Poll: If you had one choice, which format would you pick?
by Lee Koo (ADMIN) - 8/22/07 3:09 PM
If you had one choice now, which format would you pick?
Blu-ray (What are your reasons?)
HD DVD (What are your reasons?)
by: Lee Koo (ADMIN) August 22, 2007 3:09 PM PDT
0 people like this thread
for this kind of HD you will need more bandwidth to download. If a DVD movie size is about 700mb (not the whole disc, just the main movie) that takes about two hours to download at 256kbps, so I wonder how much would these HD movies sizes would be and maybe they will take up to 4 hours or more to download. I'm also sure that we will need to backup our files on some optical media because of hard disks mechanical failure, and 25gb against 15gb of storage room makes a difference to me; however I'm not choosing any until it settle down.
by drew30319 - 8/22/07 7:51 PM
The reason why is pretty simple: I received the HD DVD add-on for my 360 at Christmas (thanks Mom!). Since then I've purchased about ten HD DVDs. So my answer is based on my (admittedly small) investment. Netflix has a pretty nice selection of HD DVD movies and I'm able to keep my queue filled up with them, only purchasing those that bear repeat viewing (if you're an Eagles fan I'd recommend the Melbourne Farewell Tour disc).
However if I were on the sidelines I believe that I would still opt for HD DVD. The primary reasons for me have to do with cost of entry for both consumer and studios/distributors.
HD DVD hybrids have become more common and if the price can get down to DVD pricing then consumers would have a "ready-made" library once they purchased a HD DVD player. If you're unfamiliar with the hybrid disc it's a regular DVD on one side and HD DVD on the other. This same option isn't available for Blu-ray due to the physical difference between the technologies (for one, the .6mm layer of protection is the same for both DVD and HD DVD while Blu-ray has .1mm).
This same difference in technology between the formats presents a lower entry cost for manufacturers. The same plant that is used for pressing DVDs can be used for HD DVDs with "relatively minor modifications" - (I have no idea what this entails but have read it enough times that I believe this to be true).
Of course my opinion is no more valid than anybody else that has done some research. In the long run if Blu-ray "wins" I'll still have my collection of HD-DVDs and will just purchase a Blu-ray player for $50 or whatever they're going for at the time.
HD-DVD vs Blue Ray
by servaes_marc - 8/22/07 7:51 PM
First of all, both formats offer superior image quality better than any home consumer player before them. I can't visually see the quality difference between the two disk formats like I could with VHS and Beta.
Right now, without investing in any new equipment, I can shoot HD video on my 900 dollar camcorder, edit it on my existing 100 dollar Pinnacle software, and make an HD-DVD playable disk using my regular 100 dollar DVD-R drive with standard 50 cent blank DVD-R's. Granted, using regular DVD-R's, my projects are limited to 24 minutes of HD- DVD material per disk, but at least I can do it now with no additional expense. And those disks play in high definition on any HD-DVD player. I can't do the same with the Blue Ray format.
So for now, HD-DVD gets my vote because I can make HD disks with equipment I already own. It won't be long before HD comes down in price to about where regular DVD is now. I can wait.
HD-DVD, but only by a nose
by dcouchotvore - 8/22/07 7:52 PM
And that nose is that last I heard, there was no region coding on HD DVD. Bravo! Regardless of the industry spin, we all know that region coding has nothing to do with service to the consumer but everything to do with squeezing the maximum possible dollars out of us. I'm really tired of that crap.
Another plus for HD DVD: Sony is on the Blu-ray bandwagon. I'm also sick and tired of Sony's crazy copy protection schemes, most of which end up also screwing the consumer for the sake of profit protection. I've almost decided never to buy another Sony disk because of that nonsense, and I'd hate to see all HD movies come out on a medium with their dirty hands in the mix.
The increased data capacity is probably not going to be much of a factor. Current DVD disks are rarely used to capacity. They stuff as much junk as can on a DVD and encode the movie at higher bitrates than necessary simply to overflow the 4.7GB single-layer capacity to make copying more difficult. Besides, If you look at the actual play time of the HD formats, that extra Blu-ray capacity seems to evaporate.
