Vote on your preference.
I'll sit this one out
Don't care/don't know, I still have my VHS tapes.
Vote on your preference.
I voted both because they both have their pros and cons.
Nelson, I find it hilarious you put the VHS option up there.
I voted HD-DVD
They both can produce the same quality movies but unlike Blu-Ray any HD-DVD player I buy today will always be able to play future movies and all of the extra features.
HD-DVD is cheaper for both the consumer and for disc manufacturing, not everyone has Michael Bay money and can go out and buy another player when Sony finally decides what Blu-Ray's final specs will be.
One would think with Michael Bay being a film creator he would support the format that allows amateur file makers to product HD-DVD quality short movies on normal DVDs using 3x DVD.
Blu-ray does have BD9, but the PS3 which is currently 99% of all Blu-Ray players does not accept this format. Sony will not allow this because it could damage the PS3 security against pirated games if it does. Like I said before it would be wonderful if all Blu-Ray players had one set of standards/specs.
Last edited by krawhitham; 12-07-2007 at 11:40 AM.
I voted Blu-ray simply because I prefer the current movies. All we need is Warner Bros. to go Blu-ray-online and it's all over.
I'm really ignorant... I don't know the difference. But last year I bought an LG DVD Recorder/Video Cassette Recorder for over 200 Euros. From the beginning it didn't recognize some of my DVDs. After a couple of recordings, the quality of the VHS player really deteriorated. I took it back on the guarantee, they kept it for two months, and it still didn't work properly after that. Now it's completely broken... and out of guarantee.
After a while you can get really sick of all this stuff, and for young guys like me it can get really expensive.
None, im too poor for either >.< The life of a college student *cheers ramon noodles for dinner*
I voted for both since I'm a fan of high-def movies, not flipping formats.
Well i voted .......for both since i own both format player.
Sorry to say i still have a Beta and VHS video players and yes i still use them.
so which ever way this HD or Blu Ray war go's i can't lose.
Dam this Format war reminds me of the BETA vs VHS format war
HD DVD is my choice.
There is a very good discussion of the reasons here in HDTV Magazine - http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/articles...or_blu-ray.php
Voted blu-ray simply because it has the movies that I prefer on its side. Forget about price for a second and think what you are buying. It has both quality and quantity over HD-DVD.
It is just me as it is my preference but blu ray is just more convienient for me although I do own an hd-dvd add on or my 360. I am a huge disney buff so theres a starter and in my area for the very least the retailers that are closest to me stock very little hd-dvd.
If you're one of the lucky ones who actually owns a 1080p24 display, you can pick up the latest 3rd generation HD-A30 from Amazon (or other sites) for $250. You can buy a bunch of movies with the money you saved over a Blu-ray player.
My vote is for Blu-Ray, anyone that says HD-DVD is a better format is a fool. Now that doesnt mean that picture quality or audio quality is currently much better in either format but that is currently, not in the future. So you can argue how simular this movie looked to that movie, or how Transformers on HD-DVD has great sound,but Blu-Ray has higher bitrate and greater capacity. The 51g HD-DVD is nothing when compaired to a 100g or 200g Blu-Ray. And anyone that says most movies currently fit on 25g and 30g discs so we dont need the extra space is just being dumb. With greater capacity, we can increase bitrates,use less compression,and with the greater size you can one day have multiple versions of movies or entire hd trilogys with bonus hd content on single discs. HD-DVD Works for now, Blu-Ray works for the future.
Remember, we are going to be using this format for a while if DVD is any indication, and in a few years I bet ALOT more people will have 1080p sets.
The higher bandwidth on Blu-ray was needed in order to get good results from Mpeg2, the oldest of the video codecs supported by both formats.
Blu-ray Movies Hit Stores Today
What Don didn't mention is that Sony had a big investment in Mpeg2 encoding equipment to preserve. Now that they are shipping much more efficient AVC/Mpeg4 encoding equipment they don't use Mpeg2 much anymore. So much for the superior results of Mpeg2."We started working with Sony Japan a couple of years ago developing an MPEG-2 encoder specifically for this format," says Eklund. However, Eklund says the company has discovered other advantages to using MPEG-2. "Since then, we've also done some testing with VC-1 and MPEG-4 AVC. We're finding they have some advantages when encoding at very low bit rates, but those low bit rates, as compared with MPEG-2, do not yield transparent picture quality to the original master. When you're encoding, you need to encode the noise that is part of the film grain of that master as well."
"What makes the films most difficult to encode, actually, is noise. And to make the best approximation of it, you need to use the highest available bit rate," Eklund says. "The bit rate we use for our typical releases is 18 mbps [megabits per second] average, with a 30-mbps maximum. And that is one of the key differences for HD DVD and Blu-ray: We have a higher bandwidth available for encoding than HD DVD has. It gives us a lot of flexibility even when we're working with the most difficult video masters."
