Death of HD-DVD

[sircruisealotVS]

2 hours of 1080p content uses around 14gb of storage. There aren't many blu-ray or hd dvd discs that have over 6 hours of 1080p content which is required to fill a hd dvd disc is there?

The main advantage of HD DVD to studios is that it uses conventional dvd pressing methods to produce the discs, it costs nothing more to produce them. The size in the end means nothing to the user, the end product on both formats was pretty much identical. No companies are filling that 6 hours full HD content, in fact most of the time it's just the movie which is 2 or 3 hours maximum, then 720p bonus content upscaled.


Both studios were paying for the dedicated services of these studios, it wasn't a matter of saying hey this is the better format, lets go with them. Sony spent so much pushing the blu-ray that they couldn't afford to let it go under, they spent plenty of money luring over studios. The format war was 50/50 until Warner decided to switch to blu-ray... Which was only what 2 months ago? Gee for all these super smart studios, it took them 3 years to work out which format was technically superior?


HD DVD had HP, Samsung, NEC, Toshiba, Sanyo, Medion, ACER, ASUS, ROCK, LG and Buffalo Technologies all including HD-DVD in their products.

Your list doesn't look much bigger now does it?


In any case, I really don't care who won the battle, infact I prefer blu-ray because I have a PS3 to use to play them. But the fact of the matter remains, it was far from an inferior technology. What is inferior now is the the BD 1.0 Spec which early adopters got burnt with and cannot use all the features of new Blu-ray movies.

BD just had more financial backing and ended up winning in the end because it had too many studios in it's pocket which they paid for, and toshiba simply could no longer compete.

never before have i spoken to someone so stubborn and truely ignorant.
the facts where placed infront of you and you still cant concede that blu-ray IS superior to hd dvd....whatever spin you want to put on it, saying that the storage space could never be used and so on, it is STILL SUPERIOR to hd dvd.
if you cant see that then its a bit of a worry when all the info is right there infront of you in black and white.

 

[albert5268]

never before have i spoken to someone so stubborn and truely ignorant.
the facts where placed infront of you and you still cant concede that blu-ray IS superior to hd dvd....whatever spin you want to put on it, saying that the storage space could never be used and so on, it is STILL SUPERIOR to hd dvd.
if you cant see that then its a bit of a worry when all the info is right there infront of you in black and white.

Blu-Ray is > HD DVD without a doubt. But i think most ppl can't see past the name anyway. Maybe they shoulda called HD DVD drives, "The Funkdrive" or something sleazy.

 

[Dirbatua]

well toshiba was making a player that read both bluray and HD, i guess that aint gonna be happenin now.

 

[albert5268]

Microsoft will almost definitely be bringing out a Blu-Ray drive for the Xbox 360. There were rumors of one going into production alongside the HD-DVD drive.

 

[ProphetVX]

never before have i spoken to someone so stubborn and truely ignorant.
the facts where placed infront of you and you still cant concede that blu-ray IS superior to hd dvd....whatever spin you want to put on it, saying that the storage space could never be used and so on, it is STILL SUPERIOR to hd dvd.
if you cant see that then its a bit of a worry when all the info is right there infront of you in black and white.

sircruisealotVS I'm not being stubborn. Blu ray was an immature technology when it hit the market. The spec is constantly evolving, making early adopters machines that they paid $1000 for, are now obsolete.

There are 1000's of machines that people paid alot of money for when BD first came out that can no longer be used because Sony pushed their product onto the market too early.

Now, storage is merely only one factor of the product, something that is not as important to the argument as you seem to think it is. Both products do exactly the same job with the same quality. The video and sound quality is indistinguishable between the two. Both formats have very similar feature sets now.

Cost of manufacture of a Blu ray disc is ten times more expensive than that of a HD DVD, the cost of reading components are much more for blu ray as well.

I'm looking at all the factors in my judgement, you're just looking at one.

Would you have been happy to be an early adopter of blu ray to be told that you can't use some special features now because Sony changed the spec?

The only thing that makes me stubborn is because I actually know my stuff in this area. The only reason the technology is superior in peoples eyes like you is because you're a sony fanboy.

I can write stuff in black and white as well buddy, how's this storage is not the only component in making a technology superior. Which by the way HD DVD were working on getting more, just like blu ray. Efficiencies and cost of manufacture, stability and scaleability of the spec, cost to consumers etc etc have everything to do with how "superior" a technology is, something that Sony wins in a bit, something the HD DVD wins in a bit too. The technology itself between the two in terms of quality of product the difference is negligible.

Here I'll even do a little list for each of the products for you.
Blu Ray Advantages
Size
Disc less prone to scratching

HD DVD
Can use conventional dvd pressing techniques
Laser technology is much much cheaper
Had a complete spec when released, no obsolete drives
No need for any extra hardware in manufacturing shops
More scaleable in the amount of layers it can fit on a disc.

All things considered, I think there are some big advantages and disadvantages of each technology, but I don't think either is better than the other. Is that too difficult for you to understand? If the technology was as inferior as you seem to make it out to be, do you really think it would have taken this long for studios to make up their mind? The only reason they made up their minds was because each side was paying them off.

 

[1991_Vn2nV]

Will Blu Ray last like DVD, or will we see the next generation come before it gets the chance to spread?

 

[ProphetVX]

Will Blu Ray last like DVD, or will we see the next generation come before it gets the chance to spread?

It's all very dependent on how non-tech savvy people adopt it, most people can't justify or care about the difference in quality at the moment. The gap is nowhere near as big as it was between dvd and vhs. So by the time people realise other technologies could have emerged as popular. It's all dependent on how internet speeds and costs progress over the coming years, if massive bandwidth is cheap, then IPTV will probably become very popular and blu ray not as popular as it could have been.

