or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › The Matrix hits HD DVD May 22. BD release "later"
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Matrix hits HD DVD May 22. BD release "later" - Page 11

post #301 of 358
WAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!!!!!!!!!



yup. when the xa2 hits $499, I think I'm in. Too many good films on both sides. Since these formats may stay niche and eventually HD OnDemand might become prevalent, (could happen) i say enjoy the good looking films while you can.

post #302 of 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by WirelessGuru View Post

I can show you tons but I'll just stick with Superman for now.... unless the HD-DVD version is a combo.... the Blu-Ray versions are on average $3 more expensive!
http://www.dvdempire.com/Exec/v5_sea...ia_id=0&sort=5
http://www.dvdempire.com/Exec/v5_sea...=68&pp=&used=0

I did this about 3 weeks ago at BB.com, so obviously the #s aren't exactly right anymore, but still should be fairly close to the ratio

BD

16.99 - 1
19.99 - 1
22.99 - 4
23.99 - 1
24.99 - 77
28.99 - 1
29.99 - 70
34.99 - 33
44.99 - 4
99.99 - 1 (MI3 Box Set)
119.99 - 1 (Sopranos Season 5)
Total = 194


HD-DVD
6.99 - 1
16.99 - 1
19.99 - 3
22.99 - 6
23.99 - 3
24.99 - 113
29.99 - 18
34.99 - 17
37.99 - 2
39.99 - 1
44.99 - 0
69.99 - 2 (Forbidden Planet Deluxe/Toy, Smallville Season5)
99.99 - 2 (MI3 Deluxe set, Dark Earth Complete 4 set)
119.99 - 1 (Sopranos season 6)
Total = 171
post #303 of 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by WirelessGuru View Post

WHAT THE ^&%$ ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT DAVE MACK!!!!! THE A2 DOESN"T SCALE> IT DOESN"T HAVE TO BECAUSE IT IS AWESOME!!!

J/K..... thought I'd go extreme to inject some humor on it all. I'm sure we can all agree that if you got the cash... having both formats is the place to be right now.


Going forward things are going to get tough on the bank account. Both formats are going to be pumping out the releases every week.
post #304 of 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilstinky View Post

Why would you drop it altogether? I'm here for movies and the format war is in distant second place/last place for me. As the Home Boy Shopping Network would say, Mo movies, Mo movies, Mo movies.

lol, wowwwww. i dont think too many people got the reference you made. those were the days when i would rush home to watch tv
post #305 of 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdizzle View Post

lol, wowwwww. i dont think too many people got the reference you made. those were the days when i would rush home to watch tv

Homie don't play dat!

post #306 of 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by krinkle View Post

See this thread: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=825185

Looks like BD-J is working great, with much more functionality currently available than Warner needs.

I can only speculate what Warner's true motive is in delaying BD titles.

Also I would add that the price of the box set is $80 on Amazon where these numbers come from. $80 for all three movies and that cool box set is actually very cheap.

If I was an HD-DVD owner I would certainly buy it.

Making a cute little video game with BDJ does not mean that the advanced IME problems have all been miraculously solved.

There is no dispute that there is already BDJ functionality in current BD players - so I don't see how anyone could be surprised that a 2D game like this could work. BD Video 1.0 would have the functionality.

But the problems holding up movies are centered around BDJ 1.1 and 2.0 and getting those to work on various platforms, and getting movies with IME BDJ content tested to run consistently on these various platforms.

Holding up this game as proof that there's no problems out there just makes no sense...

And to insinuate that Warner has some dark ulterior motive for pretending that there is a problem is really poor form. They are doing a lot for both formats. I don't think it's fair at all to blame them for BDJ's problems or insinuate that they have an ulterior motive...
post #307 of 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by krinkle View Post

(thanks to asj2006 for the great graph!)


Hmmm - can you show me where he got the raw data for that chart? These "volumes", are they numbers that Neilsen published, or numbers that asj estimated?
post #308 of 358
Why does it show a huge drop for both formats the first week of March?
post #309 of 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by HPforMe View Post

Entirely different arguement about video and you know it. No one argues about the fact that sound is much more subjective a process than video. No one can credibly argue that there is no discernible difference between 720p and 1080p for example. It is entirely a different matter when it comes to audio at this level because of the simple fact that those extra bits YOU have no idea what the encoders have done with them, if they're merely redundant, etc., period. The encoders would have to tell you how they dithered and then what exactly occured in the compression to the losseless format to give us the bit for bit identical claim.

I disagree. While 720p and 1080p are far apart, I think a discussion about whether an anamorphically compressed 1440x1080 encode was different than a 1920x1080 encode would be pretty similar to whether a 16/48 audio encode is different than a 24/48 audio encode. While video can be zoomed up and looked at, which is one difference between it and audio, we are talking about measureable differences here, not some hocus pocus with different cables that can't even be measured. Or are you going to claim that information wasn't lost when going from 24/48 to 16/48?
Quote:
Originally Posted by HPforMe View Post

You either answer and defend by provable fact your claim of Warner compromising content at 16/48 or else your claim is left wanting.

