Blu-ray vs HD-DVD: what's wrong with quantum leap?

[ukb008]

Hi, all.

This is something that's bugging me. While discussing this title issue, a lot of emphasis is put on backward compatibility. Has it always happened with technology change?

First we had the video tapes; required new hardware. Not backward compatible with audiotapes.
Then we had VCD; required new hardware, not backward compatible with the videotapes.
Then we had LaserDisc; required new hardware, not backward compatible with VCDs.
Then we had DVD; required new hardware; for the first time, backward compatible, with VCDs, but not with others coming before that.
Now HD-DVD: backward compatible with DVDs because they use the same disc-structure.

The question is: is backward compatibility issue a drag or a push for new technology?

[dragongodz]

First we had the video tapes; required new hardware. Not backward compatible with audiotapes.
sorry but that is a pointless comparison. these are completely different in what you experience, just sound versus sound and vision. the others make more sense. :)

The question is: is backward compatibility issue a drag or a push for new technology?
it can be a drag sure but you have to consider that its also a business concern. that is companies are not interested in breaking new technology barriers just for the sake of it. they are interested in making more money aswell. as such they need the new technology to stand a reasonable chance of gaining a resonable uptake to make a profit. backwards compatability is just a tool to help that.
for example dvd uptake was not overnight because people had bought a lot of films etc on video and could not afford, or was even available, to buy them all again as dvd. so as i said its a tool to help gain sales by making it more comfortable for people to upgrade to.

[mpucoder]

The order was a little wrong, too - laserdisk was way before vcd - even predates cd.

The real reason is the consumer. Is it better to make a quantum leap after only 10 years, or to continue to capitalize on the investment made so far? Will enough consumers buy into the new technology to justify it?

[fccHandler]

The leap from cassette/VHS/laserdisc to CD/VCD/DVD was huge! It was a switch from traditional analog recording to digital technology. I don't think anyone would expect a digital DVD player to support analog cassettes (or laserdiscs). They are just fundamentally different systems.

By comparison, I don't perceive the leap from DVD to HD-DVD to be nearly as impressive. It's just more of the same digital technology with higher resolutions and capacities.

Over the past 15+ years, I've accumulated a giant collection of CDs and DVDs, plus I'm getting old. For my money HD-DVD had better be backward compatible, otherwise I'll probably just stick with what I've got. ;)

[ukb008]

Amassing Discs for 15+ years? Man, you gotta tell us how you preserve them. Written (not pressed) CDs/DVDs should go bad in about 4 years' time. I have a sizable collection of home-made VCDs; now after 5 yearts I find that they have become surreptitiously unreadable...

Side-by-side, my DVD collection started around 2 years back. I don't know how long they will last. 4 years more? Even if they do last, they'll certainly become outdated by another technology.

Even for pressed discs, 15 years is eons, man, judging by the technology obsolescence time right now.

Regards.

[mpucoder]

I have 20 year old CDs in perfect condition. And while DVD hasn't been out that long, I've had no problems with any pressed disks. For that matter, no problems with recorded DVD+R/W (limited experience with DVD-R/W), only one batch of bad CD-R (generic from CompUSA), and one CD-RW by Princo (and I'll never use Princo anything again).
So I don't see why you are so pessimistic about their durability. You DO need to handle them properly, by the edges, with clean hands. Do not lay down on any surface, "clean" or otherwise. Keep away from children, peanut butter, and pizza. Do not use as a Frisbee. Etc.

And if your entire "collection" is on recordable media - what happened to all the originals?

[fccHandler]

I've never had a pressed CD or DVD go bad (that I'm aware of), and I've only had two burned CD-R's which went bad. I believe one of them was exposed to too much sunlight; the other I'm not sure about. Neither was older than two years. However, my oldest burned CD-R is from 1996 and it's still perfectly readable, as are all my other burned discs.

Besides proper handling, I'm pretty obsessive about the quality of my recordable media (and lots of other items I buy). I will only buy from a small selection of trusted brands. People often make fun of me for being too picky. But hey, it works for me. :D

[ukb008]

Hi, mpucoder.

