Do we even know what 2.0 compliant entails?

Yeah, doesn't bother me any though. I had another lot of 7 sell for $80. Most of my HD's were bought for free, or $7 with 4 for 1 trade in's at Movie Stop with lots of old crappy SD-DVD's.

No, but it could become so.

Well, we'd like to think that but I don't think Sony has every officially confirmed that.

1.1 is far more complex than 2.0, and the PS3 has all the hardware necessary to be 2.0. I have every confidence that it will be upgraded.

That one should be a given. If we get that and DTS MA it will be a happy day.

It would seem that they just have.



http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=813

Cool. More of a reason to pass on SA players.

Great news! Thanks.

Awesome!

Since I don't quite understand...can someone explain this 1.1 versus 2.0 stuff? I have no clue what either entails or even means.

Basically, 1.1 players don't have internet capabilities but 2.0 players do.

Here's a great rundown:

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/1186

OK, I was apparently misinformed. In addition to the internet connectivity and 1 GB of local storage (both of which the PS3 already has), there are additional audio and video decoders that are part of 2.0. So, once the PS3 is updated with those decoders, it will be 2.0 compliant.

You actually read that incorrectly. Let me explain and hopefully it clear things up:

1.1 adds decoders for secondary PiP video and audio, plus 256 MB of local storage capability. (PS3 is using the cell processor power in lieu of the additional audio and video decoders, which in this case makes it 1.1 compliant if updated with firmware 2.10.)

2.0 includes those secondary video and audio decoders, a larger 1 GB of local storage capability, and an internet connection. (What he means is that it includes the decoders above but in the PS3's case it is the cell processor that is doing the work of the decoders. The PS3 already has enough storage and the internet capability to be 2.0, it just needs the firmware to be updated so discs can use its capabilities.)

What does "lossless" mean?

Thanks for trying to clarify (and you're right, I did misread it), but that still doesn't answer the question I have, which is, if the only difference between 1.1 and 2.0 is the internet capability and storage space, what does the firmware need to be updated to do that it doesn't already do under 1.1? What is missing to make it 2.0 compliant?

Even though the PS3 has those hardware specs, Blu-Ray discs don't yet have access to the networking or storage. That's why most people agree it's a very simple software upgrade, but still one that must be done.

The audio. The ones listed have TrueHD soundtracks on the HD DVD, but only standard lossy Dolby Digital on the Blu-ray. I can hear the difference so I am sticking with the HD DVDs until the Blu-rays get a new release including either TrueHD or PCM.

I've heard numerous times from Sony execs that the PS3 is their flagship BD Player and whatever updates BD will get, the PS3 will get. So, until a final BD Profile comes out, that's probably your best bet.

I did some research about this near the beginning of the format. I looked at various things: box office over the past decade, IMDB's Top 250, lists by AFI and Sight & Sound, etc. I weighted things differently, and the end result was pretty much the same (all in order of relative size):

Tier 1 studios, who have the majority of titles: Warner Bros, Disney/BV
Tier 2 studios: Paramount/DW, Sony, Universal, Fox
Tier 3 studios: LGF, Weinstein, independents

As we all automatically realized once we heard, WB going Blu was the killing blow. Paramount and Universal aren't small fish and they're not dead in the water, but they control, at very best, 25% of the HDM market. And the truth is, catalogue titles don't matter to most people. Yes, The Searchers is nice but I'd be willing to bet 300 outsold it in the first day or two.

My only hope is that WB does put I Am Legend on HD DVD.

This was posted on The Digital Bits:

"I think it would be wise at this point for the Blu-ray Disc Association and its member studios and manufacturers to make a peace offering of sorts to HD-DVD supporters. Warner and the rest of the BDA should make some kind of offer to HD-DVD enthusiasts that would allow them to exchange a few of their HD-DVD discs for Blu-ray versions of the same titles, or to provide some kind of additional discount on Blu-ray players to those who have purchased HD-DVD players prior to December 31st 2007, to help them migrate to Blu-ray more easily and painlessly. It would be a nice gesture. It's not like both camps aren't giving tons of free discs away already in "buy one get one free" offers. It might cost the BDA a little up front, but the goodwill it would generate among enthusiasts would be worth the expense, I think. It would be a nice way to welcome HD-DVD consumers into the Blu-ray fold, and it's a way to help put this format war foolishness - and the acrimony that it's inspired online - behind us. It's worth considering."

"One last note this evening: That idea I floated yesterday, that the BDA should offer an olive branch to HD-DVD consumers? I mentioned it to senior BDA executives this evening, and I think you can safely say that they're going to move forward with something along these very lines in the weeks ahead. We'll post more when we can, but the idea was definitely warmly received. In fact, plans are already in the works. We'll post more on this as things develop."

I'd be down with some sort of Blu-Ray player subsidy. I have no interest in trading any of my HD DVDs for Blu-Ray discs, though.

Shit, I just bought a player last night. I bet they will do some kind of discount now and I will miss out on it for acting too soon...

I'm excited about this possibility. Makes me think that I should wait a bit longer before sending in my rebate for the 5 free-by-mail HD-DVDs. I have a feeling that, with my luck, the day after I cut out the A3's UPC and mail it in for the rebate there will be news that owners of Toshiba players can get some sort of discount off a Blu-Ray player ... but it will require sending in the original UPC.

Really, WB is the only one that can do this, and the list of titles would be short.