It's all very dependent on how many people buy a ps3 I guess.

 

[1991_Vn2nV]

At this stage, not many

 

[sircruisealotVS]

sircruisealotVS I'm not being stubborn. Blu ray was an immature technology when it hit the market. The spec is constantly evolving, making early adopters machines that they paid $1000 for, are now obsolete.

There are 1000's of machines that people paid alot of money for when BD first came out that can no longer be used because Sony pushed their product onto the market too early.

Now, storage is merely only one factor of the product, something that is not as important to the argument as you seem to think it is. Both products do exactly the same job with the same quality. The video and sound quality is indistinguishable between the two. Both formats have very similar feature sets now.

Cost of manufacture of a Blu ray disc is ten times more expensive than that of a HD DVD, the cost of reading components are much more for blu ray as well.

I'm looking at all the factors in my judgement, you're just looking at one.

Would you have been happy to be an early adopter of blu ray to be told that you can't use some special features now because Sony changed the spec?

The only thing that makes me stubborn is because I actually know my stuff in this area. The only reason the technology is superior in peoples eyes like you is because you're a sony fanboy.

I can write stuff in black and white as well buddy, how's this storage is not the only component in making a technology superior. Which by the way HD DVD were working on getting more, just like blu ray. Efficiencies and cost of manufacture, stability and scaleability of the spec, cost to consumers etc etc have everything to do with how "superior" a technology is, something that Sony wins in a bit, something the HD DVD wins in a bit too. The technology itself between the two in terms of quality of product the difference is negligible.

Here I'll even do a little list for each of the products for you.
Blu Ray Advantages
Size
Disc less prone to scratching

HD DVD
Can use conventional dvd pressing techniques
Laser technology is much much cheaper
Had a complete spec when released, no obsolete drives
No need for any extra hardware in manufacturing shops
More scaleable in the amount of layers it can fit on a disc.

All things considered, I think there are some big advantages and disadvantages of each technology, but I don't think either is better than the other. Is that too difficult for you to understand? If the technology was as inferior as you seem to make it out to be, do you really think it would have taken this long for studios to make up their mind? The only reason they made up their minds was because each side was paying them off.

your incredible...you blame me for being a "sony fan boy" with NO reasoning what so ever, its complete and utter crap! crap which you make up just to try sound like you know what your talking about and madmouth me for no reason. simply because i have a different view on things to you (the correct view) doesnt mean you can pull this ****, its a joke how stupid your making yourself sound trying to argue a point thats been clearly shot down.
the only reason i was turning to the capacity of the discs to show you how the blu ray is superior is because thats a HUGE DIFFERNCE between the two, otherwise they are quite the same....so its natural to submit the biggest difference in a discussion about the two formats.

but by your reasoning though, this major factor is irrelevant....real convenient when your trying to sway an argument...just disregard the facts as irrelevant and move on to concentrate on complete crap.

get over yourself mate....your ****ing into the wind on this one. its very obvious what the better format is and yes...by means of its specifications the blu ray is superior, end of story go make up some more crap to spread in reply to this (cos i know you will) but it will be falling on deaf ears because im not doing this anymore, its just a waste of time with you.

 

[ProphetVX]

your incredible...you blame me for being a "sony fan boy" with NO reasoning what so ever, its complete and utter crap! crap which you make up just to try sound like you know what your talking about and madmouth me for no reason. simply because i have a different view on things to you (the correct view) doesnt mean you can pull this ****, its a joke how stupid your making yourself sound trying to argue a point thats been clearly shot down.
the only reason i was turning to the capacity of the discs to show you how the blu ray is superior is because thats a HUGE DIFFERNCE between the two, otherwise they are quite the same....so its natural to submit the biggest difference in a discussion about the two formats.

but by your reasoning though, this major factor is irrelevant....real convenient when your trying to sway an argument...just disregard the facts as irrelevant and move on to concentrate on complete crap.

get over yourself mate....your ****ing into the wind on this one. its very obvious what the better format is and yes...by means of its specifications the blu ray is superior, end of story go make up some more crap to spread in reply to this (cos i know you will) but it will be falling on deaf ears because im not doing this anymore, its just a waste of time with you.

Both formats can carry a large amount of true HD video, which is it's purpose. I said there are many other factors that HD-DVD leads in, but they're automatically discredited because blu-ray is larger? What if Blu ray was 1TB and HD DVD was 1.1TB, which technology would be superior? Considering in almost all cases only about 30gb is used on a disc.... The size is irrelevant to the comparison, because both can more than do the task at hand, which believe it or not, is the case right now. It's like having a toaster that does 10 slices of bread, when you know you'll only ever do 2 at a time.

The quality of the video is not sacrificed on either... There are many different reasons I've gone over, but you are simply discrediting them as well, simply because you deem size to be a major factor, whereas I do not because both have sufficient space.

I label you a sony fanboy because of your rants in another thread, and it comes as no surprise to me that you are defending blu-ray to the hilt.

Let me put it this way, HD-DVD technology has all the functionality of blu-ray, stores more than enough for your standard release type dvd's, is cheaper to produce, the hardware is cheaper, which means the end consumer gets a cheaper product with the same end quality. I fail to see how this is "inferior" for any HD video purposes techonologically speaking.

It's inferior now because no studios are backing it any more, but from technology standpoint, both bluray and hd-dvd are on par, all weaknesses and strengths considered.

Go on get angry, and write another post without addressing any of the facts I've put in my posts.