Why in the Blu-Ray Forums is a belief that Sony and companies will start using VC-1 - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 157 Old 08-01-2006, 10:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Health Nut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: U.S.A
Posts: 5,432
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
I think 50gb is critical for BR. Without it, they have no basis for saying the format is superior. 25 < 30 no matter how you look at it.
That is 100% correct! Increased bandwidth requires increased storage. Theincrease bandwidth would be useless without the 50 GB discs. If all Blu Ray had was 25 GB BDROM, the war would have been over already. The entire premise of Blue Ray collapes without the 50 GB. (Even if HD-DVD developed a 45 GB, they would have less bandwidth and storage).

Some might argue that the more choices the better, perhaps a universal player and the ability to play 25, 30, 45, and 50 might not be so bad, but I think it uneccessary and I'd rather have one format Blu Ray, if, and only if, they prove themselves 110% as described previously.

Let's just see what transpires. Let's just say I'm not running to Best Buy to get the next Blu Ray player, there is no reason to do so in my eyes until the 'laundry list' is complete. PS3 sounds like the next step for sure...
Health Nut is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 157 Old 08-01-2006, 10:32 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Mark0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Lowell, MA
Posts: 1,588
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by yoyoniner
...I also burried Blu-Ray if it makes you feel any better.
I also agree that HD-DVD is the better format at the moment.
You've come a long way. It's nice to hear you've finally conceeded a bit. ;)

That being said, I think we all agree that the best of both worlds is 50GB disks, BD bandwidth and VC-1.

Bandwidth hasn't really proven to be an issue (possibility in some scenes in some movies, but no one has proven it yet). But Amir says we can get most movies under 4 hrs onto 1 30GB disk. So in reality 50GB really isn't necessary. I for one am never upset when I get a movie from blockbuster spread over 2 disks. I usually need the break!
Mark0 is offline  
post #93 of 157 Old 08-01-2006, 10:44 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Health Nut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: U.S.A
Posts: 5,432
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Amir says we can get most movies under 4 hrs onto 1 30GB disk.
Remember that the picture quality you now see with HD-DVD is that using around 20 Mbit/sec VC-1... Try using 5.1/6.1/7.1 DD True HD using 20-24bit/48kHz (not 16 bit) and using 20 Mbit/sec VC-1.... aint gonna happen. Sure if you drop the bitrates of the audio and video down you can do that... but why would you want to do that. The bandwidth and the Storage of Blu Ray can make it happen, but only with 50 GB.

You could divide Lord of the Rings extended edition over two HD-DVD discs, but there is a tendency to want to squeeze extras and other items. I'm not sure I would want to divide the movies onto two discs, nor would I want to use a 'flipper'...

I'm just saying that Blu Ray has been a 'tease' so far, and I'm done chasing carrots. They will have to place it in my mouth at this point.
Health Nut is offline  
post #94 of 157 Old 08-01-2006, 10:58 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RobertR1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,770
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Health Nut,

According to Amir Batman Begins is done at 12mbps with amazing PQ so their compression is only getting better. Also, he stated (which makes sense) why use a lower rate when space isn't an issue? Let it "bloat" so to speak. I think with BB, it'll be a good indication on how good VC1 can be at such low bitrates with such a demanding film. He also stated it looked the same at 10mbps but Warner decided to stick with the 12mbps transfer for whatever reason.
RobertR1 is offline  
post #95 of 157 Old 08-01-2006, 11:06 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RobertR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: California
Posts: 6,116
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 142 Post(s)
Liked: 386
I don’t get why people think it’s necessary to fit 4 hour movies on a 30 gb disc. With the sole exception of the LOTR movies that I can think of, long movies have a natural INTENDED intermission (LOA, Ben-Hur, etc.). So split them across two discs. What’s the big deal? As for LOTR, that’s such a miniscule exception that it’s not worth worrying about (3 out of 100,000 movies!). Split them too.
RobertR is offline  
post #96 of 157 Old 08-01-2006, 11:10 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Health Nut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: U.S.A
Posts: 5,432
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Its a subjective slippery slope, that's for sure. Suffice it to say that 50GB on one side allows for just about any scenario, and the higher constant and peak bandwidth of Blu Ray is desireable. Anyway, I'm done chasing carrots, show me the beef!
Health Nut is offline  
post #97 of 157 Old 08-01-2006, 11:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Mark0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Lowell, MA
Posts: 1,588
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I agree, "where's the beef?"
too many if's. Sony may get around to releasing 50 GB disks, but if they do, I'm willing to wager they won't utilize VC-1. That my friends is a tragedy considering the 15GB Warner titles are playing better than the 25's
Mark0 is offline  
post #98 of 157 Old 08-01-2006, 11:49 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Health Nut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: U.S.A
Posts: 5,432
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Sony may get around to releasing 50 GB disks, but if they do, I'm willing to wager they won't utilize VC-1. That my friends is a tragedy considering the 15GB Warner titles are playing better than the 25's
You have to seperate Sony from Blu Ray. And you have to seperate Sony the movie studio from Sony the electronics manufacturer as well.

