|
Originally Posted by digitalfreaknyc
There's also no different between the formats (+\-r).
There's a significant difference between BD and HD DVD. The most significant differences are the construction of the discs and the focal length of the laser lense. Only the 2nd factor affects the drives, and Ricoh has created a solution to that by using 2 lenses. HD-DVD and Blu-Ray are much closer to each other than DVD is to either format, or CD is to DVD. Yet we have machines that can play 3 of these significantly different formats in one drive. Adding support for a 3rd isn't technically impossible. |
Originally Posted by Jay G.
Lionsgate BDs say that, not Sony's. Sony BD discs say "Experience High Definition," which is technically true, since they're 1080p.
|
Originally Posted by Jay G.
Lionsgate BDs say that, not Sony's. Sony BD discs say "Experience High Definition," which is technically true, since they're 1080p.
|
Originally Posted by Jay G.
Adding support for a 3rd isn't technically impossible.
The problem is the licensors. Blu-Ray will not allow a dual-format drive. AFAIK it is part of their agreement. If you're in the BRDA, you can't make a dual-format drive (or you have some incredible fine). Something similar may exist with HD-DVD but I have not heard of it. Besides, it only takes one of the sides to be a jerk. One way to go about it is to sell a chassis with "pluggable" HD-DVD and Blu-Ray drives. Spend $600 on the chassis and get one of the formats free. Add another $200 for the other format. Technically, not sold the same way. |
Originally Posted by digitalfreaknyc
and you know he's going to come back with ...
"oh yeah....?? Well what about "the look and sound of perfect?" And the answer to that is... "well, one of these statements is accurate and one of them isn't." ;) |
Originally Posted by digitalfreaknyc
Sony IS BD. You can't separate the two.
If one studio decides to declare that their film is the "best movie ever made" on their packaging, is Sony responsible for that too? Also, "Beyond HD" could be referring to interactive features and such "beyond" just a HD video experience. You're really grasping at straws trying to pin on Sony something another studio said that you don't really know the context of. |
Originally Posted by jiggawhat
HD-DVD is no where near perfect.
However, looking at the HD-DVD website http://www.thelookandsoundofperfect.com/ : "HD-DVD is the final step in perfecting your Hi Def entertainment experience." Sounds pretty arrogant to me. |
Originally Posted by Jay G.
Really? So Sony is responsible for what other studios put on their packaging of a BD, even though Sony has no control over what they put there, aside from the BD trademark?
If one studio decides to declare that their film is the "best movie ever made" on their packaging, is Sony responsible for that too? Also, "Beyond HD" could be referring to interactive features and such "beyond" just a HD video experience. You're really grasping at straws trying to pin on Sony something another studio said that you don't really know the context of. Between you and jigga, this thread is like banging your head against a wall. Have either of you bought or at least SEEN both formats? |
Originally Posted by Jay G.
Really? So Sony is responsible for what other studios put on their packaging of a BD, even though Sony has no control over what they put there, aside from the BD trademark?
If one studio decides to declare that their film is the "best movie ever made" on their packaging, is Sony responsible for that too? Also, "Beyond HD" could be referring to interactive features and such "beyond" just a HD video experience. You're really grasping at straws trying to pin on Sony something another studio said that you don't really know the context of. When you say "Beyond High Definition!" it means "Better than High Definition!" (or at least it sounds like that to me). |
Originally Posted by Jay G.
Really? So Sony is responsible for what other studios put on their packaging of a BD, even though Sony has no control over what they put there, aside from the BD trademark?
