Receiver with HDMI

[nightflier]

It's not that they cant transmit HD signal, it's that they will not be permitted to from any device that uses removable digital media. Your HD-DVR is not a removable media. I suppose you could record something, then unhook the box and give it to a buddy, but it's not the same as buring a HD-DVD and giving several copies to all of your friends.

And that is exactly my point: recorders may be restricted to 480p, but players such as the HD-DVD/BlueRay players will most likely allow people to view up to 1080i using their component outs.

I don't know if any of the current crop of upscaling DVD players that are available now will do so over their component outs, but they should. That said, I can't imagine that HD-DVD/BlueRay players will not upconvert regular DVDs, and I don't think it will matter what kind of hookup is in use (besides composite and s-video, of course). Come to think of it, I wouldn't be surprised if these player came w/o composite jacks altogether, but that's all they'll take out for the foreseeable future.

Hey Ed, can you even see the difference between 1080i & 1080p? And even if it is just a smidgen better, how much would you pay for that?

[edtyct]

As of now, component looks to be verboten for true hi def on the hi rez DVD players. If component does get the nod at all, it will most likely be at the discretion of the content providers, on a disk by disk basis. It may well be also that the new formats will require an internet connection to update and validate each player's copy-protection codes.

The new DVD players may well have component-upconverting capability. But remember that upconverted regular DVD is not the equivalent by a long shot of actual 1080i or 720p. One of the bones that the studios and mfgs may throw to people with component-only TVs may be upconversion of standard DVD, but it will hardly be any skin off their noses, since 480p will be devalued the moment that hi def DVD appears. So why would they not let component upconvert the outdated format? No current players that I know of now, except Chinese and a few left over Bravos, upconvert through their component outs. The last mainstream player to do it was an LG/Zenith, but the latest firmware, which was an improvement in some respects, rescinded that privilege from component. That's the way the studios want it.

You can't always see the difference between 1080i and 1080i scaled to 1080p, especially on a small display. But it does look smoother, on a level playing field, when the viewing distance is correct. But so many other factors determine how good a display is that just having a 1080p pixel count wouldn't be enough to guarantee superior PQ. Unless I was in the market for a TV now, I wouldn't bother with one of the current group of TVs that can scale to 1080p but not accept it. If I had a front-projection system, I might opt for 1080p as scaled, since it would be more visible on a large screen. But we haven't yet seen true 1080p material, which will not be the same as looking at 1080i/720p material scaled to 1080p. As far as I'm concerned, 1080p capability on a direct-view or RP TV, whether scaled or actually input, isn't worth our money until actual 1080p content is available.

[evil__betty]

As of now, component looks to be verboten for true hi def on the hi rez DVD players. If component does get the nod at all, it will most likely be at the discretion of the content providers, on a disk by disk basis. It may well be also that the new formats will require an internet connection to update and validate each player's copy-protection codes.

The new DVD players may well have component-upconverting capability. But remember that upconverted regular DVD is not the equivalent by a long shot of actual 1080i or 720p. One of the bones that the studios and mfgs may throw to people with component-only TVs may be upconversion of standard DVD, but it will hardly be any skin off their noses, since 480p will be devalued the moment that hi def DVD appears. So why would they not let component upconvert the outdated format? No current players that I know of now, except Chinese and a few left over Bravos, upconvert through their component outs. The last mainstream player to do it was an LG/Zenith, but the latest firmware, which was an improvement in some respects, rescinded that privilege from component. That's the way the studios want it.

You can't always see the difference between 1080i and 1080i scaled to 1080p, especially on a small display. But it does look smoother, on a level playing field, when the viewing distance is correct. But so many other factors determine how good a display is that just having a 1080p pixel count wouldn't be enough to guarantee superior PQ. Unless I was in the market for a TV now, I wouldn't bother with one of the current group of TVs that can scale to 1080p but not accept it. If I had a front-projection system, I might opt for 1080p as scaled, since it would be more visible on a large screen. But we haven't yet seen true 1080p material, which will not be the same as looking at 1080i/720p material scaled to 1080p. As far as I'm concerned, 1080p capability on a direct-view or RP TV, whether scaled or actually input, isn't worth our money until actual 1080p content is available.