Sony is only one movie studio, they aren't going to release on HD-DVD anyway. Every other movie studio can use VC-1/MPEG-4AVC, it's not a Blu Ray issue, it is a movie studio issue. Warner is going to release VC-1 titles on Blu Ray shortly.
Health Nut is offline  
post #99 of 157 Old 08-01-2006, 01:52 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
mboojigga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Little Rock AFB, Arkansas
Posts: 7,967
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 435
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR
I don’t get why people think it’s necessary to fit 4 hour movies on a 30 gb disc. With the sole exception of the LOTR movies that I can think of, long movies have a natural INTENDED intermission (LOA, Ben-Hur, etc.). So split them across two discs. What’s the big deal? As for LOTR, that’s such a miniscule exception that it’s not worth worrying about (3 out of 100,000 movies!). Split them too.

Yes it is necessary if you count TV shows like 24. On each disc currently with DVD you get 4 episodes. So for 4 HD episodes on one disc makes just as much sense as it was for DVD

The 5.0 is here
mboojigga is offline  
post #100 of 157 Old 08-01-2006, 02:18 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 21,165
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by mboojigga
Yes it is necessary if you count TV shows like 24. On each disc currently with DVD you get 4 episodes. So for 4 HD episodes on one disc makes just as much sense as it was for DVD
But with a show like 24 there should only be something like 45 minutes (maybe less) because of commercials, per episode.

I'm also not as stuck on the disk size issue since disks can be split.

--Darin

This is the AV Science Forum. Please don't be gullible and please do remember the saying, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
darinp2 is offline  
post #101 of 157 Old 08-01-2006, 05:26 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
mboojigga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Little Rock AFB, Arkansas
Posts: 7,967
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 435
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2
But with a show like 24 there should only be something like 45 minutes (maybe less) because of commercials, per episode.

I'm also not as stuck on the disk size issue since disks can be split.

--Darin

Thats fine and all but what makes more sense 4 episodes per disc or 1 episode on 1 disc? Again it still makes sense cause even saying 45 minutes that just 15 minutes from 60. Add up 4 episodes from your example of 45 min still comes out to 180 minutes. I am not stuck on either BD or HD-DVD I would still like the most content I can get on the best format whichever it may be.

The 5.0 is here
mboojigga is offline  
post #102 of 157 Old 08-02-2006, 07:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
nataraj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: WA
Posts: 8,020
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by mboojigga
Add up 4 episodes from your example of 45 min still comes out to 180 minutes.
Why do you think that can't be put on a 30GB HD DVD ?
nataraj is offline  
post #103 of 157 Old 08-02-2006, 01:52 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
mboojigga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Little Rock AFB, Arkansas
Posts: 7,967
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 435
Quote:
Originally Posted by nataraj
Why do you think that can't be put on a 30GB HD DVD ?

read post 93 I was in disagreement with him on why he though 4 hours wasn't needed for 30gb disc for TV shows. My assumption was based on his post he was only thinking about movies in this aspect and thats when I mentioned about TV shows that can take advantage of HD disc at 30gb.

