the current sweet spot and the HD-A2 should occupy it nicely, as will the A20 and XA2 as time wears on. I just think it's rather extremely partisan to not expect the Sony BDP-S300 and new Sammy to slide in at the mid/upper end of that scale, as well.

I agree that those machines should be competitive at their respective price points, but I hope you're not attempting to say that < $300 is somehow "sweeter" than > $300, because that simply makes no sense.

We have yet to presented any evidence to justify any expectation that indicates HDDVD will far outpace the 52-48 standalone performance when the price advantage in their favor was nearly double what it will be in Summer 07 than it was in Summer 06 that even the smallest percentage of PS3 adoption compensates for favorably to Blu-ray's advantage.

If the history of consumer electronics teaches us anything, it's that price trumps most anything else, and $199. is a magic number. How else to explain the fact that a dinky little console with last-gen graphics is currently trouncing the technological/branding juggernaut of the gaming industry?

I think there has to be some determining level of adoption before mass adoption, now the level is so low for both formats as to be non-existent. I can see $200 players appealing on various fronts.

Someone who bought a set and wants to give it a whirl,
If you get one bundled or discounted with new HDTVs,
BD PS3 owners who don't see $200 as an unreasonable price to be able to play the HD DVDs they want but cant get on BD.

It's just easy to drop $200.

If this were a situation where Walmart has chosen HD DVD as the most economical viable format, it's mere presence in their store serves as a promotion of the format itself.

BD sold on the promise not only that they would sell a lot of PS3's but that it would translate to substantial disc and standalone sales. They are beating HD DVD in disk sales, but they aren't making their mark in the broader scheme. Baring a quick rise to the top, the economic feasibility of these formats become more of an issue, and cheaper players, and the ability to utilize DVD production lines makes HD DVD the model, which can come in cheaper and get even more economical faster.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fubar

FUBAR
1. (WWII military slang) F**ked up beyond all recognition (or repair).

The other classic acronym is

SNAFU
1941, U.S. military slang, acronym for situation normal, all f***ed up, "conveying the common soldier's laconic acceptance of the disorder of war and the ineptitude of his superiors." ["Oxford English Dictionary," which seldom fails to delight]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/snafu

snip.......
We have yet to presented any evidence to justify any expectation that indicates HDDVD will far outpace the 52-48 standalone performance when the price advantage in their favor was nearly double what it will be in Summer 07 than it was in Summer 06 that even the smallest percentage of PS3 adoption compensates for favorably to Blu-ray's advantage.

Let's keep in mind the NPD sales numbers for Q1 2007. I think disc sales show that some percentage of PS3 buyers are snapping up BD movies, but not the majority. It's hard to know the percentage without making assumptions about BD discs/ps3.

Xbox360 = 199,000
PS3 = 130,000

(of course PS2 and Wii sold in higher volumes)

Has anyone seen NPD numbers for the HD-DVD add-on in Q1? I know they sold 92,000 units in 2006.

I agree that those machines should be competitive at their respective price points, but I hope you're not attempting to say that < $300 is somehow "sweeter" than > $300, because that simply makes no sense.


Less than $300 is just not feasable right now. It may be for the A2 come Summer, but that remains to be seen. By the time these Wal-Mart players come, regardless of whether there is no Blu-ray answer or not, Blu-ray may well have achieved an unsurpassable lead.

I don't necessarily believe HDDVD will die, and could well see it achieving enough of a base that it won't die, but I don't think there's any question of Blu-ray's survival, while there are numerous reasons to doubt the fate & longeviity of HDDVD. Particularly I don't believe the big box retailers (BB, CC much less Target and Wal Mart) will go on stocking both indefinitely and I don't believe Blu-ray will be the first to drop.


If the history of consumer electronics teaches us anything, it's that price trumps most anything else, and $199. is a magic number. How else to explain the fact that a dinky little console with last-gen graphics is currently trouncing the technological/branding juggernaut of the gaming industry?