There are actually a lot of televisions out there where the manufacturer has instructions to leave a DVD player on the defualt 480i picture setting because the TV has a much better de-interlacer in its own circitry. Take Sony's SXRD television - arguably the best HDTV out there right now. This is one of only a few micro-displays on the market right now that can accept a 1080i source and require no scaling. Now, this TV will not be able to accept a true 1080p signal, but native 1080i signals will be scaled to 1080p - and look freakin' fantastic! I agree that it is stupid not to make it a 1080p compatible, but when is 1080p comming to a consumer level??? The networks still don't have things in 720p/1080i. The cost of changing over their cameras to HD cameras is super high and I don't think that they will even consider changing over to 1080p cameras any time soon.

How long before 1080p? 2 years? 3 years? And when this content becomes availible, how many channels will be in 1080p? Remember about 2 years ago when there was maybe 3 channels in HD? Now there are a lot more, but about 80% of your viewing is still in SD. I would rather have a bigscreen in my home for 3-4 years and let the current 1080p thing work out all the kinks and let the prices fall to the level of the 720p/1080i sets now and then make my purchase. That way I can enjoy my 50" for 3-4 years while others are waiting and waiting and waiting to buy. If you have that mindset, you will never buy because the 'next big thing' will be comming out the following year, and you will wait for that price to drop and then the cycle will continue.

My two cents: make a purchase of a TV that you like now, enjoy it (a lot!), and then when the time is right for you, make your purchase of the next tv (who knows what technology will be out by the time that you really want to upgrade - no use worrying about it now).

Cheers!

-man this thread has made a serious detour from where it started

[GMichael]

-man this thread has made a serious detour from where it started

Still all good stuff though. Thanks to everyone for their input.

[edtyct]

There are actually a lot of televisions out there where the manufacturer has instructions to leave a DVD player on the defualt 480i picture setting because the TV has a much better de-interlacer in its own circitry. Take Sony's SXRD television - arguably the best HDTV out there right now.

Sony's SXRD is one of the few displays that well might handle scaling and deinterlacing as well as a very good DVD player (and a modest processor), though I certainly wouldn't assume that it's better than anything that you might connect to it (Sony's processing, unlike almost every other company's except Pioneer, is proprietary). In the bulk of cases (comprising the price points of mere mortals), however, the viewer is likely to notice little difference at all, and only some difference, imagined or otherwise, after the kind of scrutiny that has nothing to do with real-world conditions. Really good processing exists, but you normally can't imagine what it's like until you've actually seen it, under conditons that show it to its full advantage. It's like that audio experience that many of us have had at various points along the way that nothing could possibly sound better than what we have now until it does.

[nightflier]

One of the bones that the studios and mfgs may throw to people with component-only TVs may be upconversion of standard DVD, but it will hardly be any skin off their noses, since 480p will be devalued the moment that hi def DVD appears.

So what you are really saying is that the movie industry arbitrarily wants everyone to re-purchase their whole movie collections in a new format? Not that this should surprise us, but it still pi**es me off royally and I can't imagine I'm the only one who's fed up.

Why not just subscribe to a permanent rental service rather than owning the movie (i.e. downloadable content)? You'll never own the movies, but they'll always be in the highest available quality, right? While Sony and Microsoft are probably salivating at the thought of slapping a EULA on each one of these perpetually re-rented movies, they are also killing the HD-DVD/BlueRay format with this.

The real question is will HD-DVD/BlueRay players reach critical market mass before downloaded content will? The format that comes in second will loose and as long as these corporations invest in both (like Sony/SACD did when they bought Universal), the only loosers will be the consumers who banked on one over the other.

Any one have a Betamax player out there?

[GMichael]

Any one have a Betamax player out there?

Yup, got an 8-track player and a laser disc player too. Think I'll wait this time.

[evil__betty]

So what you are really saying is that the movie industry arbitrarily wants everyone to re-purchase their whole movie collections in a new format? Not that this should surprise us, but it still pi**es me off royally and I can't imagine I'm the only one who's fed up.