The 5.0 is here
mboojigga is offline  
post #104 of 157 Old 08-02-2006, 07:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
PFC5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,464
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by gearm
The reason that I jumped off the BD ship is because of these codec's. I know most if not all the problem is because of how the movie is encoded to the discs and that it will eventually be fixed. My problem came when I realized that when I went out to go buy some movies I really wouldn't have a clue how the movie I was looking at in the store is encoded.... Alot of the movies I buy are impulse buys standing in the Isles of BB... and if I had to drive home and read picture quality reviews to see if this disc or that disc looked good... why bother?

All the HD-DVD's are encoded with a good codec and look better to "my eyes"... and I won't have to worry in the future as much.
This is a very good example of a drawback of BD right now and into the future. I am surprised after all these months noone else (myself included) thought about this.

A person would have to memorize which discs might be on BD50 versus BD25 discs if they do not label the cases with this like they do/did do with dual layer SD DVD cases. I doubt many BD movies will be on BD50 discs even IF/WHEN they do are possible (my guess in 2007). They will be expensive for a long time and will be used fairly rarely for a couple of years so PQ/SQ will be unknown for that time period. It would end impulse buying on BD movies for me if I owned a BD player during that time also.

Had to move my HT gear list to my profile so click below link to see it:

HT Gear list HERE
PFC5 is offline  
post #105 of 157 Old 08-02-2006, 07:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
skogan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Koror, Palau
Posts: 4,415
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Health Nut
Remember that the picture quality you now see with HD-DVD is that using around 20 Mbit/sec VC-1...
Those numbers already include audio and IME (if applicable). The number you see that comes from the computer file doesn't separate out the video portion.
skogan is offline  
post #106 of 157 Old 08-02-2006, 11:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
WriteSimple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: KL, Malaysia.
Posts: 3,206
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by PFC5
A person would have to memorize which discs might be on BD50 versus BD25 discs if they do not label the cases with this like they do/did do with dual layer SD DVD cases.
I would think they'll put "BD50" or "Dual-layered" somewhere in the packaging. Would be smart.

Quote:
I doubt many BD movies will be on BD50 discs even IF/WHEN they do are possible (my guess in 2007). They will be expensive for a long time and will be used fairly rarely for a couple of years so PQ/SQ will be unknown for that time period. It would end impulse buying on BD movies for me if I owned a BD player during that time also.
I don't understand how BD50 would end impulse buying on your part?

If you're saying that BD50 would be more expensive than BD50 to replicate, that is true but you're not bearing the cost. The studios take a lesser cut. Compare prices of the first version of The Fifth Element (a flipper) and the Ultimate Edition (dual layer and two discs). You're really not paying all that much more.



fuad

"DonÂt let them tell you who you are is not enough, that itÂs wrong and that you wonÂt find love. DonÂt let them use my life to put your future down, or tell you that happiness canÂt be found."
WriteSimple is offline  
post #107 of 157 Old 08-03-2006, 09:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Jeff Lampert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,090
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
I don't understand how BD50 would end impulse buying on your part?
What he is saying is that

1. If BD50 is not mentioned on the packaging, then he has no way to know whether or not the movie is using it.

2. WIthout a commitment from ALL studios producing BD DVD's to use a better codec than MPEG-2 on ALL BD's, there is no way to know on any given title whether or not a superior encoding was done. HD DVD already has that commitment.

If I misrepresnet the points that gearm or PFC5 made, I hope they will correct me.
Jeff Lampert is offline  
post #108 of 157 Old 08-03-2006, 10:38 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 21,165
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Lampert
2. WIthout a commitment from ALL studios producing BD DVD's to use a better codec than MPEG-2 on ALL BD's, there is no way to know on any given title whether or not a superior encoding was done. HD DVD already has that commitment.
If a particular studio committed to an advanced codec for all titles then a person who knew which studios were doing what could just look at the studio name on the back of the package.

As far as BD50s, with advanced codecs they won't be necessary for every title. As an HD DVD advocate has said, movies are getting shorter (although I haven't personally confirmed that). If at least some 2.5 hour movies don't need more than 30GB for HD DVD, then at least some 2 hour movies shouldn't need more than 25GB for Blu-ray, if they are using using advanced codecs for both. And especially some 1.5 hour movies shouldn't need more than 25GB if 2.5 hours movies don't need more than 30GB.

