This is the "free-for-all" thread you're posting in.

Right. It's not realistic to stamp out all of the bickering and arguing, but instead of letting it filter into every thread, I'm just trying to anchor it all in here. This thread is intentionally loosely moderated.

I dont trust anything Amir says anymore. He is so unbeleivably biased. He was recently quoted saying that MPEG2 would need to be 30mb/sec to look as good as 15mb/sec VC-1. Then someone went back through his posts, and low and behold, he quoted 25-27mb/sec before that, and 22-24mb/sec before that! Every month that goes on, that magic # for mpeg2 gets bigger and bigger, aka, hes pulling the #s out of thin air to make HD-DVD look more impressive. That is my beef with him.

...to make VC-1 sound more impressive. Blu-ray can use VC-1 just as easily as HD DVD.

Plus, Adam wasn't even talking about Amir. He was talking about Cjplay, who is a compressionist for (correct me if I'm wrong) Warner Bros.

He doesn't work for Warner, although his company apparently does a lot (maybe all?) of their titles.

Anyone read this - http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centr...s/14950018.htm ?

...But it doesn't. Perhaps because of Sony prodding or who knows what else, they haven't left MPEG-2 yet, though they hopefully will soon.

I'm sure what the analyzer and Amir meant initially, within context, is that "HD-DVD is better because of VC-1," and, while this is true, its the increasing bias about how much better, and in what manner, that we should take issue with.

yes. Definitely. take issue with it.

Tell me again: why exactly does BD HAVE TO BE BETTER than HD DVD?

Blu-Ray is using MPEG-2 because the only authoring software for BD is a Sony product which uses MPEG-2. Sony is waiting for a 3rd party to make an AVC-based encoders. Then the studios can decide. Most likely Blu-Ray will never use VC-1 since it is a Microsoft product and royalties will have have to be paid to one of Sony's archenemy. And let's not forget... it's not just MPEG-2, it's MPEG-2 with the blacks and whites clipped.

How much better is HD-DVD today? Have you seen the output of both? I own neither (I'm pretty neutral to the war), but thanks to a co-worker I have (this past weekend) seen both. It is night and day. HD-DVD is orders of magnitude better.

Personally, I wanted Blu-Ray to come out looking stellar -- because they (currently) have the studio support. But it looks like crap -- no better than the upconverted DVD versions. Regardless of the reason (using a less efficient codec on smaller discs is most certainly the culprit), the quality today isn't close.

I think its funny that you are trying to come across as "impartial" when you are an obvious Sony booster. You are extremely critical of everything HD-DVD (glass half empty) while not levelling any of that critique at Sony, whose glass at this point is at generous best 1/10th full.

I don't have an HD player. I am waiting to see what Sony does next. This time last year, I thought all HD-DVD had going for it was "DVD" in the name. If I HAD to pre-order a player this time last year, it would have been a BD deck. The cards were definitely stacked in Sony's favor. I was wrong about HD-DVD. They have had quite an impressive launch, especially when compared to Sony, who seems to be stumbling drunk.

That said, I was never one of those Sony guys that were saying from the start that Sony had this all tied up, and that there was no way PS3 would have any troubles etc. We can see now that there are plenty of problems with BD, and almost as many with PS3. There is bad press almost daily, while HD-DVD just chugs along.

If you are truly impartial, and you want to discuss problems with systems, then BD must be on the tip of your tongue. Otherwise you are really blind to what is going on.

You talk about the potential of BD, comparing it to the here and now of HD-DVD. The only fair comparison is to compare current offerings. Just as BD has room to get better, so does HD-DVD. The question is how long BD has to get better if HD-DVD dominates it quickly and decisively?

In the short term. If you want to look at the longer term, you have to look at projections, and assess the likelihood of different scenarios (time before BD50 becomes widespread, decisions taken by studios, role of the PS3, etc., etc.).

Wrong.

BD has room to get better in capacity (if they get DL to work). No such thing for HD DVD.

BD has room to get better in video codecs (when authoring tools become available). No such thing for HD DVD.

Fewer than 30,000 players and three dozen titles out is not my idea of quick and decisive domination.

In war tactics, after achieving a breakthrough, the next step is the exploitation phase, where you pump your resources to consolidate your advantage.

HD DVD should take full advantage of the buzz, and ramp up shipping ASAP (not to mention getting the studios to release a lot more titles). Otherwise, it may eventually prove to be as pyrrhic a victory as the German Ardennes offensive in WWII.

Again, it is unfair to compare the state of HD-DVD now with the potential state of BD in the future, and vice versa. Tough concept, I know...



So BD will get better in the codecs, but HD will not. Hmm... Also, is it a "for sure" that HD-DVD can't add more layers to their product? I know currently they are dual layered, but could they go three or four layers down the line? I'm not sure I've read HD-DVD is maxed out, but I am also not sure I didn't.