I think that these high-def movies will do to DVD what DVD did to VHS. How many people went out and re-purchased all of their VHS tapes when DVD took over? Probably not many. I think that most people will go out and buy all their favorite movies on these new discs and settle for watching the good 'ol movies on the 'old' 480p. To scream and yell at Hollywood for producing the High-Def movies would be silly, because if they didn't, those same people would scream and yell at them for not producing them. The new discs (whoever wins the battle) will simply make watching DVD's that much better. Will it cost you more? Sure. But isn't the picture quality that much better? And if you don't want to go that route, you can be like the dieing breed of people who still wonder why they can't find any new releases in VHS. Be careful you don't end up like that - because we all know that everyone of us makes fun of those people behind their backs.

[nightflier]

I think that these high-def movies will do to DVD what DVD did to VHS. How many people went out and re-purchased all of their VHS tapes when DVD took over? Probably not many.

I completely disagree. Older movies that are good and have been re-released on DVD continue to sell like hot-cakes and will keep doing so. This is why copyrights were extended to, what is it now... 99 years? (longer than any other country in the world, by the way). And don't try and tell me you didn't buy the new DVD versions of Gladiator, The Usual Suspects, Seven, and Pulp Fiction. I sure did, and the VHS's went the way of the garage sale, eBay, and Goodwill.

I think that most people will go out and buy all their favorite movies on these new discs and settle for watching the good 'ol movies on the 'old' 480p.

That's just the problem. I can't watch my original Star Wars VHS tapes on my DVD player. This is the same thing that the industry is trying to ram down our throats again: buy new equipment and new movies. If I remember reading this correctly, none of the upcoming crop of HD-DVD/BlueRay players will even play regular DVDs because the industry knows that people also still have their regular DVD players. It's not rocket science to put a blue laser in the same box as a red one, but if we let profit-drive dictate this, there will only be blue lasers in those shiny new boxes, at least for a while.

Sure. But isn't the picture quality that much better?

Yes I know, 480p DTS-EX is so much better that 480i PL-II on my VHS, but I shouldn't be forced to make the change. Anyhow, my HK receiver at the time DVD's came out didn't even have anything higher than prologic, so I had to replace that (and I'm sure you did too). It's painfully clear that we are being forced onto the perpetual upgrade-treadmill the same way that the software industry forced computer users a few years back. I'm not happy about that, because as a department manager at work, my software costs have only gone up and reliability has gone way down.

To scream and yell at Hollywood for producing the High-Def movies would be silly, because if they didn't, those same people would scream and yell at them for not producing them.

In those prophetic words of Falvor Flav' "I've got a right to be hostile!" Yes I'm going to scream at Hollywood because their changes are arbitrary. Why don't they make things backward compatible? Why will my cable box do 1080i over component cables, but my DVD player (and future players) wont? There is absolutely no reason for this other than greed.

And if you don't want to go that route, you can be like the dieing breed of people who still wonder why they can't find any new releases in VHS. Be careful you don't end up like that - because we all know that everyone of us makes fun of those people behind their backs.

Without getting too philosophical here, we are all a little bit "like those people." Whatever you buy brand-spanking-new-the-day-it-comes-out is already outdated. By allowing the industry to make arbitrary rules to increase profit, you're essentially telling them you're fine with it. And when they see that this is how we are willing to consume, there won't be any reason for them not to decrease the usefull life of everything we buy from them because it increases their profit margins. In the end, we have to weigh our quality of life against the drive for profit. And this profit does not go into the consumer's pockets; again, I point to the software industry as an example of things to come.

[edtyct]

God knows, nightflier old pal, I don't want to make you madder, but your 1080i feed via component from your cable box isn't terribly secure these days either. I don't have much of a problem with new technology supevening the old, but I do have a problem with the restriction of fair use for bad reasons, within short technology life spans. People who invested in the first HD wave shouldn't have to face the obsolescence of their equipment quite so quickly. Products do outlive their usefulness and their profitability, but formats this shortlived are ridiculous. Piracy, my arse.