--Darin

This is the AV Science Forum. Please don't be gullible and please do remember the saying, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
darinp2 is offline  
post #109 of 157 Old 08-03-2006, 06:30 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
AnthonyP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 17,632
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
According to Amir Batman Begins is done at 12mbps
that is average, not max. There is a hell of a difference
AnthonyP is offline  
post #110 of 157 Old 08-03-2006, 10:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dralt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,207
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by mboojigga
My understanding is MS owns the codec and if that is the case what sense would it make for Sony to pay royalties to their direct competition? Isn't the only option MPEG-4?
VC-1 on DL discs in November.
Dralt is offline  
post #111 of 157 Old 08-04-2006, 10:46 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
mboojigga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Little Rock AFB, Arkansas
Posts: 7,967
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 435
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dralt
VC-1 on DL discs in November.
Do you have any links or sites to back that up. Is a date been announced about DL BD

The 5.0 is here
mboojigga is offline  
post #112 of 157 Old 08-04-2006, 10:55 AM
 
plazman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 6,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dralt
VC-1 on DL discs in November.
Seems very unlikely to me. We'll see though....

I'm sure Sony is counting on revenue from mpeg-2. VC-1 would be good for the format, but not for Sony.
plazman is offline  
post #113 of 157 Old 08-04-2006, 11:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Issac Hunt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,644
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by plazman
Seems very unlikely to me. We'll see though....

I'm sure Sony is counting on revenue from mpeg-2. VC-1 would be good for the format, but not for Sony.
A poster on another forum debunked this particular myth pretty conclusively. Apparently MPEG2 licence is about 3 cents per disc, of which Sony can at most expect to see a third, which means about 1 cent on every disc sold. Assume a run of 5 million for a highly successful title, and you're still only talking around $50,000. Sorry, but I doubt that's a significant revenue stream to a company dealing in billions of dollars. Not that it matters of course, since Matsushita have already set up AVC authoring houses in the US and Europe.
Issac Hunt is offline  
post #114 of 157 Old 08-04-2006, 01:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
BenDover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Posts: 5,331
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Issac Hunt
A poster on another forum debunked this particular myth pretty conclusively. Apparently MPEG2 licence is about 3 cents per disc, of which Sony can at most expect to see a third, which means about 1 cent on every disc sold. Assume a run of 5 million for a highly successful title, and you're still only talking around $50,000. Sorry, but I doubt that's a significant revenue stream to a company dealing in billions of dollars. Not that it matters of course, since Matsushita have already set up AVC authoring houses in the US and Europe.
there are royalties owed/paid by various parties...i'm not sure 3 cents per disk captures that all...e.g., encoders, replicators, players, recorders, discs, etc.

there are many pockets that are dipped into by the patent holders in any of these dvd related technologies.
BenDover is offline  
post #115 of 157 Old 08-04-2006, 02:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Issac Hunt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,644
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
All the players and recorders already have to be MPEG2 compliant, for DVD playback and to be compatible to the spec. The encoders have already been paid for.
Issac Hunt is offline  
post #116 of 157 Old 08-04-2006, 02:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dralt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,207
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by plazman
Seems very unlikely to me. We'll see though....

I'm sure Sony is counting on revenue from mpeg-2. VC-1 would be good for the format, but not for Sony.
Do you think a Blu-ray failure would be good for Sony?

No?

They don't either.
Dralt is offline  
post #117 of 157 Old 08-04-2006, 04:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tormond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Farmville, NC
Posts: 1,260
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by plazman
Seems very unlikely to me. We'll see though....

I'm sure Sony is counting on revenue from mpeg-2. VC-1 would be good for the format, but not for Sony.

They have to be getting revenue from somewhere. At the moment they are subsidizing the PS3 and the BD media so I would think they would take revenue from any place they possibly could.
tormond is offline  
post #118 of 157 Old 08-04-2006, 05:32 PM
Member
 
BlackFriar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 47
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by plazman
I'm sure Sony is counting on revenue from mpeg-2. VC-1 would be good for the format, but not for Sony.
Just a comment on my casual observations, but what started this mentality? Namely, let me pose a question that you should have answered before commenting: What makes you think Sony doesn't claim patents underlying VC-1? There are over 12 companies which claim patents on it (Link).