Also, as many have pointed out, if HD-DVD can get a four hour film onto one DL disc with great quality, then who gives a darn if the extras are on a second disc? Another statement dripping with BD bias debunked.

I think we'll see most studios go agnostic in the next four months, and then we'll see all studios save Sony using VC-1 (one transfer for both platforms is more cost effective). Then, in a best case scenario, Sony will get DL discs with film and extras on one platter while HD-DVD might need two.

Also keep in mind that for almost 10 years consumers have been trained that two discs=special edition. More discs=more percieved value. Of course that is not necessarily true, but we all know the perception is there.



Did I say that they had achieved "decisive domination?" No. However, if you read reports, Samsungs are sitting while stores can't keep the Tosh in stock. As some of us have said for a long time, the price of the player is hugely impactful. Of course, to a BD head, cost is no factor for quality. Except for PS3 which is of course a competitor for the Tosh. Which is it anyway? If things continue on for HD as they have, then it is entirely possible that by this time next year the only films you need BD for are Sony's films. If you can't say that Toshiba has handled the launch well, then, again, your bias is showing.

Will Toshiba screw up? I'm sure they will sooner or later, in fact they screwed up a LOT before the launch, primarily getting studio backing. If they had lined up Fox and Disney, combined with a 100% cheaper entry point for the hardware, NOONE would be backing BD, except the Sony workforce and fanclub.

If DFNYC made the comments you made here, except about HD being superior to BD, you'd be all up in arms. Difference is DFNYC is biased, and wears it on his sleeve. He makes no allusions to being impartial. It is extremely disingenuous to claim a lack of bias when one is so obviously there.

We can talk about blu-ray vs hd-dvd until we're blue in the teeth, and this thread is very very informative. The more I see though, the more right now I lean towards HD-DVD. Price as already said, is a huge factor, and no matter what specs are thrown around this forum... the majority of the consumer base will look at these costs and choose HD-DVD. The only chance Sony has at being in the running right now is its PS3. And even that right now, analysts are predicting the PS3 may be third in the console war because of its price. Now, I know that's most unlikely but people aren't too optimistic for blu-ray right now even in the industry.

Nice strawman jim. I haven't ever suggested comparing a potential situation with a current one. I just said that you can compare current vs current, or potential vs potential. Both are fair and useful comparisons, within their limitations.

No "hmm" me. Right now there are HD DVD discs in MPEG2, H264 and VC1. OTOH, all released BD discs are MPEG2. Hence, all three specced codecs in VC1 are operational, whereas only one of the (same three) specced codecs in BD are.

You still with me?

There are only two things fore sure in life: death and taxes.

But, the general consensus is that it is "extremely unlikely".

That topic is being debated in avs. Unfortunately the forum is down now so I can't give you a link.

Potentially. Right now, they can't. The evidence? All new release titles on HD DVD (Rumor Has It, Firewall, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang) have been 15/9 combos, except for Syriana, which was released as normal, dual-layer HD DVD. Interestingly, Syriana has a running time of over two hours. So right now, they can't fit a two-hour, low-action movie, that doesn't even use lossless audio tracks, in a single-layer disc.

That "four hour film onto one DL disc with great quality" is just another promise. And we have decided not to believe in promises, haven't we?

Sounds reasonable.

No kidding. The European edition of Corpse Bride consisted of two single-layer discs.

You did say "The question is how long BD has to get better if HD-DVD dominates it quickly and decisively?".

No wonder. If I were given a voucher for a free hidef player to be bought right now, I'd buy the Toshiba. You can quote me on that.

Impactful? Yes. Hugely? Not really. I believe that right now the Toshiba would outsell the Samsung even if they cost the same. Early buyers are enthusiasts who are being drawn by online buzz and instant gratification. Both are unarguably higher on the HD DVD side right now.

I'm not a BD head, so I can't tell you what they think.

Everything is possible. Especially in Hollywood.

Another strawman. Your fallacy count is disturbingly high.

I haven't said Toshiba hasn't handled the launch well. I have said that they could have handled it much better. They won round one, but it seems they are just going to dance around for a couple rounds instead of trying to score a knockout.

And failing to launch in time for the holidays of 2005. That would have been a major hit.

Obviously. A 100% cheaper entry point would mean giving away the player. The Samsung is 100% more expensive than the Toshiba, but the Toshiba is 50% cheaper than the Samsung.

If DFNYC made the comments I have made here, I'd wonder if he had begun taking new anti-rudeness medication. No offense meant.

Another strawman. Have I ever claimed any of the above?

And yes, I am ingenuous in the sense of "open, frank". I am behind a format-agnostic release calendar at the top of the page. Since February I have compiled all relevant news (regardless of format and whether they were positive or negative) on AVS. I am a true believer in perfect information as the basis for a, well, informed choice.

Or maybe you meant disingenuous?

Of course anything that doesn't back up your POV is a strawman.

Also, all your arguments assume that there will be great improvements to BD, and none to HD-DVD. Comparing present (actually encodes done months ago) to the future is a bit unfair.