Given the PS2 right on the Wii's heels, I wouldn't disagree. I just think it's an apples & meatloaf comparison at this point in time.

Let's keep in mind the NPD sales numbers for Q1 2007. I think disc sales show that some percentage of PS3 buyers are snapping up BD movies, but not the majority. It's hard to know the percentage without making assumptions about BD discs/ps3

Right. The only two options are that 1) The PS3 is primarily responsible for turning parity in disc sales to the lead we've seen this entire year. Or 2) It had an insigificant effect and the BD standalones did it on their own. Given the rather massive leads, particularly around the release of Casino Royale is far more attributable to the former than the latter, though I could see PS3 purchasing dying off, especially during the leaner/catalog months (which still see 2:1 increases on BD's side). If Sony has a plan, they'll keep the gamer demographic in mind to and stagger their releases accordingly rather than blow their wad early like they did with the PSP. Even if they don't, I'm interested how and when you believe HDDVD will ever overcome the deficit they've fallen in, if they actually hope to win the format war. Or is their goal instead merely survival of the IP and format stalemate?

Do you realistically expect that HDDVD can win at this point or merely achieve coexistence?

Less than $300 is just not feasable right now. It may be for the A2 come Summer, but that remains to be seen. By the time these Wal-Mart players come, regardless of whether there is no Blu-ray answer or not, Blu-ray may well have achieved an unsurpassable lead.

I don't necessarily believe HDDVD will die, and could well see it achieving enough of a base that it won't die, but I don't think there's any question of Blu-ray's survival, while there are numerous reasons to doubt the fate & longeviity of HDDVD. Particularly I don't believe the big box retailers (BB, CC much less Target and Wal Mart) will go on stocking both indefinitely and I don't believe Blu-ray will be the first to drop.



Given the PS2 right on the Wii's heels, I wouldn't disagree. I just think it's an apples & meatloaf comparison at this point in time.



Right. The only two options are that 1) The PS3 is primarily responsible for turning parity in disc sales to the lead we've seen this entire year. Or 2) It had an insigificant effect and the BD standalones did it on their own. Given the rather massive leads, particularly around the release of Casino Royale is far more attributable to the former than the latter, though I could see PS3 purchasing dying off, especially during the leaner/catalog months (which still see 2:1 increases on BD's side). If Sony has a plan, they'll keep the gamer demographic in mind to and stagger their releases accordingly rather than blow their wad early like they did with the PSP. Even if they don't, I'm interested how and when you believe HDDVD will ever overcome the deficit they've fallen in, if they actually hope to win the format war. Or is their goal instead merely survival of the IP and format stalemate?

Do you realistically expect that HDDVD can win at this point or merely achieve coexistence?

The above factors are important but don't completely discount the possibility that HD DVD effectively just sat out the first quarter because Universal was more paranoid than many about the AACS compromise and didn't release many prime discs. If so, then it should be obvious by the results in the next few months. If things dont's start to turn around with new HD DVD release then I guess I'll back off this theory. But for now I think it is a strong effect.

- Tom

By the time these Wal-Mart players come, regardless of whether there is no Blu-ray answer or not, Blu-ray may well have achieved an unsurpassable lead.
Umm, a 1.56:1 (or HD is selling at 65% of BD as I prefer to say it) weekly sales ratio is a massive lead?

Edit: saw nataraj's new numbers

If Walmart made a decent HDM player a loss-leader under $199, they would own the market. They're big enough to do it.

Less than $300 is just not feasable right now. It may be for the A2 come Summer, but that remains to be seen. By the time these Wal-Mart players come, regardless of whether there is no Blu-ray answer or not, Blu-ray may well have achieved an unsurpassable lead.

I don't necessarily believe HDDVD will die, and could well see it achieving enough of a base that it won't die, but I don't think there's any question of Blu-ray's survival, while there are numerous reasons to doubt the fate & longeviity of HDDVD. Particularly I don't believe the big box retailers (BB, CC much less Target and Wal Mart) will go on stocking both indefinitely and I don't believe Blu-ray will be the first to drop.