I realize that due to the strong, and bizarre, evangelism for HD-DVD spurred on by certain employees of Microsoft (Just curious... why MS; where are the Toshiba employees?!) who push VC-1 as if it's the only alternative to MPEG-2. But, in reality, the more obvious and attractive pathway is to transition from MPEG-2 to MPEG-4 AVC.

Sony is not "counting" on MPEG2 revenues; they are after BD format revenues. Sony, on the other hand, does have an absolutely enormous library of digital media - something on the order of 4,000 movies; 35,000 TV show episodes, 20,000 TV game show episodes; and now MGM's back catalogue. Sony has been digitizing their back catalogue for some time, at great expense to them. It's only natural that when they make the investment to transcode their library to a next generation format it's something that is permanent and widely adopted: which VC-1 is not.

MPEG-4 AVC has been adopted by the European DVB standard body for broadcast TV; Korea, France, Brazil, Estonia and Lithuania have adopted AVC; ISDB-T in Japan has adopted it as has most major broadcasters; NATO, The US Department of Defense has almost universally adopted it; the Internet Streaming Media Alliance adopted it; 3GPP has included it; the list goes on...

In the US, ATSC supports AVC and VC-1…

So, if you're Sony, what would you - think logically now - do when you own an enormous digital library which you distribute globally:

(1) Do you quickly transition and splinter your media catalogue formats and move to VC-1, opening yourself up to not only the inability to use the media globally, or doubling your in-house expense by supporting multiple formats and an unknown licensing and patent situation with a competitor?

(2) Do you wait and move from MPEG-2 to MPEG4 AVC, of which both are international standards and the latter is a superior codec. Of which you have patents in both pools and of which your competitor can't arbitrarily alter licensing. On the downside, the transition is lengthier and will not be quick due.


I can appreciate many of your arguments about the ****** nature of BD releases thus far; from your stand point you don't care about these issues and are only after the out-of-box experience -- and that's what a consumer should absolutely expect. BD deserves the early criticism; perhaps, in hindsight, they should have held off the the fall.

Yet, in the long run, (eg. thinking in longer terms than a month) what is the logical choice? What codec is for the betterment of the industry as a whole? Do you really want to move away from the ITU-T VCEG body and adopt a Microsoft standard? VC-1 isn't a better codec than MPEG-4 AVC when it comes to fidelity and reproduction of a source material; there is a (given) algorithmic trade-off for VC-1's lower computational requirements. In the famous words of Rob Heinlein, There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch.

So, perhaps instead of clouding the issue as some have tried, we need to approach the issue of next-generation formats as two separate issues:

(1) The Physical Substrate: HD-DVD (15GB/layer, 36Mbit/sec, etc) and BD (25GB/layer, 54Mbit/sec, etc)

(2) Software Implementations: MPEG-2, MPEG-4 AVC, VC-1, DD+, TrueHD, iHD, BD-J, etc)

And try and think rationally, what, as a consumer, if the best product in the long-run (over which costs and hardware details are irrelevant) and how we can achieve that via the competition which now exists.
BlackFriar is offline  
post #119 of 157 Old 08-04-2006, 07:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
nataraj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: WA
Posts: 8,020
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
There seems to be rash of new people trashing vc-1 and praising AVC. BlackFriar can you tell us your affiliation ... for eg. are you working for Motorola ? Note that it is against the forum rules not to disclose this information.
nataraj is offline  
post #120 of 157 Old 08-04-2006, 07:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
nataraj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: WA
Posts: 8,020
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackFriar
And try and think rationally, what, as a consumer, if the best product in the long-run (over which costs and hardware details are irrelevant) and how we can achieve that via the competition which now exists.
Really ? Are you really thinking as a consumer here ?

Cost is very relevent to me as a consumer. Unless the costs go down quickly the hidef formats will remain a niche like dvd-a/sacd.
nataraj is offline  
Closed Thread Blu-ray Players

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off