If one studio decides to declare that their film is the "best movie ever made" on their packaging, is Sony responsible for that too? Also, "Beyond HD" could be referring to interactive features and such "beyond" just a HD video experience. You're really grasping at straws trying to pin on Sony something another studio said that you don't really know the context of. Sony definitely has a chip on their shoulder or at least the guys in the front office. The thing is, if they were a little less subtle about things and just show us the goods then we could like them a bit more, but they talk the talk but they haven't walked the walk. To be fair, both have delayed their players a few times and only HD-DVD has been able to offer a product that could be deemed High Def at this point. And all this talk about High Definition, it's just a brand name. Everyone has their own definition of what they might think is high definition. Some people might think this goes beyond high definition so don't get all wrapped up in the name. When 4K res players come out some day, then I guess we can truly say that that is Definition undefined. |
Originally Posted by The Bus
The problem is the licensors. Blu-Ray will not allow a dual-format drive. AFAIK it is part of their agreement. If you're in the BRDA, you can't make a dual-format drive (or you have some incredible fine). Something similar may exist with HD-DVD but I have not heard of it. Besides, it only takes one of the sides to be a jerk.
Here's an interesting article that suggests a number of manufacturers have access to both techs through various partnerships: http://www.pcworld.com/article/126193-1/article.html |
Originally Posted by The Bus
Then they would've said "More than just High Definition!"
When you say "Beyond High Definition!" it means "Better than High Definition!" (or at least it sounds like that to me). Sony makes me laugh. |
Originally Posted by digitalfreaknyc
Sony owns the BD trademark. It IS BD.
|
Originally Posted by Coral
I also remember one of the Sony PS3 guys saying that 1080p is TRUE High Definition. Apparently almost all the HDTVs that have been sold (including Sony's) aren't HD... they're merely fake HD.
http://informitv.com/opinion/2006/05/skyhdreview/ "Many of the cheaper HD Ready displays are not actually capable of showing 1080 lines, so high-definition pictures will be downsampled to fit the display. As a result, many may not experience true high-definition television" http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/high-definition/ Offering up to 1080i, just shy of "true" high definition (knowing full well that many people's definition of "true" HD varies) http://www.dummies.com/WileyCDA/Dumm...e/id-4191.html "formats that will allow true high-definition (HD) programming to be available on optical discs" Talking about HD is tricky since there's a number of different video standards of different resolutions and scanning methods that are all considered "HD". How do you differentiate between a TV that displays only 720p and one that's 1080p when both are technically "HD"? Remember when FOX was broadcasting "HD" in 480p? "True" HD seems to have become industry shorthand for 1080p. It may not be the most accurate of labels, but when has that stopped anything? |
Originally Posted by jiggawhat
Sony definitely has a chip on their shoulder or at least the guys in the front office. The thing is, if they were a little less subtle about things and just show us the goods then we could like them a bit more, but they talk the talk but they haven't walked the walk.
And all this talk about High Definition, it's just a brand name. Everyone has their own definition of what they might think is high definition. Some people might think this goes beyond high definition so don't get all wrapped up in the name. When 4K res players come out some day, then I guess we can truly say that that is Definition undefined. |
Originally Posted by Jay G.
Going by past video standards, it'll proably be called Very High Definition or Ultra High Definition.
Btw...noted that neither one of you answered my question. |
Originally Posted by digitalfreaknyc
Btw...noted that neither one of you answered my question.
|
Originally Posted by awmurray
Any why would the HD DVD side want to allow a dual format player at this point??? They were content to let the market decide back in 2005. Now that HD DVD is clearly stomping Blu-ray in the market why the hell would they back down now??? In 2005, HD DVD was "dead in the water" according to most. Now they're well ahead of Blu-ray. You don't shift to a compromise position when you're clearly winning. The HD DVD side knew they had to win in the market and therefore they have delivered. Blu-ray (i.e. Sony) appears to have just sat back on their big lead and crowned themselves the winner--so they didn't have to deliver quality. If Sony hadn't done this, we'd have DL BD50 discs, VC-1 encoded with Dolby TrueHD 5.1 from day one. And I would be here extolling the virtues of Blu-ray. And HD DVD would be dead in the water. |
Originally Posted by jiggawhat
HD-DVD is no where near perfect.
After watching Aeon Flux.... I might have to disagree. :D |
Originally Posted by Jay G.