Given the PS2 right on the Wii's heels, I wouldn't disagree. I just think it's an apples & meatloaf comparison at this point in time.



Right. The only two options are that 1) The PS3 is primarily responsible for turning parity in disc sales to the lead we've seen this entire year. Or 2) It had an insigificant effect and the BD standalones did it on their own. Given the rather massive leads, particularly around the release of Casino Royale is far more attributable to the former than the latter, though I could see PS3 purchasing dying off, especially during the leaner/catalog months (which still see 2:1 increases on BD's side). If Sony has a plan, they'll keep the gamer demographic in mind to and stagger their releases accordingly rather than blow their wad early like they did with the PSP. Even if they don't, I'm interested how and when you believe HDDVD will ever overcome the deficit they've fallen in, if they actually hope to win the format war. Or is their goal instead merely survival of the IP and format stalemate?

Do you realistically expect that HDDVD can win at this point or merely achieve coexistence?

actually if you take the time to look you can find the A2 for 299.99 already at some places

Less than $300 is just not feasable right now. It may be for the A2 come Summer, but that remains to be seen. By the time these Wal-Mart players come, regardless of whether there is no Blu-ray answer or not, Blu-ray may well have achieved an unsurpassable lead.


I dunno ... I think you can already pick up an A2 for right around $299 right now, and still get the 5 free movies. It is rumored that Toshiba is likely very close to breakeven at the $399 MSRP (not sure if that includes street price) based on 10,000 or so produced per month. Based on that, it would seem plausible to me that if: (1) these players aren't due for another 3-4 months and (2) they are going to be produced in higher quantities and take advantage of economies of scale, then it is pretty likely that we will see them come in at perhaps a $249 MSRP with a street price of even less.


I don't necessarily believe HDDVD will die, and could well see it achieving enough of a base that it won't die, but I don't think there's any question of Blu-ray's survival, while there are numerous reasons to doubt the fate & longeviity of HDDVD. Particularly I don't believe the big box retailers (BB, CC much less Target and Wal Mart) will go on stocking both indefinitely and I don't believe Blu-ray will be the first to drop.


I'm pretty sure Blu-Ray will be around forever, at least as long as the PS3 has games coming out for it. Considering all the 'We need the space' arguments, I hardly think that developers will begin releasing games on DVD9. As far as Big Box Retailers, it all depends on how much support is being given by Wal-Mart. If they really are going to push, "Full Steam Ahead" on HD-DVD, I could see the Blu-Ray section getting smaller ... and smaller ... and smaller. Sure, they might be available online longer, but in store? Dunno. Doesn't Wal-Mart account for like 30-40% of all DVD sales or something ridiculous like that? How does that compare to BB and CC?


Given the PS2 right on the Wii's heels, I wouldn't disagree. I just think it's an apples & meatloaf comparison at this point in time.


But the PS2 is on the Wii's heels at 1/2 the price. It takes the PS2, with an avalanch of additional titles ... plus a $120 savings ... to stay on the Wii's heels? Couple that with the Wii being severely supply constrained still and I don't think it's hardly that close.


Right. The only two options are that 1) The PS3 is primarily responsible for turning parity in disc sales to the lead we've seen this entire year. Or 2) It had an insigificant effect and the BD standalones did it on their own. Given the rather massive leads, particularly around the release of Casino Royale is far more attributable to the former than the latter, though I could see PS3 purchasing dying off, especially during the leaner/catalog months (which still see 2:1 increases on BD's side). If Sony has a plan, they'll keep the gamer demographic in mind to and stagger their releases accordingly rather than blow their wad early like they did with the PSP. Even if they don't, I'm interested how and when you believe HDDVD will ever overcome the deficit they've fallen in, if they actually hope to win the format war. Or is their goal instead merely survival of the IP and format stalemate?


