Until this gets settled, I really, really hope they dont pull the trick of releasing "bare bones" editions of a DVD, while the HD version is loaded with extras;
And then of course, they might release JUST an HD disc and no standard DVD of same title at all.
Warners did this at the start of DVD-giving Laserdisc the crumbs on extras, or even no release at all=to boost the DVD market.
DVD is too embedded-if they try that theyll be sorry

FYI: they are already doing that. Seems like every movie now has a bare bones 1 disc which is sold in abundance to most people and then they screw over us DVD collectors with a two disc version. I'm sure they'll sleep no worse at night if we have to buy a new player to see some exclusive extras.

Of course I don't think this will happen right off the bat, but as soon as on format takes off I could see this switch happening.

I updated the first post again, to get us up to the most recent information. The big additions were the titles (which I forgot to add before). Just checking, HD-DVD still only has 3 dated titles, right? I'm not talking about "we'll have these out after the launch" titles, but the "these titles will be here this date" titles. I have a feeling I'm (and Amazon) forgetting one.

A fourth if you count Chronos, but otherwise, yeah.

I made another update to the main post. All 13 Blu-Ray launch titles were put up for pre-order on Amazon. The links are DVDTalkafied, so please use them to keep Geoff happy. I also added Underworld Evolution to the 6/13 list as it was on Amazon for pre-order.

I added the 3 Universal HD-DVD titles for pre-order.

I have cut down on my dvd buying,not because of upcoming formats or anything. But because of lack of space,and trying to save some cash etc.

But I have significantly cut down on 'full blown SE' $10 more releases of films and just get the 1 disc version if I choose to buy the film. And since the majority of new films released in this way don't interest me. I have saved alot of money and didn't buy either release.

So even if they started releasing bare bones dvds,to push people towards the other formats. I would just buy the bare bones dvd,since the movie is all I really care about. And I don't think they're worth paying $10 more just to get extra features.

I have updated the first post to reflect that Lionsgate has delayed their launch until June 27th as a result of the delay of the Samsung Blu-Ray player until June 25th.

I'll keep track of the HD-DVD launch date which has been rumored to be slipping again. Players will have to reach retailers today or tomorrow for a Tuesday launch.

hahahahah...are you serious? it may be delayed AGAIN?!?!

Just wanted to keep everyone informed of what's been going on:

* Players are due to arrive at stores on the 16th instead of yesterday.
* 5000 players had to be "fixed" at the warehouse due to firmware issues, supposively.
* Reports are saying expect a "quiet" launch, with 3-4 players per store.

I'm not trying to spread FUD, just what has been talked about over at AVS where both retailers and consumers frequent the forum.

Samsung put up some info on their player, so I added that to the first posts. Also added links to Blu-Ray Live (Samsung's Blu-Ray site). I removed the individual titles (since they are now coming out pretty quickly), and added a link to Grubert's release schedule thread.

I'm sure this has been answered, but in terms of long movies, Lawrence of Arabia, Das Boot, the films of the The Lord of the Rings Trilogy (Extended Editions), etc., will the the HiDef versions of these films be able to presented on one disc without spreading across double/multiple discs?

Any length of movie will fit, it will just be a question of the bitrate used. Think of the data as gas, and the disc as a can. The gas can fit in virtually any size can if you compress it enough.

With 25 GB discs and VC-1 encoding, there isn't any concern of compression artifacts from high compression. What you said is correct, but it won't be a concern for movies.

Of course if studios put a lot of HD extras on HD-DVD discs, that would likely require a 2nd disc in most cases (and since consumers prefer multi-disc releases, everyone will be happy). But there should be zero need for a movie to be stretched over two discs using VC-1.

Of course using MPEG-2 (like Sony currently is), you'd burn about 8GB/hour of film. But once they get the double layer BDs mass produced, this also won't be a problem.

and I'm really hoping when and if New Line makes a statement about the Lord of the Rings films, we fans can enjoy the films I dare say, without the extras (horrors!), but that all the discs space could be dedicated to delivering the best audio and HiDef video has to offer.

I would assume that the extras wouldn't be in HiDef so it wouldn't be a problem. In the grand scheme, the 480i extras take up very little room in comparision to the HD stuff.

It's been suggested in a number of places that these early HD DVDs from Warner are already using up most of the 30Gb of dual layer simply with SD extras, and without high res audio tracks. Keith Jack (Director of Marketing at Sigma Designs - who supply chips to manufacturers of both formats) says a Warners exec came up to him at a meeting and said they were eagerly looking forward to 50Gb discs. I'm pretty sure that other than Disney's enthusiastic championing of the opportunities 50Gb presents this is the first studio (outside of Sony) to comment on this capacity issue.

Source?

I find that just about impossible. Even with MPEG-2 (~8 GB/hour for HD), there would be plenty of room for 2.5 hours of HD film and SD extras. Add in that HD-DVD is using VC-1 and I don't see how there could be issues at all.

If this is even close to true, I wonder how Warner feels about using single layer Blu-Ray discs with MPEG-2 (which they will be doing initially)... Smaller disc size and larger file sizes... sounds like Blu-Ray better get those problems with the double-layer discs figured out pronto.

Microsoft's Amir Majidimerhr.

I don't just because I remember reading posts from the Blu-ray camp saying that VC-1 wasn't really minimizing space because of the extremely high bitrates the studios are using at present. Guess they were right.

...or maybe there are just gigs and gigs of HD DVD-ROM-exclusive extras we just can't access yet! :D

Again, I have no problem with 2 discs. Hell, give me one HD disc and 1 SD disc. As much as I LOVE HD material, I'm not dependant upon it for extras. I'd like the trailer to be in HD and any deleted scenes. Beyond that, not a biggie.

But do they need such high bitrates?

WMV-HD movies use VC-1 at fairly low bitrates, but look perfect (better than OTA HD with my eyes on my setup). And they can fit about 3 GB per hour of HD film.

This is a NON-ISSUE. DVD buyers have demonstrated that they will pay for 2-disc sets.

DVD SELLERS have demonstrated that they like to sell 1 and 2 disc editions for more money ;)

question: is there really a difference between 1080i and 1080p - is the difference that noticeable?

With display technology, certainly.

But whether you'd notice any difference (at all) between 1080i and 1080p24 sources on a 1080p display is uncertain. Some (including myself) tend to think the difference will not be noticable (because both 1080i and 1080p need to undergo similiar processing in the player to get to 1080p60 for the display), but until we see some 1080p24 sources on 1080p displays no one can say for certain.

Why are you telling me? This was from a Warner Brothers exec. But my guess is that the studios have a better idea of what they think will sell than any of us internet posters. They appear to think the interactive features of these formats (which require the extras to be on the same disc) will be a key selling point when they try to flog these old properties one more time. VHS to DVD was easy: better AV quality, and ease of access to any point in the movie. Without the new interactive layers studios would be relying on improved AV alone this time, which apparently some don't think will be enough. At least, not if they want this to become a mainstream product.