or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Players › Why in the Blu-Ray Forums is a belief that Sony and companies will start using VC-1
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why in the Blu-Ray Forums is a belief that Sony and companies will start using VC-1 - Page 2  

post #31 of 157
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by briankmonkey
are you talking about its showing at E3 2006 or more recent news? If more recent can you link it, I haven't seen anything yet. There is still quite a bit of info I want to know in regards to the add-on before buying for my 360. Also, price? Hopefully under $200.
I haven't seen anything new all I have seen is the E3 announcment I want to know if the quality of the picture will be just as good as stand alone HD-DVD's since they say we are having to connect it by USB.
post #32 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by mboojigga
I haven't seen anything new all I have seen is the E3 announcment I want to know if the quality of the picture will be just as good as stand alone HD-DVD's since they say we are having to connect it by USB.
That's part of it, as well as wonder about Audio abilities, etc. I think E3's was really just a mock up an empty shell so hard to know if USB is really the only connectivity option or not. MS did say they could implement HDMI into the xbox360 if/when they felt it was the right time.
post #33 of 157
post #34 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark0
thanks, I had not noticed that link :)
post #35 of 157
But I tend to agree that the add-on will not have HDMI. And audio may suffer as well. So my recommendation (and what I may do) is definitely go with the HD-A1 for the $364, then possibly go with the PS3 for abotu the same price.... that is IF Sony get their heads out of their a$$es and drop the price to be more competitive with DVD-HD and the XBox 360.
post #36 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by mboojigga
I haven't seen anything new all I have seen is the E3 announcment I want to know if the quality of the picture will be just as good as stand alone HD-DVD's since they say we are having to connect it by USB.
The quality may be less on the 360, but it won't be because of the USB connection.

The USB connection sucks raw data from the HD-DVD disc, probably doing content decryption on the drive itself. This is less than 40Mbps worth of bandwidth, on an interface rated for 480Mbps.

The raw content will then be decompressed inside the 360 itself, by the 360 CPU and GPU, and display via the 360's video out port.

While there is no HDMI on the 360, it could be comparable to the HD-A1 over Component. It really does depend on how Microsoft writes the VC1/MPEG4 AVC code for the 360 HD-DVD player. The 360 (and original XBox) were never exactly -awesome- DVD players, picture quality wise, so I wouldn't expect the 360 to be an awesome HD-DVD player either.

But at $199 or whatever, it's a pretty good deal. May buy one just for kicks to compare to the A1.
post #37 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by briankmonkey
I disagree with quite a few of your points and generalizations
Sorry, I've edited my post to include the fact that the whole thing was a joke. I guess I was a little too serious sounding.
post #38 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark0
But I tend to agree that the add-on will not have HDMI. And audio may suffer as well. So my recommendation (and what I may do) is definitely go with the HD-A1 for the $364, then possibly go with the PS3 for abotu the same price.... that is IF Sony get their heads out of their a$$es and drop the price to be more competitive with DVD-HD and the XBox 360.
DVD-HD? Pricing the PS3 compared to an xbox360 or an xbox360 with HD-DVD add-on? If the add-on combo, well the HD-DVD would have to be well below $200 to match the PS3.
post #39 of 157
seth.s :) I guess I didn't catch the tone
post #40 of 157
Normally I'd say the $500-$600 may be low enough, but Blu-ray is getting absolutely hammered and the only way they can catch up is to drop the floor on the price.Son't you agree that at best, the PS3 will have equal PQ to Stand-alone units (although I doubt this because of marketing reasons), and that PQ will be inferior to what we see on the HD-A1? By then the A1 will probably be selling for $400, maybe less. So that's why I think the PS3 will need to be in the $350-400 range to be competetive.
Afterall, the 360 is already out and like HD-DVD is growing everyday.
post #41 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by seth.s
EDIT: Ok I guess I should add that I'm COMPLETELY joking, I find the position I'm trying to represent in my post here completely ridiculous. Rather than respond by rationally countering this position as I normally do I thought I'd try something new.
Thank you. I was reading through it and honestly, it sounded like a lot of what I see here. Made me think about that a lot of people here would probably think professional wrestling was real because they can just look and see people doing some moves that look real. But I'm glad you were joking.

I wish more people around here could understand how a person could see that the images from HD DVD do look better right now and that for most people an HD DVD player is a better option currently, without having to then assume that HD DVD will maintain that advantage and that they have proven all they need to prove. If I was watching a horserace where one was leading early, and I had some knowledge about the horses, I would be able to use my brain to make a better decision about what the odds of certain things happening would be than just throwing up my hands and saying, "The horse in the lead has to be the faster horse for the whole race. All I have to do is use my eyes to see that and then know it."