Night, what do you think motivates companies to research and market new products? These companies are money-making ventures based on the needs, desires, and resources of people like us. Even without the excess greed that runs rampant in the upper echelons of this corporate society, if people don't have to make a living, they don't have to make electronics, films, or music for you to enjoy. Who refuses a pay increase or asks for a pay cut? Without manufacturers offering these products, you wouldn't have that old DVD player or VHS deck that you dread losing. The companies who make these things aren't making rules, but they are making money from, and gear for, a relatively affluent society. No one says that you have to buy any of it if it doesn't appeal to you. But if you have bought into it in the past and now think yourself entitled to draw a line in the sand that the economy and technology suddenly have no right to cross, you're bound to be disappointed, even in the most consumer-oriented utopia. You hardly have to be a rabid capitalist or corporate apologist to see this point. The mere fact that people complain about having to spend more money, buy more things, learn different techniques does not mean that they are on the brink of revolution. Ever hear the sound of one hand clapping?

You can't stop time. But if you think that you have a way to separate time from the flaws, foibles, drives, and glories of human nature, then you're certainly more informed than I am. For every person with your point of view, there's at least one other who's chomping at the bit for hi def DVD, or some other trinket, to hit, though he'd rather not have to pay for it either. He doesn't care one iota about the demise of VHS, or even good old DVD. Nor do I think that this fella is necessarily suffering a moral shortfall--no more than I think that the explanation for every product that hits the market inconveniently for someone is reducible to one factor, greed.

One good rant deserves another.

[GMichael]

Money makes the world go 'round. Hopefully we'll get something out of it while it's spinning. Better quality pictures. OK, we pay the price. They want our money. We want the best. They get it. We get it. Get it?

[evil__betty]

Got it.

[nightflier]

Night, what do you think motivates companies to research and market new products?

I fully understand the point. And for anyone who is chomping at the bit for new technology, there are companies doing useful research. There are plenty of people who will buy it, and I am not stopping them because of this. But the arbitrary imposition of a 480p limit on component video does nothing for useful research, quality of life, or conveniece for anyone.

It is as arbitrary as arbitrary kidnapping and rendition, only less severe. There just seems to be too little resistence to arbitrary change of any kind in our political structure. If everyone is so easily bowled over with arbitrary restrictions simply to satisfy greed, where does one draw the line? Philosophically speaking, if we agree to a small injustice, are we not paving the way for a larger one?

More importantly, if the only place where this question is asked is on these boards, then I am worried for the future that my children will grow into. There shouldn't be a line in the sand, but rather a point where we can meet to discuss the options we are willing to tollerate. But the arbitrary changes that are now being made make all discussion obsolete.

[Woochifer]

I think that these high-def movies will do to DVD what DVD did to VHS. How many people went out and re-purchased all of their VHS tapes when DVD took over? Probably not many. I think that most people will go out and buy all their favorite movies on these new discs and settle for watching the good 'ol movies on the 'old' 480p. To scream and yell at Hollywood for producing the High-Def movies would be silly, because if they didn't, those same people would scream and yell at them for not producing them. The new discs (whoever wins the battle) will simply make watching DVD's that much better. Will it cost you more? Sure. But isn't the picture quality that much better? And if you don't want to go that route, you can be like the dieing breed of people who still wonder why they can't find any new releases in VHS. Be careful you don't end up like that - because we all know that everyone of us makes fun of those people behind their backs.

I think the transition from DVD to the next gen DVD formats won't be the same tidal shift that occurred with DVD. For one thing, the new high def players will be backwards compatible with DVDs, and most consumers seem satisfied with the picture quality of DVD. With the transition from VHS, consumers benefited in a multitude of ways when the DVD was introduced:

-much smaller, less bulky form factor
-no tapes to wear out
-direct/chapter access
-multichannel audio
-doubled the line resolution
-playable on PCs and in-dash car systems
-multimedia bonus features
-video improvements can be realized on nearly all existing TVs

HD-DVD/Blu-ray by comparison offer up a much narrower set of benefits to consumers over the DVD:

