Community poll forum: Are you planning to buy a high definition DVD player?

Remember a lot of people arent even interested in downloading from their computers , and as of now the downloads are sub par performance , poor video quality poor audio etc downloads are for Techies not the average movie watcher who would rather go to Blockbuster or Hollywood Video, talk to your everyday casual computer user not the younger generstion who download from I tunes etc, and they don't even take the time to download songs, much less movies. my neighbors are lucky if they can even surf properly on the computer, much less download anything

This reminds me of the battle between the VCR cassette units & VCR tapes of the early 80s (Betamax vs. VHS) where VHS became the standard. My father purchased the Betamax VCR which very quickly became obsolete. I am going to wait till the next generation of DVD technology becomes standard & when the prices have been lowered (like the DVD recorders & players).

I spent a whole bunch of money on a 57 inch Mitsubishi DLP last month and I do love it. I don't have a HD player as yet and will likely wait a while to see if something compelling presents itself.

Meanwhile, I really enjoy the enhanced appearance of regular DVDs from my upconverting DVD player and there is a fair amount of HD content from my cable provider without subscribing to premium channels.

As you said, "There are certain things in life . . ." and I concur! Me too!

C

I selected "HD DVD", even though the poll should have had separate options for "Already have HD DVD" or "Already have Bluray".

HD DVD is the better choice.

On just PICTURE QUALITY alone, HD DVD releases are almost all encoded with the next generation VC1 codec, the best codec supported by both formats, while Bluray uses the old "DVD-era" Mpeg compression for 70% of movies in the Bluray format. This makes a huge difference in PQ. If you visit AVS forums and look for the threads by Xylon, there are many comparison screen captures where the VC1 PQ completely trounces the Mpeg photos.

70% of Bluray releases are encoded with old-style Mpeg, and 70% of Bluray releases are on Single Layer discs which are smaller than almost all HD DVD releases. Bluray talks a lot about superiority, but HD DVD has delivered MUCH better PQ.

ALSO - Bluray players are not REQUIRED to support the next-gen audio codecs, only DD at 640 K and DTS (or space-hogging uncompressed audio), again, just like old-tyme DVD. However, HD DVD players must all be able to decode DD Plus, the next gen Dolby version with bitrates up to 3 Megabits, and Dolby TruHD, a true "lossless" compression format. The only optional format for HD DVD is DTS Master Audio, DTS' version of TruHD.

All HD DVD players are also required to support Network ports, dual video stream decoding, for PiP, etc., and a complete next gen interactive language called HDi. HOWEVER, Bluray players are not required to have any of this, so most Bluray player models do not have an Ethernet port, and NONE of the standalone Bluray players can do dual video stream decoding and PiP.

Worse yet, Bluray launched before the format was fully ready, and used an "interim" version (1.0) of their BDJ language (heir alternative to HDi) which cannot do MANY of the same functions of HDi. They were supposed to have enforced a newer version (1.1) of this language which added a few things, as mandatory in May 2007 - but they DIDN'T, and have now claimed they will make it mandatory for all new players that go on sale November 1st onwards. However, ALL existing Bluray players before that can be sold without this fixed standard, and it has been confirmed on AVS Forum that NONE of the standalone bluray players currently available will EVER be able to run 1.1, do network functions, nor true PiP.

Bluray has all been about "hype", but has delivered far less than HD DVD.

HD DVD players generally can be had for HALF the cost of Bluray players, offer better PQ on almost most movie titles, have FAR more features, and are the best choice.

Spend some time on AVSforum.com to get the truth!

As a gaming enthusiast, on the PC as well as consoles, I currently own both players. The PS3 has the BluRay and the XBox 360 has the HD/DVD as an add-on upgrade.

I think the HD/DVD will develop a bigger following, since HD-DVD will be able to have HD on one side and standard DVD on the other side, the movies will play in your regular dvd player and will play HD when they buy a HD/DVD player in the future.

Hopefully the winner will be the format that meets the most need, and not the one that can throw the most influence into the fight, unless they are one and the same. It will be an interesting evolution.

But, they're too expensive and not necessarily available at retail in the U.S. But, they'll both be coming soon. I think the new "3 series" chipset from Intel will have a big impact on that.

Watch for the computer drives to play a major role in this competition. Sony spends lots of money on advertising, but they don't always win. They could spend less on advertising and use the savings to reduce prices and maybe get a steamroller going.