--Darin
post #42 of 157
Darin, I agree that it's pretty clear HD-DVD is winning, but I don't think a horserace is a good analogy.
I think we all agree here that what we want is the best picture quality for the best price. But I think we were mis-guided by Blu-ray and assumed it would be an overall better product.
Now that the day has come, we are learning that Sony is losing on nearly all fronts:
The failed to deliver a player at the same time as the first HD-DVD,
They failed to deliver on the 50GB disk,
They failed to deliver a cost-competitive player,
They failed to use advanced codecs that may have at least given them a fair shot.
I truly hope they can turn around and produce a relatively cheap player/game console. Because then we win! But until they do, they will fall so far behind they'll never catch up. If past experiences have taught us anything, we've learned that quite often Sony has gambled with new products that failed to catch on.
post #43 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark0
But I think we were mis-guided by Blu-ray and assumed it would be an overall better product.
For the record, I don't think I did and I'm pretty sure people can back me up on this as I was in the minority a year ago saying that people shouldn't just assume that Blu-ray was going to be the better format to get. Back then it was popular to be on the Blu-ray side and now it seems to be popular to be on the HD DVD side and I take heat (like from you yesterday) for pointing things out that are still to come in this race and not just going with the majority. It is easy to stand with the majority and take whatever shots they want you to at others, but sticking by your guns with a position that is the minority at some point in time is a different matter.

As far as getting behind, it will be interesting to see. I have a theory that when you are sitting and watching something like a format war it can look like the time factor looks much bigger that it will have been in retrospect later on. For instance, I don't think VHS was even on the market within a year of Beta's launch and yet VHS won. But I wasn't really paying that much attention back then.

Oh, and some of us just want the best quality, even if we do have to pay some more for it. Paying less for the best quality is great, but it won't necessarily hold.

--Darin
post #44 of 157
I never really had support for one nor the other at first, but thought Blu-ray had the edge. Over time, the more I read, the more I thought Blu-ray might not live up to it's promises.
Back then we were speculating, but today we have the hard facts, and it's difficult to dispute what we are finding. At this point, how much better of an experience can we expect out of HD-DVD? Assuming they get the DD+ worked out, probably not much. So if the price is right, HD-DVD is a good bet. Of course I agree, it's early and anything can happen, but in this day of the internet and information being so readily available and forums like this are available, I find it hard to believe this war will be fought for long.
J6P heads out to buy a $500 player to go along with his $2000 new HDTV is probably a bit computer savvy, at least enough to check the web, and although the praises were not all around at first for HD-DVD, word has gotten out. Even the non-AVS type of reviews (c-net comes to mind) have modified their initial reviews to now recommend HD-DVD. HD-DVD sales are so much ahead of Blu-ray that companies must be taking notice. And with player sales in the order of 10:1 or so in favor of HD-DVD, blu-ray is going to fall even farther behind.
If I were to set the odds of tryng to pick a winner at this stage, I'd say HD-DVD has an 75-80% chance of winning.
post #45 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2
I'm expecting Sony to move to MPEG4 at some point here and skip VC-1 for their own stuff largely to avoid going with MS. They could save some face by saying that Panasonic has improved their MPEG4 encoder recently and have shown Sony that it is now ready for use. And they could use it for things from some other studios that they are contracted to do also. I'm just guessing that this will happen before the end of the year, but wouldn't be shocked if it doesn't. Sony going to VC-1 for their own stuff would surprise me though. We'll see.

--Darin
I agree with you.

I think that Sony will never use VC1 because doing so would be an admission that the higher capacity and bandwidth of Blu-ray was not required and that the HD DVD DL30 form factor was all that was required for great video and audio.

