Buzz Out Loud Lounge: MATCH-OFF: HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray
MATCH-OFF: HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray
by defensorfortis - 11/30/06 5:03 AMIt's too early to tell which format will win the war, but I was curious on which side you were on? HD-DVD or Blu-Ray?
Also, is there a website that keeps consumers posted on the latest news between the two formats?
My choice: neither
by rtemp - 11/30/06 10:05 AM In reply to: MATCH-OFF: HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray by defensorfortisI honestly don't care about the hi-def DVD's at all. They only give you benefits if you have an HDTV (I don't know anybody that has one) and they are just too expensive.
I'm sticking to regular DVD's for as long as possible.
-Ryan
*but I like the HDTV*
by defensorfortis - 11/30/06 10:23 AM In reply to: My choice: neither by rtemp(yelp)
*slowly raises hand*
*softly says* I have a HDTV and I care.
But on a FYI note, America will switch over to pure HD content in the year 2008, this action was to take place in 2006 but was delayed. Europe is already a step-ahead of the great American government and has issued no more analog signals over the air and is pure HD.
So I would consider upgrading before becoming obsolete. And you can get a great 30" Samsung Slim-Fit TV for about $700. Just food for thought.
But I respect your stand, just thought I add a little insight.
All HDTV by 2008?
by navsimpson - 11/30/06 11:03 AM In reply to: *but I like the HDTV* by defensorfortisI not sure that's accurate - that would mean 80% of people in the US would have to buy a new TV in the next 2 years. I'm pretty sure you're talking about the transition to analogue to digital dude. I don't think that a date has been set in any country for a total transition to HDTV.
And defensortis: I'm pretty sure the HD-DVD drive for the 360 does now output at 1080p after the recent firmware update - it's just that very very few TV sets can accept 1080p via component or VGA. Besides, as CNET have said, 1080p is really hard to distinguish from 1080i, so you should be good to go.
Does anyone know if one format is visually superior to the other? I know the first batch of films favoured HD-DVD, but Blu-Ray was then using MPEG2 compression. What's the verdict now that both are using MPEG4 (or VC1?).
Broadcasted in HD
by kellenjb - 11/30/06 11:13 AM In reply to: All HDTV by 2008? by navsimpsonI learned about the transition 4 years ago so I might have my facts wrong.
But my understand is that originally by 2006 all broadcasters had to be broadcasting in HD. This means that all of the signals coming into your cable company would be HD. This doesn't mean that the cable company can't go and convert the signal.
HD 2006
by defensorfortis - 12/1/06 5:30 AM In reply to: Broadcasted in HD by kellenjbAt least I'm not crazy, because as I mentioned earlier... I heard by 2006 High Defintion was going to be mandatory. But maybe it was meant for analog to ditial conversion as the other dude mentioned in this discussion.
no you are not crazy
by kellenjb - 12/1/06 5:54 AM In reply to: HD 2006 by defensorfortisNo, I am pretty sure you are right. All content should be HD. Although I am not sure of the exact requirement here. For example, right not my cable company doesn't offer all of the HD programing offered to them.
For example, ABC has HD programming, but my cable company isn't paying for it. So I am not sure if it is just a requirement that HD programing is offered, but not required. The cable companies still could still only buy the standard programs.
However, after trying to see if I could find anything about this I found a page that talks about the conversion. It says the year is 2009 and that it is to digital like the other guy had said. But the article is not written very well as they seem to use HD and digital interchangeably. The call digital to be in the 16x9 format. They also mention 720p which is a HD format.
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6136298.html
HD Channels not are not Full HD
by defensorfortis - 12/1/06 6:12 AM In reply to: no you are not crazy by kellenjbThanks for the backup! 
My cable provider doesn't provide full HD programming either such as NBC, FOX, and ABC. Only some of the episodes are HD and it appears some are not full 1080i. (Hhhmmm...)
I mean... I thought the HD channels were full-blown HD content, but it doesn't turn out to be that way. (Waa..waa... *the sound effect of a horn playing to a loser in a game show*)
But I can't remember if I mentioned it earlier.. but Europe (Germany for sure) is pure digital or HD. It was BIG there while I was living in Germany when the conversion occured.
Money
by rtemp - 11/30/06 2:59 PM In reply to: *but I like the HDTV* by defensorfortisI'm a college student. I don't think I need to say any more on why I'm not even thinking about upgrading.
-Ryan
Digital from Analog
by Romasteve - 1/26/07 7:58 AM In reply to: *but I like the HDTV* by defensorfortisHi all
Here in Italy the transition is underway. Digital TV over normal TV channels is happening. For example. The TV from France now is ONLY on digital, also SAT tv, but no longer on analog.
Stephen in Rome
Trying to reach Romasteve
by Rbcsoup - 2/7/07 7:43 AM In reply to: Digital from Analog by RomasteveHey Romasteve. Trying to reach you about Ellen Cohen and The Shadows. Please email me via www.casselliot.com
You do not need to have HDTV, only digital
by Sith840 - 1/26/07 8:59 AM In reply to: *but I like the HDTV* by defensorfortisThe rules which were pushed back to 2009 will require a converter box only. The signals will all be digital, but the rules are such that the signals have to be downgradable to 480i (standard TV). There will be lots of boxes you can attach between your old non-HDTV and the new signal, so it will still work. Of course, an HDTV or HDTV-ready TV will give you a much nicer image, as more and more shows and the like will be recorded in higher resolution (at least 720p, like DVDs).
That said, as far as the format wars, the two are too similar to say one is better than the other in image quality. BR has much higher capacity (hours of a movie or GBs of data you can store), but at a higher cost for the discs and the lasers. So, it will not win due to one being better than the other, but rather the marketing war. Sony has had some advantage as they are also a movie studio and have gotten most of the other content providers on their side. But, it seems too soon to be sure how it will go. The real losers are us consumers, as any one who takes the plunge risks having obsolete equipment (unless you buy the dual-format devices).
OTS
by batavier - 12/1/06 11:56 AM In reply to: My choice: neither by rtempI don't think that any of this answers the poster's question.
As far as the benefits of 1080p are concerned. Somewhere I read a post by someone who already owns a "mainstream" HDTV. He walked into a big box store, and was drawn to the picture on a demo set across the store. It was showing a different move that all the other sets. Upon inquiring as to what he was looking at, was told that this was a BlueRay video (on a BlueRay DVD) connected on a 1080p set. According to the poster, everything else looked absolutely inferior (I think he used a different expression....)
I'm not sure about BlueRay vs HD DVD, but a the rate technology is moving, I would expect not just HDTV, but 1080p broadcasts, software AND hardware to be the norm by 2008. I expect that once people see what's possible, the will demand it, and competition in the market place will follow, including price drops to civilian levels. That is, unless government intervenes on the side of the nay-sayers and whiners.
As far as as the changeover is concerned, according to the FCC website, there will be conversion boxes available (possibly for free if you get your progamming via antenna.)
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
