Do you plan on upgrading to the new HD formats when they arrive?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

kexo,

One thing that hasn't been mentioned, I don't think, is that the HD-DVD is easier to manufacture. It can use basically the same platform that already exists. This is a major advantage, even if it doesn't ultimately kill the competition. It's the reason why HD-DVD players will emerge first.

You can bet there is more to this picture than just manufacturering cost. BluRay has a very impressive slew of backing companies who are well aware of BluRays strengths and weaknesses. I know for without a doubt that sony will figure out a way to make their disc cost on par with HD-DVD. They have managed to do so against every technical advantage that HD DVD has had over them since each formats announcement.

I think that the extra storage capacity is a moot point for most viewers, who'll mostly be interested in getting their DVDs and sound at a higher resolution. The ability to store more data will not impact the primary reason that consumers will buy either format. Technical archivists will find Blu-Ray's storage capacity valuable, but who among us wants to watch extras for a week and a half just because they will fit?

The extra capacity IS a benefit in two ways. It means that it will support lossless audio and video which takes up more room than lossy audio and video signals. The less compression used, the better both will look and sound. Also added storage means there is plenty of room for any new A/V technology that comes in the future.

One more point: The original impetus for DVI and HDMI was the studios' desire to protect content, the same move that we have witnessed over the years with other formats. But it remains to be seen whether they are able to deny those with only analog connections the HD programming that they spent hard-earned money to enjoy. A nasty legal battle is falling into place. At any rate, I wouldn't expect the studios to be able to pull the plug on analog at their impulse without serious opposition--not to imply that they won't initiate other means to make life hard for those who pose a threat to them. It's about time these old fogeys got creative about protecting their interests and started looking for ways to adapt to, rather than scuttle, new technologies out of the chute. So far, they have been able to parlay these moments of terror into increased revenue for themselves without impaing the "rights" of others (I know there's a lot more to be said on this subject), and I'm sure that a little ingenuity will help them this time as well. Standing in the way of progress won't cut it, for anyone.
Ed[/QUOTE]

Ed,
I absolutely agree with you here. I think the studios would be making a huge mistake if they didn't allow backwards compatability with the component outputs of millions and millions of digital T.V's already out in the field.

One thing that I am acutely aware of is that the studios do not really care about consumers. What they care about is pursueing and maintaining their revenue streams, it doesn't matter what the cost is, or the damage it does to us. I think they will go as far as to kill both formats before they will allow any non copy protected input to be used.

[kexodusc]

Sir Terrence, the comments I've seen would suggest that HD-DVD could fill a disc with the highest quality audio and video formats available, and still have room for 2 more movies on each disc.
Is this an "exaggeration" on part of the HD-DVD camp? I mean,there comes a point when 30 GB or whatever is more than enough for any of these formats, and having extra provides no benefit until an even newer format (BluRay 2, 2160 i or p or something) becomes available.
What exactly could an HD-DVD hold in terms of minutes or hours at the highest possible resolution?

[Smokey]

Sir Terrence, the comments I've seen would suggest that HD-DVD could fill a disc with the highest quality audio and video formats available, and still have room for 2 more movies on each disc.
Is this an "exaggeration" on part of the HD-DVD camp?

I am not Sir TT (thank God ), but that is an exaggeration.

From what I have read, a typical HD movie will require 25 Gigabyte of storage. Throw in high quality audio and there might not be too much room left for extras on 30 GB HD-DVDs (not to mention another movie)

[kexodusc]

I am not Sir TT (thank God ), but that is an exaggeration.

From what I have read, a typical HD movie will require 25 Gigabyte of storage. Throw in high quality audio and there might not be too much room left for extras on 30 GB HD-DVDs (not to mention another movie)

Thanks Smokey...Then we are left waiting to see if a superior format will fall to a more economic, corporate friendly format. Man, history really does repeat itself (VHS vs. Beta).

Does anyone have any idea how many people actually have HDTV's? I seem to recall that the figure was somewhere around 10-15%, and only starting to grow...this could affect how aggressively either of these formats pushes as well. Not to mention the max capability of the TV's owned...

[Smokey]

Man, history really does repeat itself (VHS vs. Beta).

What is bothersome here is why manufactures decide to take different routes. Couldn't they all agree with one format and go from there. There are already enough confusion with the current technology

Even if BlueRay is capable of uncompressed 1080p images there's only a handful of sets now that could display it.