I'm pretty sure that the PS3 is the reason for the turning in disc sales rates. It would make sense. Add the millions of players to some of the BOGO and 50% Amazon deals and that can create a huge surge, no doubt. I agree that Sony would be well served in focusing on titles that would appeal to the gamer demographic in order to keep disc sales moving at as best a pace as they can. But, the 'gamer demographic' and the 'videophile/audiophile demographic' are not necessarily one and the same. One is bound to not get all the content they want, and neither are the casual audience.

As far as the deficit they are in ... I just don't understand this. Disc sales are what? 2:1? Total discs sold between both formats hasn't quite even reached 2 million yet, has it? And the two overall are what? 100k apart? 150k? 200k? A recent buy on the HD-DVD anniversary where a few HUNDRED consumers participated completely usurped the lead Blu-Ray had taken -- in one day -- on most of the rankings. This is a 'huge deficit'? The fact that a relative handful of consumers can skew results tells me that the number's we're talking about here are insignificant in the big picture. Also, let's not forget the number of players out there. HD-DVD has a few hundred thousand, right? Blu-Ray has a few million PS3's. Talkstr8t has suggested that something like 80%+ of those people watch movies on their PS3. We're talking about a 10:1 ratio of hardware players to maintain a 2:1 lead in software sales? And this is 'good'? This creates a 'huge deficit'? Even if the Blu-Ray sales lead of 2:1 continues over the next few months, we're still only talking about hundreds of thousands of discs advantage, right? If 1 million HD-DVD players come out, and each person buys just (1) HD-DVD disc with it ... the deficit would be easily overcome, no? :confused:


Do you realistically expect that HDDVD can win at this point or merely achieve coexistence?

I don't know that either format can really win anymore. Blu-Ray will be around for games at the very least and it'll be a long long time before Sony goes Neutral I would think. But time will tell, it's really hard to say. If Disney goes Neutral and BD+ turns out to be a bomb, Fox could very well follow suit. Sony is a public company -- how long before shareholders started to revolt because SPE is leaving a ton of money on the table?

Of course, this is all conjecture. If there are no inexpensive players to create a huge cost differential, who knows what is going to happen? If both camps create a market for inexpensive players, then I would think the nod still goes to the HD-DVD side. Why? Because it creates a mess for Sony's plan of economies of scale imo. As long as HD-DVD is sucking up potential Blu-Ray disc sales, it will take that much longer to achieve price parity in terms of replication. How long will shareholders allow Sony to subsidize Blu-Ray, and the PS3?

Time will tell though ... it'll be interesting to see where this infant market is come next year's CES. ;)

Hmm ... wasn't the Wal-Mart/Chinese Player news in the News Thread? If so, it's not there anymore. I wonder ... fake news? Or early tipped hand?

I dunno ... I think you can already pick up an A2 for right around $299 right now, and still get the 5 free movies.

There are a LOT of people who do not want to buy electronics online. They want to be able to return easily if things don't work out.

Anyway, I don't think $299 is a realistic Walmart chinese hd dvd price to move 2M players quickly. It would have to be below $200.

I was told by someone in the know that the player will be on the shelf at $299 and frequently on sale for $199

I'm hoping to get a few thousand with my branding.

-Robert

There are a LOT of people who do not want to buy electronics online. They want to be able to return easily if things don't work out.

Anyway, I don't think $299 is a realistic Walmart chinese hd dvd price to move 2M players quickly. It would have to be below $200.

Agreed; I think it'll need to at be at worst case $299 MSRP with a street of $199-249 A/B Pricing. The 'Wal-Mart' Warranty is awesome, but to really get that impuse buy, it needs to not start with a a '2' ... unless, we're talking $20. ;)

I was told by someone in the know that the player will be on the shelf at $299 and frequently on sale for $199

I'm hoping to get a few thousand with my branding.


Aha ... that makes sense. And I do hope you get a part of the action - having supported HiDef DVD so well till now.

snip........