-720p/1080i picture resolution
-DTS-HD/Dolby Digital Plus audio with lossless mode

Consider that the only people who can realize any benefit from HD-DVD/Blu-ray are people who own HDTVs (currently less than 20% of U.S. households) and DTS-HD/DD+ processors (currently 0% of U.S. households). This seriously limits the market potential of the new formats from the outset. If the DVD did not already exist, then the shortage of HDTVs in the market would not matter much because average consumers would still enjoy a huge step up from VHS. But, because the DVD format is already out there, and only the minority of households that own HDTVs can see the improvement from HD-DVD/Blu-ray over DVD, the potential number of interested consumers is relatively small.

[edtyct]

Wooch, these points are indisputable, but one of the them might be subject to a small rider. People's satisfaction with a format, audio or video, can change when they've been exposed to an improvement of it. I doubt, however, that this phenomenon will have much immediate impact on the launch of a new HD format. But it does tend to snowball after a certain threshold of familiarity has been reached, and the innovation has passed into the general public. That's when nightflier's legitimate gripe about downconverted analog output will take on new meaning if the problem isn't handled satisfactorily at the outset. Look at the mess that lingering analog has had in the transition to HDTV. HDTV-capable analog households that are barred from hi def DVD can throw a monkey wrench into the works, even if they represent only a fraction of the HD population.

[Woochifer]

Wooch, these points are indisputable, but one of the them might be subject to a small rider. People's satisfaction with a format, audio or video, can change when they've been exposed to an improvement of it. I doubt, however, that this phenomenon will have much immediate impact on the launch of a new HD format. But it does tend to snowball after a certain threshold of familiarity has been reached, and the innovation has passed into the general public. That's when nightflier's legitimate gripe about downconverted analog output will take on new meaning if the problem isn't handled satisfactorily at the outset. Look at the mess that lingering analog has had in the transition to HDTV. HDTV-capable analog households that are barred from hi def DVD can throw a monkey wrench into the works, even if they represent only a fraction of the HD population.

Believe me, the more stuff I see in native HD resolution, the cruder 480p looks! The issue with HD-DVD and Blu-ray is whether those formats can gain enough traction in the market while the number of consumers who will benefit from the new formats is only a fraction of the total market. The whole stumbling block is that the DVD was introduced as an "interim" format that would hold forth in the market until a true HD format was ready. Well, the risk of course is that the DVD would become wildly successful and hinder the progress of a successor format, and that seems to be exactly what's happened.

All you have to do is look at what happened with SACD/DVD-A to see how easily a superior format can fail in the market, and the HD-DVD/Blu-ray launch so far has a lot more in common with the botch job that accompanied the high res audio formats. Just as the audio market has moved more towards portability and downloads, the video market also has those shifting sands in the works with the onslaught of on-demand programming and streaming content.

Also, consider that the restrictions on analog component video resolution have already got long-time HDTV owners (the ones without the digital video inputs) in an uproar, and you got a lot of market barriers in place before the actual players are even in production. A poll on the AVS Forum identified that nearly half of the HDTV owners on that site do not have digital video inputs on their TV, so the analog video issue could very well leave a lot of otherwise enthusiastic early adoptors sitting on the sidelines.

[Geoffcin]

All you have to do is look at what happened with SACD/DVD-A to see how easily a superior format can fail in the market, and the HD-DVD/Blu-ray launch so far has a lot more in common with the botch job that accompanied the high res audio formats. Just as the audio market has moved more towards portability and downloads, the video market also has those shifting sands in the works with the onslaught of on-demand programming and streaming content.

But as far as I see it this is going to be SACD/DVD-A redux. A lot of marketing money will be spent, quite a few players will be sold, way too few titles will be available, and all of them will be overpriced.

Wooch has it right on the $$$ with the changing winds of the video market. The HD-DVR cable/sattilite box has already trumped the release of HD-DVD BlueRay. I have a HD-DVR, and right now it's so full of HD programs and movies that I don't have time to even watch then all! I also have HBO on demand. So why do I need a BlueRay player?