The two new codecs that most movies are now being released on are AVC/Mpeg4 and VC1. These codecs will only become more efficient with time, not more bloated and inefficient. A movie at 1920x1080p24 is a movie at 1920x1080p24. Unless you think Hollywood is planning to move to 5+ hour movies, 100GB and 200GB discs are irrelevant.
For those buying into Blu-ray, keep in mind that you're also buying into the following DRM mechanisms: BD+, disc watermarking and region coding.
What are you talking about ? This is just a silly way of attacking Sony. Do you work for either Toshiba or Microsoft ? Or are you a Paramount employee supporting CEO decision to go HD-DVD exclusive and you have to say something against Sony at any cost ?The higher bandwidth on Blu-ray was needed in order to get good results from Mpeg2, the oldest of the video codecs supported by both formats.
Blu-ray Movies Hit Stores Today
Telling that the higher allowed bitrate for muxed audio/video streams on Blu-Ray specifications was made in order to use MPEG-2 it's a really silly statement.
Every manufacturer in the industry had an estabilished user base, hardware/software products and employees expertise for MPEG-2 built in the last 15+ years. The first MPEG-4 Part 10 H.264 capable DSPs appeared on the market from various manufacturers not much time ago, there have been design and debugging issues to address. H.264 hardware was too expensive but now it has started replacing MPEG-2 everywhere. VC-1 has never really been considered as an option.What Don didn't mention is that Sony had a big investment in Mpeg2 encoding equipment to preserve. Now that they are shipping much more efficient AVC/Mpeg4 encoding equipment they don't use Mpeg2 much anymore. So much for the superior results of Mpeg2.
So, what is your point ? Sony being evil and greedy while Microsoft,Toshiba,DVD-Forum being so kind towards everyone and willing to throw their MPEG-2 products and user base quickly ? Well, Microsoft surely yes since they had the smallest investments on MPEG-2 hardware/software compared to other manufacturers and just wanted to push WMV9 rebranded as VC-1 everywhere as it was the best codec around which is just not.
Moot point. More the space, higher the bitrate. And I bet that if they are going to add 100GB and 200GB discs to Blu-Ray specifications the maximum allowed bitrate will be raised so that producers can make use of the available space.The two new codecs that most movies are now being released on are AVC/Mpeg4 and VC1. These codecs will only become more efficient with time, not more bloated and inefficient. A movie at 1920x1080p24 is a movie at 1920x1080p24. Unless you think Hollywood is planning to move to 5+ hour movies, 100GB and 200GB discs are irrelevant.
What is your point ? You seem really so biased. You want to make Sony look bad at any cost while trying to make Microsoft,Toshiba,DVD-Forum look good and customer friendly or allowing copies to be made.. that's just not the case at all !For those buying into Blu-ray, keep in mind that you're also buying into the following DRM mechanisms: BD+, disc watermarking and region coding.
HD-DVD features DRM copy protection spy-on-user mechanisms as well, being optional means nothing since 99% of studios are using the AACS system and it has been partially cracked at will trying to push the adoption of HD-DVD and for marketing reasons for sure.. it surely wasn't due to some little kid doing reverse engineering that it got cracked, unless you want to believe some fairy tales for the general public to justify the sudden appearence of such cracks and no real legal action to take them down.
From a Microsoft document on HD-DVD specifications is possible to read:
HD DVD supports Advanced Access Content
System (AACS) to protect copyrighted
property and deter illegal copies from being
made. It provides flexibility for content
owners while remaining transparent to
legitimate users. AACS protection is optional
on HD DVD discs. If protection is required the
content owner determines the rules for
consuming the content and then they work
with an AACS licensed disc replicator to
manufacture the discs with the content
Audio watermarking, while not required, can
also be used in conjunction with AACS to
prevent the illegal use of content. An
inaudible watermark signal can be added to
the audio track indicating protection is
required. When an AACS-compliant player
detects the watermark signal and the content
is not protected, it recognizes it as illegal
content and deals with it accordingly. For
example, if a watermarked movie is copied
through an analog hole that circumvents
AACS, it will contain the watermark but it will
not be AACS protected so compliant players
will not playback the movie.
At this time, recordable media does not
support AACS for HD DVD.