Because of the lack of Dolby True HD and DD+ mandatory support in BD, DL50s are needed for Blu-ray to reach HD DVDs current performance. With AVS and PCM, Sony can say that 50GB is needed, (because they'll max out the 50GB disks with AVS coding), and can continue to say 50>30 and HD DVD is the weaker format.
post #46 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by b.greenway
IIRC: MS (amir) has already said that Sony has access to the codecs, all they have to do is ask.
You are right, but do you see Sony in all its pride conceeding that the HD DVD sponsor Microsoft was right and they were wrong? And then forking over royalties that would shave off some of their precious profits? I might be wrong but I don't see it! ;)
post #47 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2
I wish more people around here could understand how a person could see that the images from HD DVD do look better right now and that for most people an HD DVD player is a better option currently, without having to then assume that HD DVD will maintain that advantage and that they have proven all they need to prove.
But Darin, wouldn't you agree that it is a lot easier and more rational to side with a format that has proven something, rather than blindly back a tech along side the constant bombardment that they will eventually prove something? The logical among us have often conceded that BD is the technically superior format... if all of the promised advantages are met. Until those promises are met and while HD-DVD continues to provide both a quality and price advantage over Blu-ray, I fail to see how taking a wait and see attitude with regard to the future of BD wouldn't be the prudent thing to do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2
All I have to do is use my eyes to see that and then know it.
Hmmm... Judge things based on what I can actually see or make my decisions based on what Sony PR wants me to believe? Do you know how condescending that sounds? The success of BD was and is huge for Sony and they should have exploded, talons out for HD-DVD's blood at launch. This should have been the most important thing for them after the money invested and the years of selling this format to the studios, the CE's, and the AV public. Instead, they launched like a mouse fart and Sony and its supporters seemed startled and confused by, not just a lack of enthusiasm, but the backlash because it failed to deliver on its basic promise to be "Beyond High Definition." So am I supposed to believe that this was all part of a grand Sony master plan for a format horse-race, or should I believe my own eyes that Sony was overconfident, fell short, and now have the challenge of having to gain lost ground by stalling and hurling blame at the feet of their allies?
post #48 of 157
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?
They don't seem to have any problems paying hundreds of millions of dollars to MS for Windows.
post #49 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliff Stephenson
But Darin, wouldn't you agree that it is a lot easier and more rational to side with a format that has proven something, rather than blindly back a tech along side the constant bombardment that they will eventually prove something?
I see a difference between buying into a format and trying to make the other one die before people can see what they can deliver further into the race, or trying to cover up or dismiss technical limitations with things that aren't logical.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliff Stephenson
So am I supposed to believe that this was all part of a grand Sony master plan for a format horse-race, or should I believe my own eyes that Sony was overconfident, fell short, and now have the challenge of having to gain lost ground by stalling and hurling blame at the feet of their allies?
You should believe that they were overconfident, fell short, and are looking for some excuses, just like you said. I have trashed them for what they have delivered software wise so far and said it reminds me of the story of the tortoise and the hare. However, that is different than believing some spin about the technical details of the formats. So far what we have seen has mostly been VC-1 vs MPEG2. I have both players (2 HD DVD players here and 1 Samsung) and honestly I can't tell you that one is better than the other. But I can tell you that the VC-1 HD DVD titles are much better overall than the MPEG2 BluRay titles I've seen.

As far as using your sight, a person could look at titles from each and say that VC-1 looks better than MPEG2, or they could say that HD DVD looks better than Blu-ray and will stay that way. Choosing between which assumption they will make as to which is the cause between those requires our brains.

And the relative quality of the titles when the main difference is the codec, is one reason I am backing VC-1 heavily as a codec. That to me is much different than backing HD DVD and not Blu-ray going forward. I currently am recommending HD DVD for the vast majority of people buying today, but I'm also not going to ignore the realities of what they have proven, what they haven't and the design limitations of the format (or of Blu-ray).

It is interesting to me how much resistence there is to looking at the limitations of the formats (or at least one of them), but it isn't for technical reasons, it is for marketing reasons.

--Darin
post #50 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark0
HD-DVD sales are so much ahead of Blu-ray that companies must be taking notice. And with player sales in the order of 10:1 or so in favor of HD-DVD, blu-ray is going to fall even farther behind.
If I were to set the odds of tryng to pick a winner at this stage, I'd say HD-DVD has an 75-80% chance of winning.
This is fan-boy hallucinating (and I only own an HD-DVD player atm). Until player sales hit a million or more, there is not a hint of market penetration in terms of sales numbers that mean something to studios and CE corporations. There will likely be less than 100k A1's shipped by the end of the year, certainly less than 250k HD-DVD players altogether. Sure, the utterly insignificant market share of AVS members prefers one format, but that doesn't translate into a significant lead in the format war. And 10:1 sales isn't getting Toshiba far enoug ahed when they are shipping 10-15k players a month (or less).

If HD-DVD extends its lead over the holidays, then you can start talking about the format having a good chance of winning, and looking for a studio to think about switching sides. But with the CE, studio, and computer support that the BD group has, it's wishful thinking right now to believe that Toshiba's good start has put it significantly ahead at this point in time.
post #51 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2
I see a difference between buying into a format and trying to make the other one die before people can see what they can deliver further into the race, or trying to cover up or dismiss technical limitations with things that aren't logical.
You should believe that they were overconfident, fell short, and are looking for some excuses, just like you said. I have trashed them for what they have delivered software wise so far and said it reminds me of the story of the tortoise and the hare. However, that is different than believing some spin about the technical details of the formats. So far what we have seen has mostly been VC-1 vs MPEG2. I have both players (2 HD DVD players here and 1 Samsung) and honestly I can't tell you that one is better than the other. But I can tell you that the VC-1 HD DVD titles are much better overall than the MPEG2 BluRay titles I've seen.