But both formats still suffer from a problem that as plagued disks since CDs first appeared, and maybe since videodisks, but I never had one of those: the media attract scratches. I feel cheated everytime I spend $15 to $25 bucks for a disk (even more for games!) only to have a single handling by a child destroy that investment, and then to have the situated exacerbated by new copy protection methods that make it impossible or at least excrutiatingly difficult to make a backup, which, as I believe, is still our right under US law. This, of course, means that we often don't have to buy a title once, but two, three, maybe four times. Oh, can you see the profit rolling in? (My personal record, though, is 3). Come now! Silicon dioxide passivation technology has been around for decades, and polyimide coatings for a few years less. It's cheap enough to put hard coatings on eyeglass lenses, but doing so on discs would cut into profits. I'm almost tempted to vote "NEITHER" until they get that fixed, but I can't see it happening in my lifetime. </vent>
We bought a Sony Blu-ray 3 weeks ago
by unterdenlinden - 8/22/07 8:13 PM
Back in 1980, we paid over $600 for our first VHS VCR. We thought we'd have it "forever". Boy, were we wrong! LOL.When I think of all the VCRs & DVD players we have owned and tossed since then...
The VHS tape rewinder is still collecting dust in the basement.
As long as Net Flix has Blu-ray DVD's for the next 2 or 3 years, I'll be happy. Then we'll get the next player...whatever that might be.
Who knows. By then, discs could be obsolete.
HD DVD is better
I know some say PORN is why HD DVD will win. No that's not it. Yes it's what helped VHS to win. Who wanted to get out there 8mm projector and screen to watch porn when you can watch on your TV? That and the fact that you could watch most all movies on a single tape where as on Betamax they were on 2 tapes. Plus of course the players were more Expensive. This time, most get there PORN on the Internet, those that don't is only because they don't have Internet access or are suck with Dial-Up. Plus do you really want to watch porn in 1080P on your large HDTV? Maybe, maybe not. Might spoile your Ilusion. It might help slightly for HD DVD, but most of it is still on DVD anyway.
Yes Blu-Ray has a extra 20 gig's of space for their movies. 30 Gig's for HD DVD and 50 gig's for Blu-Ray. That's the ONLY advantage Blu-Ray has. Period. You would think that would matter! It hasn't, HD DVD Movies Look and sound just as great, in fact only recently has Blu-Ray got the Picture and sound Quality HD DVD has had since day 1, because most Blu-Ray movies were being released on 25 gig Disc's and still using Mpeg 2 compression. Which is why some movies are being Re Released.
Still Blu-Ray is a Unfinished format! You owners are Beta Testing Blu-Ray right now as it's not Finalized until October of 2007! That's still a couple months away. To get features that HD DVD already supports since day 1!!! Oh except a Ethernet port is still a option for Blu-Ray, where it's required for HD DVD to use for things like Updates, or Extra Movie Content.
Even with less space on HD DVD, a lot of movies released on both formats, HD DVD has more/extra content. The movie "300" is a good example of this. Blu-Ray has Double the Copy Protection(which currently isn't used yet, but will be when it's finalized) and Region coding. HD DVD has neither of these! You can buy a bunch of HD DVD Movies all around the world that will play just fine on a U.S. HD DVD player that are Blu-Ray Only movies in the U.S. but HD DVD in other countries. Fantastic 4, MR & MS Smith, and many many others.
Movies like The Matrix and Batman begins were delayed on Blu-Ray because they wanted the extra content on the disc's and have to wait for Blu-Ray to be finalized and players to be released to support it. If you own a stand alone player now, your out of luck on a upgrade! Of course those players will start being sold cheaper to make room for the Full working Blu-Ray players. Pretty lame if you ask me. You can buy a HD DVD player, NEW for about $240 NOW with 5 free movies, and it fully works with ALL HD DVD Movies now and later.
The only Movie Studio's that support Blu-Ray are SONY OWNED, other then FOX, maybe one other, of couse Sony wants the Double Copy protection and Blu-Ray Royalties!!! A extra 20 gig's for a Movie Disc? Not a big deal at all compared to all that HD DVD has to offer and at a lower cost.
I hope Blu-Ray dies SOON!!! Let the HD Format war end. Some of Sony's failures in this area that I can think of. Betamax, MD Disc's, UMD Disc, SACD, Memory Stick. Ya, look how that SACD and DVD Audio war has turned out. Anyone have either? Sony had to go their own way on that also and pretty much killed High Quality Audio Music from taking off and instead we have low quality IPOD and other player Music. The Heavy Copy Protection didn't help either. I want nothing to do with Sony. DRM infested Cd's, Fake Movie Critic's, etc. No thanks. I'll NEVER buy anything Blu-Ray!!!
YOU ARE SOOOOOOO RIGHT !!!!