I'm seriously trying to figure out what you are looking for here. We are on the internet, so how do you want me to prove this? It isn't like we can go into a room and test these. Filmmixer (the guy who does this professionally) has mentioned having people come out so he can show them, but as long as we are on the internet here, what is it you want? Are you somebody who knows that 16/48 and 24/48 are different, but just wants to complain? Or are you somebody who doesn't know and is actually trying to find out if there is a difference? If the latter, do you need me to hold your hand? You can go find the literature as easily as I can. As I said, I've already talked to a guy at Dolby about this (as well as reading discussions here). I can point you to one link from Filmmixer here:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...45#post9885845

where he talks about this stuff and says:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Filmmixer View Post

16 to 24 bit.. big jump

but if you just are looking to play a game of saying that you haven't seen proof, then there isn't much I can do. Are you somebody who would claim that there isn't any difference between CDs and SACDs?
Quote:
Originally Posted by HPforMe View Post

Why don't you stick with your stronger argument: Warner should use pcm with 50 gb disks, period.

Why? Somebody could just play like you and say that there isn't any difference between PCM and DD. Or are you willing to accept that one without whatever thing it is you want as "proof"?

Seriously, what is it that you are looking for that could be done here?

--Darin
post #310 of 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaronwt View Post

Why does it show a huge drop for both formats the first week of March?

Stock Market Crash??? LOL! It's really a Nasdaq and Dow chart!!!
post #311 of 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdjam View Post

Hmmm - can you show me where he got the raw data for that chart? These "volumes", are they numbers that Neilsen published, or numbers that asj estimated?

Hmm... anyone?
post #312 of 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdjam View Post

Hmmm - can you show me where he got the raw data for that chart? These "volumes", are they numbers that Neilsen published, or numbers that asj estimated?

I believe that the chart was created by nataraj, and it first appeared around here:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...&#post10111220

Edit: Oops, just realized that those are two slightly different charts ... but you can read all about the number controversies there...
post #313 of 358
Quick question for anyone who can answer:

Since the HD-DVD of the Ultimate Collection is a 30GB/9GB combo disc, isn't it conceivable for the Blu-Ray version of the Ultimate Collection to have 5 50GB single-sided disc with all the content intact?
post #314 of 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by C. Lawrence Sims View Post

Quick question for anyone who can answer:

Since the HD-DVD of the Ultimate Collection is a 30GB/9GB combo disc, isn't it conceivable for the Blu-Ray version of the Ultimate Collection to have 5 50GB single-sided disc with all the content intact?

I think they will have to be since BD/DVD isn't in the spec and I believe it is actually impossible due to some manufacturing restriction.
post #315 of 358
Thanks, Fettastic....
post #316 of 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fettastic View Post

I think they will have to be since BD/DVD isn't in the spec and I believe it is actually impossible due to some manufacturing restriction.

I believe Talk, if not paidgeek, directly contradicted that in the Insiders thread and that BD flipper combos are possible but just haven't been pursued (thank God!). If they were flippers, I would despise them on BD just like I do on HDDVD. Blech.
post #317 of 358
Flippers get such a bad rap, as long as you don't have to flip the disc to complete the main movie who freaking cares? Disc art does not mean anything to me, I look at the disc 5 seconds from case to player. I find it better to flip the disc for extras then go back to the case pull out another disc for extras. Plus it saves on shelf space.
post #318 of 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaronwt View Post

Why does it show a huge drop for both formats the first week of March?

No HD DVD releases and the only Blu-ray release was a Destiny's Child concert.
post #319 of 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by swanlee View Post

Flippers get such a bad rap, as long as you don't have to flip the disc to complete the main movie who freaking cares? Disc art does not mean anything to me, I look at the disc 5 seconds from case to player. I find it better to flip the disc for extras then go back to the case pull out another disc for extras. Plus it saves on shelf space.

ya i never got the obsession with wanting disc art unless u keep all ur movies in a binder. usually its the same art thats on the box, and i cant understand why anyone would actually look at it for more than 5 seconds. if it was the cover, thatd be understandable, but even then all u generally see is the spine of the dvd anyway since theyre usually on a shelf. i honestly think it has more to do with fanboys mad matrix is 1st on hd-dvd than having a real problem with flip disks.

now combos are different. b4 i had my player, i thought they were the greatest things ever. now that i have em i hate it since they cost more. but with google checkout, and getting movies for under 20, i dont even care
post #320 of 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by swanlee View Post

Flippers get such a bad rap, as long as you don't have to flip the disc to complete the main movie who freaking cares? Disc art does not mean anything to me, I look at the disc 5 seconds from case to player. I find it better to flip the disc for extras then go back to the case pull out another disc for extras. Plus it saves on shelf space.

ya i never got the obsession with wanting disc art unless u keep all ur movies in a binder. usually its the same art thats on the box, and i cant understand why anyone would actually look at it for more than 5 seconds. if it was the cover, thatd be understandable, but even then all u generally see is the spine of the dvd anyway since theyre usually on a shelf. i honestly think it has more to do with fanboys mad matrix is 1st on hd-dvd than having a real problem with flip disks.

now combos are different. b4 i had my player, i thought they were the greatest things ever. now that i have em i hate it since they cost more. but with google checkout, and getting movies for under 20, i dont even care
post #321 of 358
It will be nice to get these on BD this year with hopefully PCM audio and some non hd dvd ported and handicapped 50gb versions.
post #322 of 358
the complete trilogy is up to #16 on amazon. I hope blu-ray sales can still hold 'em off.
post #323 of 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by beatboy77 View Post

I think The Matrix will sell decently on HD-DVD, but not great. I completely see PotC blowing it away in sales for a number of reasons. The main reason being popularity and price.