As I am sure you are well aware, 1080p format doesn't come from the disc, but rather the player (or the TV with internal decoders). So bandwidth might not be an issue here.

But I agree that it probably be a few years before it will be in mass market. Price dropping of HD displays will definitely be in favor of sooner than later. Most tube HDTVs are already selling under $1000

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

What is bothersome here is why manufactures decide to take different routes. Couldn't they all agree with one format and go from there. There are already enough confusion with the current technology

There is huge fee's you get from liscensing the technology to other manufacturers. It is also a revenue stream that last for years(Sony and Philips are still getting paid for the CD as are the makers of the DVD format). Whoever wins, get's that income for years to come. When the enconomy turns sour, this could save your company from ruin, or at least keep you afloat thrrough it.

As I am sure you are well aware, 1080p format doesn't come from the disc, but rather the player (or the TV with internal decoders). So bandwidth might not be an issue here.

But I agree that it probably be a few years before it will be in mass market. Price dropping of HD displays will definitely be in favor of sooner than later. Most tube HDTVs are already selling under $1000

I think BluRay larger pipeline(40mbps) gives it an advantage because it allow more gentle compression to the video, and up to 24/192khz audio in 7.1. This can be nothing but a plus for both audio and video.

[Tarheel_]

First, i disagree with others who say DVD is in it's prime...actually I feel it's past its prime. Quality wise, Superbit is probabaly as far as it'll go. Two disc SE's don't excite me.

Second, i bought one of the first DVD players in 97. So having owned DVDs for 8+ years now...well, i'm excited about new technology and a whole new format.

Three, to prepare for the new format, i recently traded all my DVDs (except my overall faves) to Blockbuster for $8 each. Total sold....around 80 DVDs. Used credit to rent or buy special ed's of my favorites.(star wars,etc.). Stuff i need to get me through.

Four, can't wait to see my favorites in a new format which should surpass in both audio/video/extras over DVD.

Fifth, as a HT lover, it's fun to explore new formats...you know reading, research, comparision shopping...remember when you discovered DVDs? Ah, the joy!

[Geoffcin]

I am not Sir TT (thank God ), but that is an exaggeration.

From what I have read, a typical HD movie will require 25 Gigabyte of storage. Throw in high quality audio and there might not be too much room left for extras on 30 GB HD-DVDs (not to mention another movie)

For 1080p performance it will require a lot of bandwidth, but most HD sets sold today, including projectors, are only capable of 720p resolution. At 720p HD-DVD has plenty of space for uncompressed image and sound. Even if BlueRay is capable of uncompressed 1080p images there's only a handful of sets now that could display it.

DVD tech when it was released, was as easy as plugging it into your existing TV. HD-DVD & BlueRay will require a multi-thousand dollar investment by the consumer to realize it's potential. Just from this standpoint alone these higher-rez formats are up against really hard acceptance resistance.

[kexodusc]

DVD tech when it was released, was as easy as plugging it into your existing TV. HD-DVD & BlueRay will require a multi-thousand dollar investment by the consumer to realize it's potential. Just from this standpoint alone these higher-rez formats are up against really hard acceptance resistance.

I think Geoffcin really nailed it here, and this is why I wouldn't be surprised to see HD-DVD win out, despite it all it gives up to BluRay.

[Geoffcin]

I think Geoffcin really nailed it here, and this is why I wouldn't be surprised to see HD-DVD win out, despite it all it gives up to BluRay.

I really feel that there's going to be no winners in this race at all. When DVD came out it was a revolution. One that was, and is, very affordable. HD-DVD & BlueRay, for all the hype and mirrors, bring absolutely NOTHING to the table besides their higher resolution. It might have been sellable if the resolution of DVD were bad, but DVD's 480p is pretty darn good, and Dolby EX & DTE-ES are good audio formats too.

My money is no these formats to spend a decade trying to establish themselves with no clear winner, or even anything that could be remotely called acceptance. We have a precedent to look at called SACD/DVD-Audio.

Joe consumer is the guy that's going to make the call on these higher-rez formats, as we A/V junkies are just a tiny percentage of the equation when it come to consumer electronics.

[kexodusc]

I really feel that there's going to be no winners in this race at all. When DVD came out it was a revolution. One that was, and is, very affordable. HD-DVD & BlueRay, for all the hype and mirrors, bring absolutely NOTHING to the table besides their higher resolution. It might have been sellable if the resolution of DVD were bad, but DVD's 480p is pretty darn good, and Dolby EX & DTE-ES are good audio formats too.