My wife runs a small dance group of teens, and has frequent programs. All the shows (ranging from 20 minutes to around 90) used to be kept in CDs in mpeg-1 form because these are easy to distribute and play in common players.

Naturally these were for archival purposes, and for use as masters when copies were needed; they weren't used everyday. So you can imagine my surprise when many of them were found unreadable after a long time storage in a proper plasic case inside a cardbord one. Just unreadable...no scratches, no nothing. The discs weren't recognized in the drive, is all...Worst affected were the ones that were written on blanks and commercial circular adhesive labels were used on the other side.

Some were written under Win98 and when WinXP said the disc structure was corrupted, they could be re-backed up in Win98 machines. But many others were just unreadable in any OS.

The Film VCDs, presumably because they are manufactured in a different process ('pressing'), are, however, okay till now. I don't have too many of them, though. Certainly not as many as my film DVDs. (Alas, I don't watch them after starting with DVDs. I'll probably give them away soon to release space). By now I own around 400 film DVDs; the number was more a few weeks back - I have given away some 2 star films because of space constraints. Advent of 2-disc DVD cases has greatly helped space issues, because I can now store my mpeg-4 backup with the original DVD in the same box. My concern is with these backups. I do these backups in mpeg-4 form (XviD) in CDs, and don't use adhesive labels any more.

I have read that Blu-Ray and HD-DVD will have improved protective layers and better materials. I am keeping my fingers crossed, because till the time I am ready to make a transition from DVDs to the next generation of medium, my current originals and backups should hold.

There is another concern, too. My Braveheart is a sparkling print in DVD-9. When available in Blu-Ray in 50 GB size with (presumably) near-celluloid picture quality, what will I do to my DVD? My entire collection will become obsolete. Just like my film VCDs.

Regards.

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by mpucoder
I have 20 year old CDs in perfect condition. Me too!

I even have one of the very first PolyGram promotional CD's, which we used to invite customers to de-face using marker pens and scratch with their finger nails.... And it still plays fine!

Does anybody remember RCA launching their competitor to the LaserDisc?


Cheers

[guada 2]

What it is really the technology?

A "projection" for humanity or a financial transaction which makes circulate ideas.

Can one still speak about receipt of grandmother in this world of rough of which I form part?
Blu-ray and Hd-dvd have already their successor.
The "men of the shade" know what it is necessary (that which one needs). The procedure is their stick.


There remains only with benefitted from our humanity, for at least retaining the essence of our terrestrial passage.

"It was only one bracket among so many others".

NOTE:I respect the ideas of all one each one.
Sorry for my translation.

[ukb008]

Your translation is magnificent. You have written:

Blu-ray and Hd-dvd have already their successor.

What exactly do you have in mind?

Regards

[GIR]

Originally posted by SeeMoreDigital
Does anybody remember RCA launching their competitor to the LaserDisc?
I assume you speak of SelectaVision (http://www.cedmagic.com/home/cedfaq.html) :)
No I don’t remember it, I do however remember reading of an even older vinyl video format called "VISC" very bizzaro.

[guada 2]

Products which will unload in an immediate future:

- Disc HDV InPhase Trapesty (1.6 To).
- Miranda technology.
- The technology of the hologram

There is still but... I reserve myself the right to be vigilant.
One all is supervised...

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by GIR
I assume you speak of SelectaVision (http://www.cedmagic.com/home/cedfaq.html) :)
No I don’t remember it, I do however remember reading of an even older vinyl video format called "VISC" very bizzaro. Yep... that's the kiddie... Great fun!

[lexor]

what's wrong with quantum leap?

Well to answer that question literally, the problem is that quantum leap is actually a jump of a quant over an infenitesimal distance. Herein lies the problem, since the difference is so small people can't make an informed decision about which format to go with :D

p.s. who would've guessed that all that quantum theory they shove in my brain actually comes in usefull.

[ukb008]

The Little Oxford Dictionary defines:

Quantum Leap a. Sudden large increase or advance.