Anyhoo, the Tosh is $500. The Samsung is $1000. The Tosh is $500 less then the Sammy. That is a 100% difference in price, not 50%.

...although there are a few possibilities as to why that could be.

1. The "four hours" they talk about may not really be four hours but three-and-a-half and change rounded up. "Just over two hours" times two is still more than four hours.
2. Syriana has right at a full hour of MPEG-2 encoded extras. That could be skewing things. Although previous combo discs have had all of the extras on the DVD side of the disc, perhaps Warner was insistent on including this extra half-hour or so of extras from the Best Buy bonus disc, and it made more sense for them to include all of the extras on one side of an HD DVD disc than to split them across both sides or re-author the DVD portion to accomodate.
3. Maybe the runtime Amir and company keep talking about is achieveable but requires a great deal of time and effort, and for whatever reason, that wasn't invested in Syriana.
4. Perhaps it was a marketing decision to compare sales of a day/date release on a traditional HD DVD to these combo discs.
5. Maybe Syriana was encoded with earlier tools that aren't representative of what VC-1 is capable of now.

Or it could be something else entirely. Pointing to one movie of dozens to prove any point doesn't necessarily mean anything. I'm not saying you're wrong (neither of us are in a position to say for sure, so it's all speculation anyway), but there aren't enough data points yet to pick up on a trend.

With that logic, then BD cant be dual-layered since none have been released.

Im also in the camp that doesnt care if the special features are on another disc (docs and so on). As long as they can fit the entire movie, audio tracks/commentaries and IME special features on the first disc (which HD-DVD can obviously do).

If the movie is 3.5-4hrs+, I dont mind 2 discs for it. Like, LOTR EE sd-dvds.

Basically, I just want the BEST pq/aq. They can put the special features on a second sd-dvd for all I care (if the spec features are sd).

What BD is releasing right now is a shame! They should have AT LEAST included a second sd-dvd of the special features.

IMO, HD-DVD is doing the best job of producing great pq/aq AND maintaining at the very least, the sd-dvd special features (while some have exclusives).

Wrong. Trying to distort my POV is a strawman.

I have acknowledged several of the points you made so don't even try to caricature me.

I have stated and reasoned where BD can improve.

Do you refute the possibility of BD50 and advanced codecs for BD? If so, please give an explanation.

Conversely, do you know of potential improvements to HD DVD? If so, please specify which ones.

Let me summarize my premises:

1. High-bitrate hidef MPEG2 can look good. Example: I, Robot D-VHS.
2. MPEG2 hidef video on 25GB (and with PCM eating disk space) doesn't look good overall.
3. VC1 and H264 video on 30GB looks very good overall.

Are we in agreement?

So, if you either get more space, or an advanced video codec, picture quality will increase. Agreed?

We can debate whether this is something likely to happen soon. It has nothing to do with comparing the present to the future.

As always with percentages, it depends on the point of reference of the percentage.

3 is 50% more than 2, but 2 is 33.33% less than 3.

I think even HD DVD fans will tell you I'm right.

Hence, a "100% cheaper entry point" is nonsensical.

Hey, I'm just putting myself in the shoes of the 'promises schlomises" clique.

I agree 100% with the rest of your post.

Both formats can improve (whether it be size, encoding, multiple discs and so on).

BD has MORE room to improve, because right now, they are releasing subpar material (bad pq/aq and limited or no special features).

They are releasing very good discs right now. They dont need to improve as much as BD. The biggest thing that HD-DVD can do right now, is release more material.

The best thing BD can do right now, is add special features and increase the quality of the movie pq/aq.

Grubert, give up on the percentage thing. Who cares if some don't understand math?

And all your talk about BD having the potential of better video codecs is pointless since HDDVD is already using those advanced codecs. BD has the potential to CATCH UP in compression, not surpass. Hardly something to brag about.

Josh Z,
If you think 5.1 compressed audio is good enough, go for it. I want 7.1 uncompressed that is promised by both these formats, and nothing has delivered. A couple discs have uncompressed audio, so that is a good sign, but no current player can take advantage of them. And stop thinking I am a BD fanboy. I am simply waiting for a usable player to be put out. Paying $500-2000 for a player and 5 movies is silly. I am perfectly happy waiting til there's enough of a library to make this upgrade worth the money. Get a grip on your crazed "I hate BD" mantra.

Here are 2 posts from CJPlay (A compressionist) who says BD50 is out, and really soon. Hes worked on a lot of HD DVD flicks, so his info is always spot on.

Anyone who thinks its vaporware.. Well, you just wait.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...&&#post7926861

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...&&#post7929681

...the potential to catch up in compression - and surpass in capacity. You forgot that.

If BD ultimately fails to get the capacity advantage, then it really will be inferior and will deserve to die. 50 > 30 > 25 , y'know.

It says coming soon or possibly later this year.

Where the hell does it say it's out?