As it is, I think it is going to be a while before a winner emerges. It could be that, as someone here has posited, a newer technology will take hold before the competition is settled on this and thus, in effect, both formats will lose.

Fun, though, isn't it!

C

I have a good friend who is about to jump into HD. Amazingly, he doesn't have any DVDs! Why? Because he heard about this coming "HD thing" a few years ago and decided it would be a waste of money to buy DVDs only to have to replace them all with "HD" versions. I guess he got stung with a big record collection...then 8-tracks...then cassettes...then CDs.

But he hasn't watched a DVD movie at home for...forever! The only movies he's seen are in the theater or when they come out on cable, in NTSC format. In our economic class/culture, that's pretty amazing, especially since we both work in software in Silicon Valley and you'd think we're the demographic who goes for all this bleeding edge stuff.

My point is that while you could sit on the fence and wait for a shakeout in the HD disc wars, or wait longer until all content is available over your networks (cable/disk/internet), you'll be missing out on experiences available now. And, as the kids say, "It's all good!"

For the folk who are weighing the cost/benefit of specific choices, I get that, but also consider the "opportunity cost". If your current equipment (NTSC/DVD) serves you well there's no _need_ to upgrade, but if you're on the fence about HD-DVD or Blue-Ray, or sitting it out because there will be something better coming soon, then you owe it another think. How long are you willing to wait? How much will you defer and for how long? 5 years? 10 years?

I see people claiming $100 HD disc players coming in the fall and current formats being obsolete in "2-3 years". That's not real. The prices fell to 1/2 their start as the wealthy, "gotta have it" early adopters were all saturated. But as the volume goes up, there's no pressure to drop the prices. Look at HD displays. By the $100 player logic we should have $600 42" plasma displays by now. And while there are displays that will play "2XHD" (2160p), they're just technology showcases, suited for computer displays only. They're the "show cars" of the industry. No need to rush them to production, there's plenty of product in the pipeline and a market that isn't close to being saturated. So it will be more like 7-10 years before the next major format upgrade that will require you to replace your content again. I'll go out on a limb and say that at that time the main thing you'll get back in the Next Big Revolution is shelf space, because all your movies will be inside the box...somewhere on the network.

What we will see is incremental improvement in features and size and speed. All the usual technology stuff. And that's always changing. How long did you defer a computer upgrade because the next Intel chip was going to be XX percent faster? Or a bigger hard disk was due out next year? And when do you think they'll settle this Mac/PC format thing so I can buy just one computer?

Will you be able to sell your used player on the market to help offset the cost of the new one because you just have to have HDMI 1.3 and your old player "only" does 1.2? Of course. Will there be someone to buy your 1080i set when you want to signal match to your 1080p player? Certainly, just look at craigslist. To put it another way, did you buy a Dolby 2.1 receiver then a 5.1? Then a 6.1, 7.1? With component, then optical, then HDMI (I skipped one format in there...)? You probably didn't.

I went from a used 20" tube TV to a new 27" after six years. The 27" lasted 13 years. Did I feel compelled to upgrade again and again to 32", 37", 46" along the way? Of course not. But I'm not watching black and white TV either, and I'm not watching VHS tapes any more. The jump to HD discs--along with a proportionally larger screen for the viewing distance--is just as great a change in the experience of viewing as was a 20" TV with VHS going to 27" TV and a DVD player and 2.1 sound.
Sure I'm used to it now but would I go back? Hmm.. let me go into the kid's room. Power up the 27". Pop in a Barney tape... Nope. Ain't going back.

Look at the forums. Has anyone said, "After upgrading to an HD disc player and HD screen I regret I spent the money, because it just isn't any better than my DVDs and NTSC tube TV"? I don't think there are.

There are some who predict they won't like it any better, but that's not the same criticism. You have to take that, "I know it isn't better than what I have now" attitude with the same grain of salt of someone who just spent a big chunk of cash and _everything_ is better. Their broadcast TV and DVDs look better on the new HD screen and HD player. And their dishes are cleaner and laundry is whiter! It may seem that way to them, but they're also re-enforcing to themselves that they made a good choice. But that's another thread.