Quote:
Originally Posted by vancouver View Post

I support both formats, but sometimes cant resist responding to your statements. I just cant help it.

as an FYI the Matrix Ultimate Edition (the more expensive one) has been available for pre-order for less then a day and its already at #44.

*60 minutes later and its now at #42

I really sould update this.

The Complete Collection is #17
The Ulitmate Collection is #53

Combined? Who knows!! I can say this, its doing better then "decently".
post #324 of 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebland View Post

Second place in a two man race is last place.

My thoughts are that during the HD DVD drought earlier this year, HD DVD was mortally wounded as many early adopters (like myself) dropped HD DVD altogether. They still have not rebounded to where they were back in 2006.

I wouldn't say motrally wounded....but hurt for sure. People like me who already had 50 HD-DVD's during the drought bought a PS3 and nearly 30 BD titles in less than 2 months. Now that things are starting to ramp back up I've started buying HD-DVD again the most recent purchase was happy feet.
post #325 of 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickFoley View Post

I'd like to see the tons of other examples.

You have Superman Returns BD which is a single sided disc and is cheaper than the combo HD DVD. The other Superman movies have the same MSRP, the HD DVD versions are not combo discs and the difference in price is due to the elevated % discount on the HD DVD MSRP offered by DVDEmpire.

But on that movie a few of us who didn't pay attention got screwed went for the slightly cheaper BD version and didn't get TrueHD.
I'm still planning to sell the BD disc and try to find a used Superman Returns HD-DVD to get the better soundtrack.
post #326 of 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sky042 View Post

I wouldn't say motrally wounded....but hurt for sure. People like me who already had 50 HD-DVD's during the drought bought a PS3 and nearly 30 BD titles in less than 2 months. Now that things are starting to ramp back up I've started buying HD-DVD again the most recent purchase was happy feet.

Same here just bought Happy Feet in HD DVD. I buy whichever is best or which ever is exclusive.
post #327 of 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ilka View Post

I believe that the chart was created by nataraj, and it first appeared around here:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...&#post10111220

Edit: Oops, just realized that those are two slightly different charts ... but you can read all about the number controversies there...

So the number being charted here are not really videoscan's, but an estimate of what someone has derived from the videoscan numbers?
post #328 of 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by UxiSXRD View Post

I believe Talk, if not paidgeek, directly contradicted that in the Insiders thread and that BD flipper combos are possible but just haven't been pursued (thank God!). If they were flippers, I would despise them on BD just like I do on HDDVD. Blech.

BD camp tried to get this working and gave up.

Technical hurdles and cost were too great, from what was said.

Is it "doable" - sure, they can probably say it's "doable", and it was touted as being in the spec.

But in reality, it's a paper tiger only - they weren't able to make it happen.
post #329 of 358
They didn't try to get it working - there was no-one asking for it.
JVC had a BD25/DVD9 hybrid (single sided) disc working successfully at IFA 2005.
It worked on a prototype Blu-ray player and on a regular DVD player. It worked just fine, with everything on one side.

http://www.blu-ray.com/ifa2005/

JVC

JVC was showcasing their BD/DVD hybrid media (33.5GB), which was developed to ease the transition from DVD to Blu-ray by creating a disc that will play in both BD players and DVD players. The hybrid disc is basically a single-layer BD-ROM (25GB) and a dual-layer DVD-ROM (8.5GB) in the same disc, which can be read in both players as the Blu-ray layer is transparent to the red laser used in a conventional DVD player.

A JVC representative offered a live demonstration where he first put the hybrid disc in the BD player and played the video in high definition (HD), he then transferred the disc to the conventional DVD player which seamlessly played the same video in standard definition (SD). According to the JVC representative the BD/DVD hybrid will be part of the BD-ROM specification, which was also confirmed by a BDA representative at the show.

post #330 of 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by dobyblue View Post

They didn't try to get it working - there was no-one asking for it.
JVC had a BD25/DVD9 hybrid (single sided) disc working successfully at IFA 2005.
It worked on a prototype Blu-ray player and on a regular DVD player. It worked just fine, with everything on one side.

http://www.blu-ray.com/ifa2005/

No one said they never got a prototype working. But it never made the transition to mass-production viability. Nor to handle dual-layer-DVD.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › The Matrix hits HD DVD May 22. BD release "later"