Author Topic: HD DVD vs Blu-Ray (Read 736 times)

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #15 on:** January 11, 2008, 06:14:12 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dnil
porn is on blu ray. Slowly getting there but its there.

and I think I predicted this last week before the announcements at CES.

withe porn industry currently being a several billion dollar a year industry.
It'll be there

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #16 on:** January 11, 2008, 07:37:26 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by crockett
HD DVD is the better product, but seems Blu Ray is likely pushing some money behind the scenes or something. I'm actually amazed that Blu Ray is winning.

The reason VHS won out over Beta was because the p0rn industry pushed VHS and it was the p0rn industry that was largely responsible for the success of VCR's at the start.

With the HD formats Blu Ray has stated they won't allow p0rn to be sold on their format, at least that's what they have said in the past. I assumed because of that that HD DVD would win out, because it's also the better product.

I guess it just shows mony talks.

Actually Blu-Ray is the better product because the sound quality for Blu-Ray movies is far better than the sound in HD-DVD movies and Blu-Ray has a larger capacity than HD-DVD.

If anyone is planning on buying either a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD player, might want to hold off until Samsung releases their dual player with both formats.

ack-ack

lazs2 · « **Reply #17 on:** January 12, 2008, 10:41:54 AM »

I have a panasonic plasma TV.. regular tv looks pretty good.. HD TV looks good to spectacular. It has about the best picture of all the TV's I have seen.

normal DVD looks good on this set. I have an upconverting dvd player... I can change the settings.

On the normal setting it looks good but.. when upconverted.. it seems to be as good as most HD programing.. I can already see the guys pores on it.. not sure I want a better picture.. it has an almost 3d look to it to me and.. most who see it. Had people ask me how much the HD player cost me.

The upconverting player was very cheap... like a hundred bucks or so with a cheapo HDMI cable.

I am very happy with this setup for now. It is relatively cheap and works very well.. old DVD's that I have look so much better than they used to.

lazs

AKIron · « **Reply #18 on:** January 12, 2008, 10:46:42 AM »

My player upconverts and regular DVDs look pretty good at 1080p. Still, HD is one of those things you can't really appreciate until you've spent a little time watching it and then go back. The difference then becomes quite notceable.

lazs2 · « **Reply #19 on:** January 12, 2008, 10:48:31 AM »

maybe my HD programing is not as good as yours on cable. I notice the quality varies but.. there simply is not that much difference between regular HD shows and upconverted DVD's it seems to me.

lazs

AKIron · « **Reply #20 on:** January 12, 2008, 10:49:59 AM »

I don't have an HD receiver. The only HD I get is from my Blu-ray player. When i move in a few weeks I'll be ordering an HD DVR.

Sox62 · « **Reply #21 on:** January 12, 2008, 11:09:53 AM »

I purchased a Toshiba HD DVD player last week.

Now Paramount is dropping HD DVD support along with Warner Bros.This will leave Universal as the last major movie maker supporting HD DVD.HD DVD is as good as dead now.

I'm taking my HD DVD player back and getting a Playstation III.

Paramount to drop HD DVD support

Gunslinger · « **Reply #22 on:** January 12, 2008, 03:16:17 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sox62
I purchased a Toshiba HD DVD player last week.

Now Paramount is dropping HD DVD support along with Warner Bros.This will leave Universal as the last major movie maker supporting HD DVD.HD DVD is as good as dead now.

I'm taking my HD DVD player back and getting a Playstation III.

Paramount to drop HD DVD support

I think the PS3 has alot to do with BluRay's success. If it wasn't for the PS3 IMHO blu ray would have lost out.

However,

I do think actual disks themselves will be obsolete in a few years as faster internet speeds will allow downloaded content in HD to be a MAJOR convenience compared to buying one format of player and then shopping for a movie in said format.