Right. The only two options are that 1) The PS3 is primarily responsible for turning parity in disc sales to the lead we've seen this entire year. Or 2) It had an insigificant effect and the BD standalones did it on their own. Given the rather massive leads, particularly around the release of Casino Royale is far more attributable to the former than the latter, though I could see PS3 purchasing dying off, especially during the leaner/catalog months (which still see 2:1 increases on BD's side). If Sony has a plan, they'll keep the gamer demographic in mind to and stagger their releases accordingly rather than blow their wad early like they did with the PSP. Even if they don't, I'm interested how and when you believe HDDVD will ever overcome the deficit they've fallen in, if they actually hope to win the format war. Or is their goal instead merely survival of the IP and format stalemate?

Do you realistically expect that HDDVD can win at this point or merely achieve coexistence?

Let me first correct my Q1 numbers (I mistakenly posted March numbers earlier).

Q1 2007 (NPD - North America Sales)

Wii = 1,030,000
PS2 = 874,000
Xbox360 = 726,000
PS3 = 506,000

I believe your option 1 is correct. In earlier posts I speculated that about 10% of PS3 buyers would turn into BD movie buyers. I haven't sat down to try and crunch all the numbers, but I think that swag is in the right ballpark. With 3M+ PS3s sold, that would equate to a little over 300K BD movie buyers + whatever stand alone sales BD has had. In comparison we know there are 100K stand alone HD-DVD devices + 92K of HD-DVD add-ons (as of 12/31/2006). I don't know what the actual add-on sales to date look like. I haven't seen those numbers anywhere.

I think that corelates to the disc sales numbers we're seeing. I believe HD-DVD's plan is to ramp volume and drop the bottom out of player prices to drive mass adoption. The Walmart news is in line with that. I believe BD will try and do the same, and will look to China as well to try and achieve this goal.

This causes a problem for BD. Sony's primary goal is format victory (as is Toshiba's). Sony will have to drop the bottom out of player prices as well, and this will upset the other BD CE's. Folks like Pioneer, Panasonic, etc. will face two options. Option 1, go the LG Samsung route to differentiate by providing universal players into the market. Option 2, quickly drive to BD-Live devices to offer a higher end BD solution than the low cost players offer. I believe they will choose option 1, as it is a much easier way to differentiate. Having to educate the retail channel to understand and upsell the value of BD-Live is a loosing game.

I believe Toshiba's goal is to win. You don't go into a competition with the hope of tying. Do I expect HD-DVD to win? No, not any sort of near term decisive victory. I've always believed the market would go to universal players and both formats would continue to hang around. In that scenarios one will eventually become a niche format (or maybe both, if downloads take off), but it will take much longer (and I could come up with scenarios for either format dominating in the long term). That's not a bad thing, as it leaves options open to publishers. With lower cost HD-DVD, we may see some content come to market that wouldn't otherwise (or at least sooner).

In earlier posts I speculated that about 10% of PS3 buyers would turn into BD movie buyers. I haven't sat down to try and crunch all the numbers, but I think that swag is in the right ballpark.
This is obviously extremely anecdotal, but today I stopped by my local Circuit City and spoke to the sales manager about PS3 sales. She said she thinks about half of the PS3s they are selling are intended to be used primarily as BD players. Food for thought...

That's because about 1/2 also buy a BD movie? My point is that most of them are gamers, and their movie buying will decay with time.

This is obviously extremely anecdotal, but today I stopped by my local Circuit City and spoke to the sales manager about PS3 sales. She said she thinks about half of the PS3s they are selling are intended to be used primarily as BD players. Food for thought...


I would expect BD disc sales to be much higher in that case. Maybe they're mostly renting movies, or it could be she is off in her estimate.

My point is that most of them are gamers, and their movie buying will decay with time.As someone who watches Blu-ray movies on a PS3 I can't see people simply no longer buying Blu-ray movies as time goes on. In my opinion very few people who own a HDTV, a PS3, and have watched a good Blu-ray movie are likely to just go back to DVD. In fact if anything I think a lot of PS3 owners are potential Blu-ray movie buyers.