As far as using your sight, a person could look at titles from each and say that VC-1 looks better than MPEG2, or they could say that HD DVD looks better than Blu-ray and will stay that way. Choosing between which assumption they will make as to which is the cause between those requires our brains.

And the relative quality of the titles when the main difference is the codec, is one reason I am backing VC-1 heavily as a codec. That to me is much different than backing HD DVD and not Blu-ray going forward. I currently am recommending HD DVD for the vast majority of people buying today, but I'm also not going to ignore the realities of what they have proven, what they haven't and the design limitations of the format (or of Blu-ray).

It is interesting to me how much resistence there is to looking at the limitations of the formats (or at least one of them), but it isn't for technical reasons, it is for marketing reasons.

--Darin
All fair points, but would you also say that for BD to be superior to HD-DVD that they need to get BOTH VC-1 and 50GB working and soon?
post #52 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliff Stephenson
All fair points, but would you also say that for BD to be superior to HD-DVD that they need to get BOTH VC-1 and 50GB working and soon?
If they had VC-1, size wouldn't be an issue.
post #53 of 157
But that is what they have been pushing for the superiority of BD for the last two to three years.
post #54 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by alfbinet
But that is what they have been pushing for the superiority of BD for the last two to three years.
And 50 gb won't be enough if they are using mpg2.
post #55 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sid Viscous
And 50 gb won't be enough if they are using mpg2.
I agree. They need to change the codec. I am in the HD DVD camp at the moment. What I want is the best possible PQ and audio. Right now HD DVD has me sold. I am waiting for the BD group to sell me something, I can see, feel, and experience now. Not something in a white paper that may or may not happen.
Very Simple. I have already been told, that according to my opinions I am "very simple." I thought about reporting the "bashing" aspect but I see one of the mods already deleted it.
post #56 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by briankmonkey
Interesting. So would it still be more beneficial for Sony's pocket to have mpeg2 on Blu-Ray titles from Sony studios financially?
I don't think so but you erased the part where I think the answer lies. People don't want to believe it true or that it doesn't matter but it does, we don't live in Disneyland. America needs a little wake up call, but I'm not saying we have to be completely vigilant about this but at the same time make it more of a consideration and know that others are actively doing that against us, competition is fierce out there. We have a US company making a relative equal product vs the Japanese. They will not buy our stuff period but we will buy their stuff without a second thought. That is an economics war. In the long run that isn't a good deal, the younger generations will pay for that, your sons and daughters that you live for. Sony is doing it because it theirs their last choice would be choosing an American alternative and I'm not saying their wrong but some day maybe we should play that same game.
post #57 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by ottscay
This is fan-boy hallucinating (and I only own an HD-DVD player atm). Until player sales hit a million or more, there is not a hint of market penetration in terms of sales numbers that mean something to studios and CE corporations. There will likely be less than 100k A1's shipped by the end of the year, certainly less than 250k HD-DVD players altogether. Sure, the utterly insignificant market share of AVS members prefers one format, but that doesn't translate into a significant lead in the format war. And 10:1 sales isn't getting Toshiba far enoug ahed when they are shipping 10-15k players a month (or less).

If HD-DVD extends its lead over the holidays, then you can start talking about the format having a good chance of winning, and looking for a studio to think about switching sides. But with the CE, studio, and computer support that the BD group has, it's wishful thinking right now to believe that Toshiba's good start has put it significantly ahead at this point in time.
I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is. I'll even give you 4:1 odds!
Unless BD camp drops their prices to less than half, they won't compete with inferior performance. Word is getting out on the street.
post #58 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by alfbinet
I agree. They need to change the codec. I am in the HD DVD camp at the moment. What I want is the best possible PQ and audio. Right now HD DVD has me sold. I am waiting for the BD group to sell me something, I can see, feel, and experience now. Not something in a white paper that may or may not happen.
Very Simple. I have already been told, that according to my opinions I am "very simple." I thought about reporting the "bashing" aspect but I see one of the mods already deleted it.
I want both of them to die a horrible death, and won't be buying either. Both are anti-consumer abominations, and neither was needed to provide HD content on a little silver disc.
post #59 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark0
I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is. I'll even give you 4:1 odds!
Unless BD camp drops their prices to less than half, they won't compete with inferior performance. Word is getting out on the street.
Letting Samsung provide the first player was a worse decision than mpg2, me thinks.
post #60 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark0
I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is. I'll even give you 4:1 odds!
Unless BD camp drops their prices to less than half, they won't compete with inferior performance. Word is getting out on the street.
And it is. In high end AV shops as well.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Players
This thread is locked  
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Players › Why in the Blu-Ray Forums is a belief that Sony and companies will start using VC-1