I know there was talks about Time Warner cable and comcast offering HD content downloadable in about 4 minutes. I also know that on ALL of my ATT u-verse boxes there is a USB port for transfering and playing content one other boxes through out the house. This makes going to the video store a thing of the past.

crockett · « **Reply #23 on:** January 12, 2008, 03:22:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gunslinger
I think the PS3 has alot to do with BluRay's success. If it wasn't for the PS3 IMHO blu ray would have lost out.

However,

I do think actual disks themselves will be obsolete in a few years as faster internet speeds will allow downloaded content in HD to be a MAJOR convenience compared to buying one format of player and then shopping for a movie in said format.

I know there was talks about Time Warner cable and comcast offering HD content downloadable in about 4 minutes. I also know that on ALL of my ATT u-verse boxes there is a USB port for transfering and playing content one other boxes through out the house. This makes going to the video store a thing of the past.

Yea I think so too. Comcast announced a few days ago that they found away to dramatically increase cable modem speeds. I think At&T is planning on doing the same. Supossed to let you D/L a full movie in 4 mins.

AKIron · « **Reply #24 on:** January 12, 2008, 03:31:25 PM »

I just bought a PS3 last weekend. You guys can thank me for settling this format war. I think it will be more than a short while before we can download a 10GB HD movie over the Internet in a reasonable amount of time but I'm hoping I'm wrong.

Nashwan · « **Reply #25 on:** January 12, 2008, 04:59:27 PM »

Quote

I think it will be more than a short while before we can download a 10GB HD movie over the Internet in a reasonable amount of time but I'm hoping I'm wrong.

I can download 10 GB in just over an hour now, with a 20 mb cable connection. An hour is probably quicker than going to the shop to buy or rent a dvd, and if there was a streaming service available I wouldn't even need to wait an hour.

Basically with my current connection (which isn't particularly fast) I could cope with nearly 10 GB/hour streaming, which is high enough for HD.

lazs2 · « **Reply #26 on:** January 13, 2008, 10:15:18 AM »

it costs about twenty five cents or so for dvd recordable discs and the quality is as good as rentals.

the upconverter makes it look about like HD.. HD discs are very expensive for not much improvement. For now.. I feel like the best deal for me is DVD recorder and upconveting player hooked to a good plasma tv.

When HD discs and recorders and rentals and players all get cheap as this.. either blue ray or whatever.. I will throw away all the movies I have in DVD and my upconverting stuff and get the new stuff..

just like I did with all my VHS stuff.

lazs

AKIron · « **Reply #27 on:** January 13, 2008, 10:24:08 AM »

One thing AT&T and others claiming fast movie downloads are around the corner aren't addressing is the load on the download sites and the Internet routes to them. Burst speed is one thing, sustainable bandwidth capable of supporting this when 100 million Americans want to download the same new release on Saturday night is another.

I guess they could do some sort of multicasting at scheduled intervals. This would at least relieve congestion at the download site and on some of the pipes.

bj229r · « **Reply #28 on:** January 13, 2008, 10:40:37 AM »

I can download 10Gb in....4,280 days (hmm mebbe 4.2 days:huh ) satellite internet only makes that 5X faster, and there is a cap each day, after which you are choked down to dial-up speed....so I think I'll just toodle down to Blockbuster;

Gunslinger · « **Reply #29 on:** January 13, 2008, 11:03:57 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKIron
One thing AT&T and others claiming fast movie downloads are around the corner aren't addressing is the load on the download sites and the Internet routes to them. Burst speed is one thing, sustainable bandwidth capable of supporting this when 100 million Americans want to download the same new release on Saturday night is another.

I guess they could do some sort of multicasting at scheduled intervals. This would at least relieve congestion at the download site and on some of the pipes.

There was a post recently on how comcast planned to solve this problem. They would have local "movie server" hubs in resedential areas. If movies weren't on these hubs then they can go out and get one from a national server. These small "nodes" are to prevent such traffic accross the entire network.