Please stop trying to make this an HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray discussion, or continue to make "Sony is arrogant" claims. This thread is about dual-format players. If you have any new comments about dual-format, or want to actually reply to my response to you regarding the differences between the formats that a dual-format player would have to handle, feel free.
So you've just admitted you've never owned either format and i'm betting never seen either. Your already low credibility rating just went out the window. |
Originally Posted by awmurray
Sony uses [Beyond High Definition] blazed across the front of the Blu-ray
Thanks for providing that link, since it clearly shows the context they're using the phrase in, and it's not "more resolution than High Def." From the brochure: "Blu-Ray delivers everything you've been wanting -- and more. The best High Definition picture you've ever seen. Plus the best uncompressed sound you've ever heard, rich interactive features, compelling online content, and powerful recording capabilities. In fact, with Blu-Ray Disc, High Definition is just the beginning." Note that they clearly state the video as High Definition, not more than HD. The "beyond" is clearly referring to the audio capabilities and other features of Blu-Ray. |
Do you even have to look up the excuses? Because they seem to come so easily for you.
|
Originally Posted by Jay G.
switched to dual-format machines, and both formats still exist.
Really, what's that significant difference? Is it in the identical video and audio codecs the two formats share? The identical encryption scheme? The identical laser the two formats use? The most significant differences are the construction of the discs and the focal length of the laser lense. Only the 2nd factor affects the drives, and Ricoh has created a solution to that by using 2 lenses. HD-DVD and Blu-Ray are much closer to each other than DVD is to either format, or CD is to DVD. Yet we have machines that can play 3 of these significantly different formats in one drive. Adding support for a 3rd isn't technically impossible. You are now swimming with the big fish here on this topic. If you want to be taken seriously, especially with a the contrarian view you are taking, you need to school yourself. |
I'll be more than happy to take a picture of the cardboard display at the retail location if proof is needed.
"True HD" in video terms, means to me maximum HD, which is 1920x1080p. Anything under that (most LCD displays today, the Xbox 360*), are not that. It is also my understanding that 1080p source material looks no different on a 1080i or a 1080p TV. As of today, the 1080i vs. 1080p argument is moot, if this guy is correct:
Originally Posted by Evan Powell
The truth is this: The Toshiba HD-DVD player outputs 1080i, and the Samsung Blu-ray player outputs both 1080i and 1080p. What they fail to mention is that it makes absolutely no difference which transmission format you use—feeding 1080i or 1080p into your projector or HDTV will give you the exact same picture. Why? Both disc formats encode film material in progressive scan 1080p at 24 frames per second. It does not matter whether you output this data in 1080i or 1080p since all 1080 lines of information on the disc are fed into your video display either way. The only difference is the order in which they are transmitted. If they are fed in progressive order (1080p), the video display will process them in that order. If they are fed in interlaced format (1080i), the video display simply reassembles them into their original progressive scan order. Either way all 1080 lines per frame that are on the disc make it into the projector or TV. The fact is, if you happen to have the Samsung Blu-ray player and a video display that takes both 1080i and 1080p, you can switch the player back and forth between 1080i and 1080p output and see absolutely no difference in the picture. So this notion that the Blu-ray player is worth more money due to 1080p output is nonsense.
(As a side note, 1080p could offer a subtle improvement in motion smoothness if (a) the player was able to output at 24 frames per second, and (b) you happened to have a video display that could take 1080p/24, which is a rarity these days. In the future it is probable that both HD-DVD and Blu-ray players will output 1080p/24. But neither one does it today, so it is not relevant to the present competition between the formats.) Source: http://www.projectorcentral.com/blu-ray_2.htm * Keep in mind although the 360 can't do 1080p, it is unlikely whether we will see that from the PS3 and/or if it means we don't have to sacrifice framerate/details for that jump. We won't know for sure until launch through 2007. |
Is it just me, or has every post since #68 been completely off topic and should only be allowed in the FreeForAll thread?
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:39 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.