The ONLY thing that you were incorrect about is that HD-DVD is now in triple layer 51 Gb format check out Wikipedia. Also the fact you forgot to mention Root-Kit sony virus crap and people are STILL stupid enough to go with Sony! HD-DVD is cheaper and both have the SAME 1080P and MPEG2, MPEG4, and VC1 Encoding and 36MPS Data Transfer Rate so there is NO reason to go with Blueray. As for the uneducated person that went to BESTBUY "Ya they have GREAT quaily there did you ever think about the cables they were using, the players, the TV's etc??? People DO YOU RESEARCH HD-DVD is the ONLY way to go. Like the old saying goes for you Blueray folks a fool and his money are SOON parted !!!!!
oooh technology ....
I used to love my first cassette player, then when CD came I was amused that you've could select the track that you want, then it was the mp3 CD players witch I thought that it would be enough because of all the songs you can fit on them, but then the ipod and hard disk mp3 player came and now they have them up to more than 80gb filled with all the songs that you can fill... I still have some of these old cassettes; however I used to have a turntable but I lost it some where.
I went with Blu-ray because...
by HRS2005 - 8/22/07 8:39 PM
Before buying one or the other format player, I was watching the Planet Earth series on a *very* expensive, high-end 1080p plasma display, fed by the HD-DVD version of the title at a local Best Buy Magnolia store. Nearby the Blu-ray version was playing on another television. There was no comparison in quality--the Blu-ray version was perfect; the HD-DVD version had very noticeable flaws.
So, I decided for Blu-ray and I've not regretted the choice. A carefully transferred movie, done on a BD50 disc and displayed on a great 1080p TV can be, for this viewer, without visible flaws. My "perfect" list so far includes "Bullitt," "The Untouchables" and the remastered "Fifth Element."
Panasonic, pioneer, sharp, LG, philps, and samsung and a others jumped on blu-ray. it was a joint effort, it is the better format, and i took blu-ray b/c of ps3. I have had luck and performance out of all of my sony products, which is more than i can say from others(SHARP). Yes things are made to be "sonycentric" and you pay more for their products, but as a rule they are almost always above average to great, and usually compare to ultra high end nitch makers. Yes toshiba is a solid, but i can't see HD-DVD winning in the end if prices compare, but if manufactures, start jumping ship and making HD-DVD players(like LG is and Samsung-may) things could get interesting
Compare both on the same set-up
I rented Planet Earth on HD DVD and it was perfect on my 60" Sony XBR (I give credit to Sony when it comes to their TVs). I'd wonder if there was a difference in set-up on the TVs. You would see a difference if HDMI was used for one and not the other. Not to mention video settings on the TVs themselves.
I'd ask for both to be hooked up to the same TV and get a movie like The Departed (available in both formats) to compare them in a controlled environment.
yah, sony does have good tv's. but everything else sucks.
Blu-ray has won sense day one
by gringojo - 8/22/07 9:13 PM
They have Sony & Disney nuff said
HD DVD, because it is not Sony
by Emilio2000 - 8/22/07 9:16 PM
Why does Sony always have to play in the opposing field? Why can't they cooperate with others to create UNIVERSAL STANDARDS? Instead, Sony always pushes its own proprietary formats.
Sony lost me for good when they started pushing their Memory Sticks instead of accepting the Flash Cards and SD cards that everyone else adopted as the standard. Ever since then, I have avoided all Sony products. I simply don't want to get tied down to a format that nobody else supports except Sony.
none for now
by 7aji88 - 8/22/07 9:17 PM
I'm a fan of Sony but I admit that they care about their name more than their consumers. I mean the memory stick duo looks exactly like the normal SD card, so why Sony won't drop the SD for the sake of everyone? It's not like you can fit more stuff on it and the SD cards are cheaper. We heard a lot about how good the PS3 is and I think it's good but we were expecting more after all that buzz going around, but it got a BD drive built in unlike the 200$ external HD-DVD for the XBOX360 witch will make it cost like the PS3. Any way, I don't have a HD TV so I don't care because I'm happy with my 20.1" Samsung computer LCD monitor on 1680 x 1050 resolution, now that's more than HD for a video game, and I download some HD movie trailers every while to experience the HD!! (that is how it sounds in commercials)
by Adil Ahmed - 8/22/07 9:34 PM
I have had both format. I still find Blu-ray as much better ooption compared to HD-DVD. Technically, Bly-rays are ahead. when you watch the same movie in both formats, its easier to pick BluRay.
