This is not always true. Even with a perfect de-interlacer it is more than possible to not get the true signal back again. Here is Keith Jack (Director Product Marketing, Sigma Designs, BD and HD-DVD decoder supplier) take on the apparent ease of de-interlacing-
BTW AFAIR the Sony Styles were supposed to get 1080p capable sets ready for the preview, but some missed out. That should still leave some displaying proper 1080p.

You can deny it all you want, but all HD DVDs are in 1080p and are plenty futureproofed. When I upgrade to a true 1080p input HDTV in a couple of years I can easily buy a new HD DVD player that is also 1080p. No one keeps the same player for 10 years. At least the flawed HD DVD player is $500 compared to the flawed Blu-ray players that are $1000. All first gen HD DVD and Blu-ray players will have to be upgraded in a year to take full advantage of both formats.

The first Blu-ray decks are plenty hobbled too. The "format war" will not be decided by first-gen hardware, and I'm not sure why you're so insistent on arguing otherwise.

Well, that leaves 70% of the bitstreams as error free right? Regardless, the HD-A1 must have a damn good de-interlacer in it because I can't see any motion artifacts. I have not seen anyone say they've seen de-interlacing artifacts on the HD-A1 anywhere (including avsforum).

It'll be better when the player can output 1080p (mainly so Blu-ray supporters have one less "advantage" to hold onto). But, since most people can't take advantage of it anyway, I don't see it as the 'killer app' that some claim it to be. Especially since I can't find any de-interlacing artifacts even when I'm looking for them.

All I see is a stunning picture for half the price of Blu-ray.

Hell, my PJ can "only" display 768 lines of resolution, but after seeing what HD DVD looks like on it, I'm in absolutely no hurry to upgrade to a native 1080p display. Like I've said elsewhere, it looks better than the theoretically superior picture from the native 1080p Westinghouse BB has on display. I was worried at first because the Westinghouse was 1080p and I wondered how much worse my projector would be... but it turned out to actually be better. So not all 1080p displays are even created equal it turns out.

The fact that the software is 1080p is good evidence alone.

It isn't the same Blitz, but it's a lot more similiar, in that only a few modifications are necessary to mass produce the discs. On the other hand, Bluray is way different. Sounds like something from outer space. Nice concept, but not in this world. Not yet, maybe next time.

You have to remember that DVD has been the most succesful consumer product in history. I mean, a LOT of people bought into it. It's part of our culture, so if nothing else then by it's name (and technical similarity), HD DVD won't "threaten" the average Joe as much. Nobody wants to see their collections become obsolete.

From what I heard BR players are backward compatible by force. It was such a bitch getting the player to read DVDs, they said fuck it on the CD part (I guess), so it won't play CDs. Now that's a dead giveaway for people that BR is TOO different. Ain't gonna happen Blitz.

That is more than an indictment of deinterlacing. If 30% of all bitstreams contain errors, then that includes 30% of progressive bitstreams as well. So what's your point?

I've seen the results of deinterlacing the 1080i60 bitstream from the HD-A1 on my 1080p60 display, and there are no interlace artifacts present. Period.

That's not what I was insinuating either.
You mean: A vast enhancement to DVD.
Not neccessarily! Eagerly, people are buying HD-DVD because it's the very first format on the market to release HD content on a DVD format at the present time. Just for clarification, I am not in favour of neither HD-DVD, or Blu-Ray currently, but whether it's HD-DVD, or Blu-Ray comparative better features, improvements, and superior manufacturer quality, consumers will purchase the latter, regardless of the price... I know I will at least.

The first BD standalone player, the Samsung, is apparently capable of playing CDs.

If you read Kjack's post you will see that he was specifically responding to a post dealing with interlaced streams. Seems fairly obvious what he was referring to.

Damn, does it always have to be subjective opinion offered up to counter objective tests? With less than two dozen titles on the market (and some not up to scratch, by all reports) it's probably a little early to be making definitive comments from a consumer perspective.

This isnt even worth replying to. Sad.

p.s. - Blu-Ray players CAN play cds.

My bad about the CD part. Shoulda checked up on it first. Just "heard" that it wouldn't and leaned on it. Info changes so fast...

Let's say that in a "perfect world" both HD and BR will be able to output 1080p and 1080p displays are finally catching on.....

If films on both formats are encoded at 1080p.... where's the advantage?

Does simply having larger storage capcity (BR) determine a winner in this war?

Honestly? Yup. That's the only thing BD is clinging to. That and "support" which can change at any minute.

Not worth replying to because you don't have a decent rebuttal? Sad.

One Blu-Ray player supposedly may be able to play CDs, until the specs are revised closer to launch. Sony, Pioneer, and Panasonic do not claim CD support.

There's nothing subjective about it. The artifacts resulting from improper deinterlacing are easy to see. I've encountered them on some lower end progressive scan DVD players. They aren't present in the image as presented on my 1080p set. It doesn't matter whether there are a dozen or a thousand discs tested, either the deinterlacing works or it doesn't. On my set, it works.

And that is the whole point. The absurd claims that converting a 1080p24 signal to 1080i60 for transmission is somehow downgrading the image quality are patently false. Sorry you have such a problem accepting that.

You claim greater knowledge in this area than Keith Jack? Interesting.

I suppose "futureproofing" includes releasing single layer discs that have the blacks/whites clipped?

The Toshiba player isn't ideal (IMO), but there is no chance in hell I'd buy the essentially damaged on arrival (my opinion) initial Blu-Ray discs. They are about as future proof as clothes from 1910.

No, but it is clear that you are reading way more into his words than even he intended. But if that's the best you can come up with, then there is really no point in trying to convince you of anything.

Most lack the 1080P ability, and many that have it have sets that can reconstruct the 1080P from the 1080I. The discs are 1080P which is the important thing. When I replace our main theater setup, I'll surely get a 1080P set, and by then there will be 1080P HD-DVD players on the market to use with my already 1080P library.



Better do some research about branding. Look first at your friend Sony who is smart enough to know "Playstation 3" is smarter than "Blu-Gamer" from a branding perspective.

Additionally, HD-DVD, like it or not, is the official successor to DVD.

There is no question that Sony has a hurdle (debatable how big a hurdle) to get past the Bluray name versus HD-DVD. To the lay person, HD-DVD is easily associated with DVD whereas Bluray is not.

It sounds like some sort of lasik eye surgery thing to me.

BD isn't associated. Remember? they don't want to be known as a DVD format.

I believe there was a thread on AVS about how they had to fight to get another laser in there to read DVD's alone.

I wonder how it will upscale.

I thought they weren't allowed to use the DVD name because it is a different technology

It's because the DVD Forum didn't pick Blu-ray as the successor. IIRC, Sony never even submitted Blu-ray to the DVD Forum.