And then, regarding the current lack of Regional Coding on HD-DVD discs.. that is not going to last any longer if HD-DVD ever survives the format war or worse it would replace Blu-Ray.. DVD-Forum, Toshiba and Microsoft are already working on specifications update to include Regional Coding:
HD DVD to carry unwelcome DVD baggage
By Eric Bangeman | Published: May 26, 2006 - 01:25PM CT
Perhaps capitulating to studio pressure, the DVD Forum has moved to burden the next-generation HD DVD format with region coding similar to that of its predecessor. Called Region Protection Coding, the new specification will function in much the same way as current DVDs do: restricting players from showing content from discs purchased outside of the player's region. The number of regions and the geographies they each will cover are not yet known.
Blu-ray is also using region encoding, narrowing the seven regions of the current DVD specification down to three. In a somewhat curious move, Blu-ray is combining the Americas and much of Asia into a single region, meaning that US anime fans will be able to easily import and watch the latest and greatest from Japan for viewing on their PlayStation 3 or US$1,000 Blu-ray players.
If RPC is ultimately approved and incorporated into the HD DVD format, it is unclear how the players that have already been sold will handle it. The most logical solution would be to allow the current handful of HD DVD players already on the market to play any HD DVD. Unfortunately, history tell us that logic is not one of the entertainment industry's strong suits, so it's not outside the realm of possibility that region-coded HD DVDs will cause problems for some early adopters.
Many have questioned the need for region coding at all. It is ostensibly an antipiracy measure, as it supposedly ensures that a DVD released in the US can't be shipped to southeast Asia, copied, and resold. In reality, region-free DVD players have been widely available in the past—before a studio-led crackdown—and there other ways *cough*DeCSS*cough* around the issue.
Updated February 22, 2006
33rd Steering Committee Meeting (Feb. 22, 2006)
14 Approval of "The RPC subcommittee's Request to SC:
-The RPC subcommittee to request input from studios regarding current and anticipated use of DVD-Video RPC system.
-The RPC subcommittee to request input from VPC regarding marketplace data regarding multi-region products.
-The RPC subcommittee to communicate with DVD CCA regarding RPC enforcement.
-The RPC subcommittee to consider possible change to region code map." approved
Updated September 12, 2006
35th Steering Committee Meeting (Sep. 12, 2006)
10 Approval of "The letter to be sent to DVD CCA from DVD Forum regarding multi region players currently available in the market place" approved
Updated September 12, 2006
34th Steering Committee Meeting (May 24, 2006)
6 Approval of
"HD DVD RPC Ad hoc group to work with appropriate WGs to develop a specification and enforcement plan for RPC on HD DVD-Video including region map and requirements in consultation with the studios" Approved
Last edited by wingzero; 12-10-2007 at 02:25 AM.
In answer to your question about Michael Bay's opinion, here's a quote from the man himself:
"What you don't understand is corporate politics. Microsoft wants both formats to fail so they can be heroes and make the world move to digital downloads. That is the dirty secret no one is talking about. That is why Microsoft is handing out $100 million dollar checks to studios just embrace the HD DVD and not the leading, and superior Blu Ray. They want confusion in the market until they perfect the digital downloads. Time will tell and you will see the truth."
You see HD-DVD only has two main supporters: Toshiba and M$. In 2005 it appears Toshiba was ready to drop HD-DVD and M$ somehow made them stick with it. Blu-Ray *is* the superior format (lossless audio and higher bit rates) and has wider industry support.
Blu-ray . . . at its best it's better quality picture and sound. At its worst it's HD DVD
I don't care what anybody says, Toshiba doesn't compete with Pioneer Elite, Denon, etc. I don't want a Toshiba player, and nobody wants to make an HD DVD player other than Toshiba.
Also, for the money you save on the HD DVD player you can buy more movies, huh? I guess if you only like Universal, since Paramount has been pretty lackluster since the switch, Weinstein is MIA, and I can get Warner on Blu-ray with PCM audio, along with every other studio.
I voted Blu because it is the Future. HD-DVD is the past being dragged out at the expense of the consumer.
Movies in Blu
Blu, beacause the play in my PS3 which will also upscale regular DVDs to HD for anything thats not available on Blu, thou blu sounds and looks the best
I think Blu-ray's the only format that would allow an entire Lord of the Rings movie to be stored on one 50GB disk with artifact-free video and lossless audio. To achieve the same quality the movie would need to be spread across two 30GB HD DVD's.
I'm looking for a next-gen format that allows the movie to look and sound its best without splitting movies across disks. The higher storage capacity and Audio/Video bandwidth of Blu-ray obviously allows for that higher A/V quality.
I'm a big Bond fan so it obviously helps that MGM/Sony are on board with Blu-ray. I love Panasonic electronics so that helps too.
I voted Blu-Ray because of it's larger storage capacity and higher bandwidth!
I really dont see any advantage with HD DVD now since blu-ray are introducing PIP and Web-enabled movies as well.
Blu-Ray has the best technology and the most industry support and should be the obvious choice to replace DVD.