I am a college student and I know other college students, thus how I know people who use the PS2 as a DVD player as well. Not everybody is like us who needs upconverted SD or top of the line progressive scan players. Not only that, a DVD on a PS2 still looks better than a VHS period (a few of these people don't have that big of screens). And now DVDs also happen to be bargin-bin cheaper than VHS tapes.

Granted, I have three DVD players in my house and sometimes I happen to watch movies on my 20" iMac (they sure do look pretty on it), but not everyone is like me. If only they were.

Wouldn't that be a good thing? If a majority of the Blu-ray owners have non-HDMI players, then there goes ICT out the window.

And with it, one of the main reasons the studios sided with BR in the first places.

I don't buy the notion that the $499 PS3 will inhibit the use of ICT. Consider this:

• Most of the people hooking up their $499 model PS3 using analog cables will be doing so to a SD TV.

• Most of the people buying the $499 model probably aren't aware of ICT and might not even notice that output is limited to 540p (and those that DO have HDTVs will likely have that 540p automatically upscaled by the TV).

Only a handful of people of the sort who hang out here are even aware of ICT and they are the ones who are likely to buy the more expensive HDMI capable PS3. Yes, there has been a lot of complaining here by those with older component only HD displays. But they are a drop in the bucket compared to the number of average folks likely to buy PS3s.

JMO, of course.

This brings up a question: will disc cases even be labeled to say that ICT is turned on? I'm guessing no, and the only way to know will be disc reviews and the like.

I believe they have to label the packaging if they enable ICT.

And you think these people will be in a rush to buy Blu-ray discs?

I was thinking the same thing.

Well, maybe I didn't make my experience clear enough. I wasn't comparing my PS2 DVD experience to a top of the line progressive scan standalone DVD player. I would rather have a $39 Emerson DVD player than use a PS2.

No, I don't think it will go out the window at all. The studios (for greedy, paranoid reasons of their own) believe that without ICT they will lose billions of dollars in revenue. They won't simply roll over and give up on the idea.

Very likely not. And this is another reason why I don't think that the sale of non-HDMI PS3s will cause studios to NOT use the ICT in future releases, as others above were speculating.

Please don't assume that I believe that the PS3 is going to make or break the Blu-ray Disc format. Having never played a video game in my life, I haven't a clue as to what impact the PS3 will have on the success or failure of the BD format. I leave that for the gamers to argue over (although I am inclined to believe that the format will survive simply because the games themselves will be encoded on BD).

From avsforum:

An appropriate update to this:

1st Gen BR players, it's now been confirmed, will not have HDMI 1.3 and will not be able to have advanced audio codecs like DD+, Tru HD and DTS-HD output to an external AVR.

They cannot decode them in the player either, so owners will never be able to listen to these. Compared to HD DVD which has on-board decoders for DD+ and TruHD, so that anyone can enjoy them now, over analog, HDMI and even (via DTS recoding) over Optical.

The initial runs of BR movies will be on 25 gig discs, with Mpeg 2 - this could be 100 or 200 releases before the tools are sorted and the DL BDROM manufacturing problems are solved. As opposed to HD DVD on 30 gigs, with the VC1 codec - the best codec.

A lot of BR supporters are saying they won't buy these releases without VC1 (I wouldn't either, to be frank). Sony is increasingly looking like they will use AVC (not VC1) when they eventually move away from mpeg 2. Yet Japan releases on HD DVD using the same AVC encoding are apparently clearly inferior to VC1.

Only some of the BR players can play CDs. Sony's can't, either. Yet the Toshiba HD DVD players not only can play CDs, but upsample CDs (and DVD and HD DVDs) to 96/24 audio.

The Pioneer 1st gen machine uses the same bootloader mechanism as the Toshibas, and the boot time is said to be equivalent.

And the BR players cost 2 or 3 times more than the HD DVD machines - and the only dubious advantage is 1080p versus 1080i output (both use the same 1080p24 on the discs).

No 1.3 was given, but if it is true that all the BR players won't decode any of the HD-sound formats... ouch.

Sony's specs make it look like their player won't do any decoding, but I don't think we have final specs for the Samsung or Pioneer.

AFAIK, it's true.

Link? This can't possibly be true. They would have to have some capability for these new codecs. Not only would that be market suicide, I don't believe it follows BD specs.

Check avsforum. It's all over there.

To be accurate the BR players will take the core 5.1 signal out of DD+, TrueHD and DTS-HD. They will ignore all the advanced sound though. BR players will have support for 5.1 LPCM so any discs encoded with that will be your only way of getting advanced sound on BR for the first gen of players. However, standard 5.1 sound on BR will be at a higher bitrate than current DVD players so it will sound better than DVD.

The troubles with DL BR are well documented and are being worked on. Recently numbers were that DL discs have a 75% failure rate, but I'm sure its better by now and I expect them to solve that by years end.

Hopefully when studios like Warner release titles on Blu-ray we can get some side by side and see how Mpeg2, VC1 and AVC stands up. However, if VC1 is the best codec I hope everyone will quickly move to it as a standard for the industry. I would hate to have to double dip later just to get a better HD encode.

Additionally, it must be noted that LPCM takes up a huge amount of disc space in comparison to any of the lossless formats like Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD. Considering that initial Blu-Ray titles will use MPEG2 on single-layer 25Gb discs, LPCM is almost certainly going to eat into the video bit rate. I doubt we'll see too many discs with it.

So then what sound format would they use??

Warner and Buena Vista reps on HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray...although only the Buena Vista rep debates the two formats. Warner doesn't take much of a stance either way, at least in the body of the interview.

They will probably have the discs encoded with DD+ or TrueHD, but the players will only extract the 5.1 core until a later generation.

Love that one of BVs big reasons for backing Blu-ray is the fact they can get pan and scan on the disc as well with the greater storage capacity. Really makes me want to run out and buy that $1000 Blu-ray player.

That could make life a lot easier for everyone, though. There's only one disc instead of separate SKUs, which is good news for stores and, I'm sure, for the studios too. The OAR crowd gets their widescreen, and the full-frame crowd can fill their 4x3 screens. (I guess Buena Vista is really looking forward if they're anticipating 13" 4x3 TVs having Blu-ray players hooked up to 'em.)

I took their comments and specs to mean they would convert any Dolby/DTS lossless to LPCM for analog output.

Funny how it always comes back to the 1st gen sucking.

And your paying $1000 for it to suck.

No, the players would need to have the appropriate decoders for that (this is what the HD-DVD players do), and it's already been confirmed that the first generation Blu-Ray players won't.

Not I. I'll see what $1000 buys in 2008. God, and I thought the A1 was bad for audio, these BD players seem truly offensive. Course, that's what I expect from Sony and Samsung. Not sure what Pioneer is thinking, I hope that model rots on shelves.

I've been thinking BD has a better chance of survival, but it looks like they are self-destructing. The PS3 might be the best BD player of 2006.