As one last analogy, I have never come away from the optometrist's office with a new prescription and said, "Eh. Looks about the same." I've always come away with a palm print on my forehead thinking, "Sheesh! It looks better! Why didn't I go in earlier?"

So, in summary, I say this: Jump on the technology merry-go-round, and enjoy the ride. Look at all the fun the other folk are having! You can always trade horses once you're on board. Why miss out if you have the means to get a ticket?

You forget about those who stay on the trail end of techno curves because of the money issue. The cost of HD will have to come down if it's going to include the maximum number of people to maximize profit. My wife and I bought a large screen TV because the old one finally "gave up the ghost". The new TV is 51" and only has 1080i capability. Later on I bought a combo vhs/dvd player/recorder that up-converts to 1080i. I am happy with it and will probably not bother with upgrading to full HD until the TV dies completely. Total cost was around $1300. Thank God for tax returns and clearance/open box items. The experience of full HD isn't going to be significantly greater enough compared to what we have now to go thru the financial strain it would put on us right now to upgrade.

Maybe it's just me, but I'm not floored be either HD or Blu-Ray. It just isn't that much better than a properly upconverted Standard DVD. Am i the only one that isn't impressed?

Voids the warranty... but I can take an XBox 360 read only HDDVD drive and "IDE" it into my HTPC that has HDMI / HDCP support, and watch HDDVD now, for only $200?

Instead of $600 for a PS3? Or $1000 for an Blu-Ray player? or instead of $800 for a Blu-Ray RW drive?

Seems relatively cheap for nerds to get into HDDVD, compared to Blu-Ray (unless you already own a PS3).

I'll wait and see what the adult film industry supports... as goes adult content, so goes the high tech industry

I have no plans of buying wither Hi Def disc format, because I do not own an HDTV. That just is not in my budget.

HDTV is not only extremely expensive, like, I've ever in my life spent more than $100 for a TV set, but the ones at Walmart have a picture quality that looks like the surface of the moon. The normal TV's next to the HDTV's have a much softer picture with much more natural lighting. I'm sticking with traditional.

It would be expensive to set up a good source for the various sets in such an environment. You said it best: "... remember Wal-Mart is Wal-Mart."

What sold ME on HDTV was seeing the Michigan v. Ohio State game on a LCD set in an Office Depot receiving a broadcast HD signal through a rabbit-ear antenna. (!!!) The Notre Dame game was on in the front of the store using the only cable connection available in the store, but these guys in the back wanted to watch the Michigan game and they used a bit of ingenuity to get the set to a place in the store where the signal strenght was adequate. There were occasional artifacts which I attributed to the marginal signal strength, but the picture quality was stunning.

Once you decide to buy a HD television, and after you have watched some of the HD programming (some of which is available FREE of charge OVER THE AIR) -- after you have watched some of that, come back here and vote again on the Blu-Ray v. HD-DVD v. neither one.

Admittedly, there will be people who don't care. Not everyone wants a BMW. Some people don't even want to buy a new car unless the 1955 Fairlane catches fire and burns up in the driveway. So, HD is not for everyone and even for HD owners, not everyone will want a HD video disc player.

Me? Yup, I'll probably have to get both, but I'm waiting for better prices.

Well, as I mentioned above, I own a CRT-HDTV. There aren't all that many models around anymore, but you can find 28" to 32" models that are considerably less expensive than their plasma and LCD counterparts. Negatives are that they are big and bulky and don't look as 'cool' and, except for the picture, won't impress your tech-snob friends and you can't buy huge room-filling monster screens. The upside is the picture---and isn't that what really counts here---is still better than those expensive plasma and LCD screens, plus you can save hundreds of dollars if you shop wisely. I've seen 26" CRT-HDTV's in the $400 neighborhood, they are getting hard to find, I admit. Here's one: http://www.devlib.org/resources/gadgets/hdtv/crt-hdtvs/toshiba-26hf85-crt-hdtv/details/
For that matter, if you are happy with a 19 to 22 inch TV, there are LCD HDTV's for under $300. So there are reasonably priced systems there for limited budgets. Even better deals if your ego will let you buy refurbs or scratch and dents. Another way to save a couple hundred bucks if you are on satelite or cable: Skip the tuner in the set. Buy an HDTV ready set and hook up the tuner your provider gives you. All this takes work, but if you are willing to put in the time, you can do well when that old TV becomes more trouble than it's worth.