My money is no these formats to spend a decade trying to establish themselves with no clear winner, or even anything that could be remotely called acceptance. We have a precedent to look at called SACD/DVD-Audio.

Joe consumer is the guy that's going to make the call on these higher-rez formats, as we A/V junkies are just a tiny percentage of the equation when it come to consumer electronics.

The devil is in the details...I'm not so sure how much better HD-DVD or BluRay will be than 480i DVD (until my new progressive scan DVD unit arrives, I don't even know what 480p looks like). I know many that claim HDTV broadcasts make DVD unbearable though...exaggeration? Maybe, we'll see.
I don't doubt that at some point there will be a superior successor to the DVD. These things just take time. I'm not ready to write off SACD/DVD-Audio either, these are both still in their infancy as far as I'm concerned. Until the labels really try to push these to market with effort, it's too early to call these a failure. I think these formats haven't been slowed because of the format itself, but rather the lack of affordable players and awareness. These things have only been cheap enough for the non-audiophile/fanatic for maybe a year now.

However, these new audio and video formats might actually end up helping each other. Eventually people will buy new players, I'm sure they will be quasi-universal (playing most of the above formats, if not all). Then I wouldn't be surprised to see all new releases being hybrid discs, CD/DVD-A or CD/SACD for audio, and DVD/BluRay or DVD/HD-DVD for video. Most industries force feed new innovations to the masses. I see no reason why the a/v industry would be any different.

I just think all of this is at least 2 or 3 years away.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I really feel that there's going to be no winners in this race at all. When DVD came out it was a revolution. One that was, and is, very affordable. HD-DVD & BlueRay, for all the hype and mirrors, bring absolutely NOTHING to the table besides their higher resolution.

I agree, there are going to be no winners when this one is over. I however disagree with you about the new formats not bringing anything to the table. They bring the promise of uncompressed video and audio, which is a HUGE plus. With uncompressed video that means no misquito blocking, edge enhancement, pixelation or other compression artifacts. With audio it means a bit for bit transfer of the signal without the damaging effects of lossy codecs. Since I have heard the difference between the printmaster soundtrack and the encoded after effects of both Dolby digital and Dts, I can tell you that the differences are pretty dramatic with DD and half bit rate Dts. The idea of having 7.1 at 24/192khz resolution is pretty amazing as is 1080P which is TRUE HD. I would gladly trade this incarnation of DVD with its limited pipeline of 9.8mbps transfer rate for 36-40mbps anyday.

It might have been sellable if the resolution of DVD were bad, but DVD's 480p is pretty darn good, and Dolby EX & DTE-ES are good audio formats too.

Maybe I am alone here in saying that 480p is just a start. So much compression has to be applied to the video at this resolution that it looks nothing like the original 35mm print it comes from. Video currently does not resolve enough color to compete with 35mm. 1080p brings us that much closer. While 480p may be good, 1080p is much better in every way. As far as Dolby EX and Dts ES, well if you compared DD at 448kbps and Dts in its current 754kbps to the original printmaster soundtrack, you could easily ascertain that we could do better than what we are doing now. Dts at full bit rate is a pretty big improvement over Dts at half bit rate. Lossless Dts is a improvement over both.

My money is no these formats to spend a decade trying to establish themselves with no clear winner, or even anything that could be remotely called acceptance. We have a precedent to look at called SACD/DVD-Audio.

I don't think we can look at this (IMO) quite the same way as SACD and DVD-A. Both of these new format really are victims of record companies cutting back because of reduced profits in the last few years. They are not being pushed or advertised at all. Once the financial picture of the industry improves, you will probably see new life breathed into both of these formats(if it is not too late).

Joe consumer is the guy that's going to make the call on these higher-rez formats, as we A/V junkies are just a tiny percentage of the equation when it come to consumer electronics.

Keep in mind Geoff, it was us early adopters that got DVD on the map in a hurry. I think if we sit on the sidelines, then neither will have a chance.

[edtyct]

Sir T said: "The extra capacity IS a benefit in two ways. It means that it will support lossless audio and video which takes up more room than lossy audio and video signals. The less compression used, the better both will look and sound. Also added storage means there is plenty of room for any new A/V technology that comes in the future."

No argument there. My point was just that the average consumer might not care all that much about the storage difference between the two formats, only that they will allow significant improvements to audio and video. Both BluRay and HD-DVD will support Dolby Digital+ and DTS-HD, as well as the lossy versions that we have now.

Ed