I was told by someone in the know that the player will be on the shelf at $299 and frequently on sale for $199

I'm hoping to get a few thousand with my branding.

-RobertI think you should yet us decide on your brand name...you know do a poll. It would be fun! :D

Anyways...I hope you get your wish and do well in the process!!

As someone who watches Blu-ray movies on a PS3 I can't see people simply no longer buying Blu-ray movies as time goes on. In my opinion very few people who own a HDTV, a PS3, and have watched a good Blu-ray movie are likely to just go back to DVD. In fact if anything I think a lot of PS3 owners are potential Blu-ray movie buyers.
The PS3 is solely responsible for the success of Blu-ray up to this point. However, there are lots of PS3s that probably aren't even connected to a HDTV. Obviously the PS3 is hurting sales of the Blu-ray stand-alone players. I feel that even though Blu-ray is superior on paper, HD DVD will be the choice of the general public. It's all about price, and while Sony might be willing to race Toshiba to a $199 player, the other Blu-ray manufacturers would be pissed. Once the cheaper Chinese HD DVD players are available, more and more people will buy HD DVD players until it reaches a tipping point. By Christmas the PS3 will probably cost three times what a HD DVD player will be going for, and at that point the only people buying the PS3 will be the people that want it for games. I used this analogy in another thread, but it's kind of like the Titanic, where right after it hit the iceberg everything still seemed normal, but the engineers knew that it was inevitable that the ship would sink. Everything seems fine for Blu-ray now, but looking ahead it doesn't take a genius to figure out that Blu-ray will be in serious trouble. Once there are millions of HD DVD players out there, the studios will surely go neutral(even Sony eventually.) Personally I think that Blu-ray has better specs and would be a better format, but the general public doesn't care about the things we care about on this forum such as 1080p video and lossless audio. Most people will be happy to just get a 1080i picture with sound through their TV speakers, so they will buy the cheaper players--and HD DVD will have the cheaper players sooner.

Originally Posted by AnthonyP
not at all. what I am saying (might this might be high school science) is that the eye has a retina, the retina has rods and cones. Rods are not important in this discussion since they are not colour sensitive. Cones are divided into three categories red, green and blue (wow what a coincidence they match the primary colours) depending on the wavelengths they react to, these reactions are then sent to the brain and we see colour. if the eye gets yellow wavelength the green and red react and send a signal, if the eye gets red and green wavelength the red and green cones react and send a signal to the brain. In both cases it is the exact same signal that reaches the brain and we see the exact same thing.

And what you have described is how humans PERCIEVE color.

Now, do you recognize that is NOT how bodies radiate color?

We may be getting somewhere.

Anothony.. I see you've been the forum the day after this post, but opted to not respond.

I'm disappointed.

However, there are lots of PS3s that probably aren't even connected to a HDTV.Good point, when those people with PS3s do buy an HDTV what do you think is more likely. That they will buy Blu-ray movies or that they will buy a HD DVD player? In my opinion it is rather likely they would just buy Blu-ray movies.


Once the cheaper Chinese HD DVD players are available, more and more people will buy HD DVD players until it reaches a tipping point.No offense but that is a personal opinion and in my view is more wish than reality. I am not saying that it can't happen but it is certainly not guaranteed as some people seem to believe.


Once there are millions of HD DVD players out there, the studios will surely go neutral(even Sony eventually.)That doesn't look at the possibility of Universal going neutral, which in my personal opinion would end this format war rather quickly.


Most people will be happy to just get a 1080i picture with sound through their TV speakers, so they will buy the cheaper players--and HD DVD will have the cheaper players sooner.Well HD DVD supporters are certainly hoping for that to happen, but if this format war was simply about cost than I think EVD would have been the winner (it is by far the cheapest HD format). There is a lot of factors involved in whether a video format does well and player cost is only one of those factors.

Good point, when those people with PS3s do buy an HDTV what do you think is more likely. That they will buy Blu-ray movies or that they will buy a HD DVD player?A third possibility: neither.