Blu-ray is anyday better.
over all, I feel, the cost of all format players are comming down. just have noth of them together. why is this fight now. I am sure any person who can afford to have one of them could also be able to buy other player too. dont tell me that he is put life and soul to just purchace only one. . have both. if you feel you good movies on Bluray, watch them on bluray or if you feel you have good ones on HD go for it..no big deal.
why do you want to unnecassary create fuzz between the two.
the bottom line..if you ask me.bluray is ahead.
your right about having both. I think lg came out with this player that plays both hd dvd and blu-ray, but how is blu-ray ahead of hd dvd? I saw both playing at office depot with identical tv's, and they looked the same. i would buy lg's new 2-in-one and look at movies in both format and see which on is cheaper. Like, if The Simpson's Movie is on both, but the HD DVD is cheaper, then yah. But if I was buying lets say transformers, then I would get the blu-ray because it was cheaper? Yah. There is no difference in quality.
by Ed-duh-win - 8/22/07 9:47 PM
I'll definitely go with Blu-Ray. Its holds more data than HD-DVD and more space is defnitely a good extra.
by job1866 - 8/22/07 9:59 PM
High Def over blu-ray! Could this negatively affect the Playstation 3 in any way?
yes, because it's sony. See the magic! Sony sucks.
Why not buy both??
by PlatinumAV - 8/22/07 10:00 PM
I guess it may be a little pricey for some...I had a XBOX 360 before either were released. I purchased the HD DVD player for 100 dollars on Ebay. I also bought a PS3 on Ebay new for 400 dollars. I have both connected to a 65 inch Pioneer Elite. I think Blu-Ray looks slightly better. However, I am using a HDMI cable for the PS3 and components for the XBOX. I ran the same Monster fiber optic cable from both into my Denon receiver and think the Blu-Ray sounds better as well. Im too much of a movie buff to choose one or the other. I'll save all the arguing for ya'll!!!
i think... lg came out with this player that plays both blu-ray and hd dvd. why not get that and go willie with both formats?
Blu-ray all the way
by jh3101 - 8/22/07 10:01 PM
My dog likes watching blu-ray movies on my 52 inch flat screen.
I made the PS3 investment and it does everything:
2) Connects to my HP Media Center
5) is more attractive then Xbox
IT has USB ports so I could always eventually buy a USB HD Dvd Player as an add on to the PS3. And maybe Sony would support it.
For all the Anti-Sony crap on here, isnt Microsoft equally as evil and controlling. Come on people.
Blue Ray Is Better Simple As That
Blueray is better much more storage space and I like having lots of storage. I also like playsation better than xbox. 1. Cause I have a ps2
2. They have more games. Microsoft is more market controlling they have windows XP and vista and since they love to get your IP address when you activate windows I think they must be more evil.
sony, apple, and microsoft
Okay, here's the list on dumbley high prices and control:
1. Apple: Ipod, imac, macbook, itv, iphone. money super black holes.
2. Sony: their laptop, ps 2 & 3, blu-ray, blu-ray players, tv's. Money black holes.
3. Microsoft: Office, Vista, Xbox, Server. small money black hole.
by quokkasplace - 8/23/07 12:19 AM
Because as usual these days Australia Invents the best eg. We invented the Black box flight recorder.
I Am Australian
Have Fun :0) Scott
This time go with Europe
by JohnCLord - 8/23/07 12:21 AM
The Europeans are already buying HD-DVD stuff at 3 times the rate they're buying Blu-ray. With videotapes, the U.S. ended up with VHS and Europe ended up with (Sony's) Beta. Let Blu-ray be used for data backups. Let HD-DVD come into play for movies.
If I had to choose right now, I'd choose HD-DVD. Fortunately, I don't - so I'm going to wait until the dust settles. Besides, they're both going to be obsolete in 30 years when quantum data crystals start being made to store terabytes in 1cm square chips.
Regardless of which format wins, there's no point in buying a player-only now for $500 when you'll be able to buy a player-recorder in the winning format for under $100 in 5 or 6 more years.
And when is someone going to make a DVD player that can play DIVX, XVID, and AVI files, (without a PC), or did I miss that one? I can burn 12, almost 13 hours of TV shows on a D5 single layer (4.5GB) DVD in Xvid format (about 350mb per hour), but only as a data disk for playing the files back on the PC.
by savagedude_21 - 8/23/07 12:42 AM
Because i would have to buy all of my DVD's again in blue ray format?? just crazy!
so on the HDDVD player, i can play new movies, and my old dvds
Hi, I own a Blu ray player and I watched my old DVD movies in there as well. So, I can watch Blu ray movies or DVD movies, and it is true for the improvement they make to the standards dvd's.
And I received a cd to upgrade my player so it can play different formats.
So for now I choose Blu ray.
by LauderdaleBob11 - 8/23/07 1:29 AM
It is really a toss of the coin which way to go, however, the main reason that I would go HD, as against Blue Ray is that so far the HD format is supported in accessoble video cameras. I have as yet not seen BR in video camera's