I'm pretty sure that no movies had been released in the BluRay format that weren't MPEG2 at that time.

CJ

Joe Kane was also espousing the virtue of 720P back in the day...
We have ABC and PBS broadcasting in 720P, and everyone else has chosen 1080i.

I have a Sony 1080P SXRD Grand Wega at home, and I prefer native 1080i off air line doubled to 1080P over native 720P off air scaled to 1080P.

Either way, off air looks 1000x better than cable or sat... I am still waiting to take home an HD-DVD or BluRay player. Maybe I will take one out when the Panasonic BDs start shipping next week...

Someone in a large Eastern electronic's giant's booth told me to stick with Sony. They own the patents on most of the optics irrespective of format ( just repeating; no idea if this information is true. ) so he suggested they had the inside track on these machines. True? ???

Alan

Moe's original BBQ: no problem, I just like making sure everyonre has all the facts.

As for codecs, Idid not really want to get into it. But the one thing to know is that it does not mean much. You might get drunk with fewer 9% beer then 4% beer, but if you get drunk or not will ultimately be how many beers you drink. The same here. At high enough bitrate there should be no difference between codecs. If someone wanted they could compare 2mbps VC-1 to 50mbps MPEG-2 and you will see the opposite.

As I understand it, the only inherent difference in the formats quality-wise is that Blu-Ray has higher possible storage capacities. Whether that decides the winner might be subject to other factors, like the extra expense manufacturing BR discs, uptake of the PS3, and where the porn be at but from a quality perspective they're potentially identical besides capacity.

this is sort of true, but HD DVD is now looking like it will support triple layer, dual side, if you wish. plus absolute storage does not mean much without also talking about what format will be stored... MPEG-2 vs MPEG-4.

there is also much higher BW.


that is highly exagerated.

exibit
A)
[Link: proactionmedia.com]
[Link: proactionmedia.com]

B)
[Link: dvdtimes.co.uk]

I highly doubt it. It would be a sure way to PO the current customers. Even if added to the specs studios won't use them because they will not play on older players


true, but then again both formats have the same codecs (as I indicated earlier)

I heard that the BluRay discs need entirely new machines to stamp discs where as HDDVD uses the same machines as standard. True?

Funny enough everything we are talking about is discussed in the Mag.

Yeah, but if you'd have to buy a case of one compared with a 6-pack of another- what if you only had room for a 6-pack (it's your analogy :) ). How much storage would you need for a full-length movie encoded with 50mbps MPEG-2?

CJ

I've been looking at BD players since I think I want one... seems the toughest qualification is to find one that also plays CDs (astounded that the Sony will not do this). So far the Panasonic is looking like the best...

yes and no.

BD does need new lines. As far as I know no one has created a conversion process. And for HD DVD there is the conversion process

On the other hand every large replicator (Cinram, Technicolor....) has bought new lines for both (and last I heard the HD DVD was a bit cheaper).

My understanding is that the HD DVD conversion makes it useless for DVD (and replicators are not willing to lose production, it is not as if studios are stopping or cutting back on DVD) unlike the new line that can be changed back and forth at the push of a button and something like 10-20 minutes one way (I have heard numbers in that range). As well as the converted lines are much slower and have a higher reject rate.

The conversion process was more of a test to prove that HD DVD was manufacturable in real life. And after that like the 40$ hotel room in the guide just used to get the calls before "oh, the cheapest room we have now is 100$"

1) that would be max and not average, so the average would be much lower
2) none cqan have 50mbps max. BD is 40 max for video only 48max for A/V and 54 max. HD DVD is 30.24 max for everything.
3) a movie also has audio (several tracks), subtitles, menus....
4) movies come from much less then 2h to wow, can't sit through that [Link: answerbag.com]

You are right, and I agree. But my point was that you need to discuss the bitrate, the encoder, VBR or CBR, manual or automatic........ and can't just say codec X is better then codec Y.

Daniel: the Samsung also plays CDs. But I agree the Panasonic looks the most interesting out of them all.

Did you get to see any of the BD players? do you have anything interesting to say about them?

I "saw" them at CEDIA but I didn't get to really "see" them, if you get what I mean.

If I remember correctly the Samsung, Panasonic and Philips will play CDs. I'm not completely sure on the rest, but I know the Sony and Pioneer will NOT. And what's with the designs of half these players? Sloping angled fronts? Buttons on top? Brushed aluminum right out of the 70's and 80's?

At any rate, my two qualifications are CD playback and 7.1 analog outputs (don't know why so many are only bundling 5.1). The Panasonic seems the only one to have both of those.