The difference may be so small people can't make an informed decision in the language of Quantum Physics, but in Queen's English, it is actually large.

Yes, it's amazing that the knowledge of the Quantum Theory finally comes in useful in the Doom9's Forum. Einstein would have been pleased. He was the one who had put the theory of relativity in the kitchen in the lap of his wife.

Regards.

[dragongodz]

getting back to the actual subject...

what you have to consider aswell is that going from vhs to dvd was more than just more of the same. it enabled not only better picture quality but also jumping to chapters(no more fast forwading all the time trying to find a spot), lots of extras such as multiple audio tracks - selectable subtitles - extra featurettes such as making of(again jump straight to and not as some vhs occasionally had such a featurette on the end). all these were marketable to help draw people to the new technology. even then, as i said, dvd took time to build and get to where it is now. it didnt happen over night.

looking at HD-DVD and Blu-Ray they are closer to being in the more of the same stable. that is yes you get more room and can have better picture quality but really there is not much else new. extras, subs, multiple audio etc as i said were all introduced with dvds so not marketable as something new. so they need something to say you dont lose out by upgrading. backwards compatability is such a tool. you dont lose being able to play all your old dvds and having to buy them all again JUST for a better picture.

companies are not interested in how ground breaking a technology is if they can not make a profit. no company wants to run at a loss, especially not such large companies as the ones we are talking about.

[markrb]

IMHO the argument for backward compatability in this case is no argument at all.
It is very simple with either technology to include the ability to play current DVD's even if this requires the use of a second laser.

This has already been done with combo players from Pioneer that played CD's, DVD's and laserdiscs in one unit all using the same transport.

This is the same thing as it's always been since before the VHS/Beta wars. It's all about who owns the patents, who makes the money and in the end who can convince the consumer their way is the right way to go.
However as they(big companies) have seen consumers are getting smarter and demanding it all such as the -R +R and now also RAM writters in one.
This I am sure has cost them individually in fees and such. So recent events that have the two groups considering working together on a single standard makes sense and might actually work.

Mark

[Doobie]

Originally posted by ukb008 The question is: is backward compatibility issue a drag or a push for new technology? [/B]

As I see it, there has only been DVDs and VCRs for video. The two are such different technologies that backward compatibily wasn't an option. Laser disks and VCDs have never been mainstream in America, or were they backwards compatable with anything before them. DVDs are backwards compatible with VCDs, but I think that's irrelevant to DVDs succes in America.

Look at computers, Mac vs. PC. Macs have repeatedly forgone backward compatibility while PCs have preserved it. The result is that Macs are a more efficient and elegant design, but PCs give more bank for the buck because backwards compatibility gives them the market size to trump efficiency with brute force.

Look at game systems. What's going to happen with the backward compatabile PS3 vs. the not-backward compatable Xbox360? PS3 is going to win.

[dragongodz]

IMHO the argument for backward compatability in this case is no argument at all.
huh ? ukb008 asked why backwards compatability is being done/used, for what reason ,and if its a drag on technology. i and others have given the reasons why companies use it.

who makes the money and in the end who can convince the consumer their way is the right way to go.
exactly and as already said backwards compatability is a tool used to convince customers they can easily and safley upgrade their tech without having to start from scratch. that way they get more people buying the new tech and make more money.

DVDs and VCRs for video. The two are such different technologies that backward compatibily wasn't an option.
yes but they had the new features that dvd provided to use as an incentive for people to buy dvd rather than more of the same.

[markrb]

dragongodz I think you are missing my point here. I am simply saying that this should not be a sticking point on what is next in this case.

It would cost almost nothing to allow current DVD's to play if either format wins.

Mark

[dragongodz]

dragongodz I think you are missing my point here. I am simply saying that this should not be a sticking point on what is next in this case.
i get what you mean and agree in this case. however sometimes its not so easy, such as vhs to dvd, because the technology is so different. yes you can buy dual players that have both a dvd player and vhs player in one unit but they are not exactly cost effective having to practically have 2 units in one. while for dvd to HD-DVD they both use a red laser so no duplication of hardware should be needed and with Blu-Ray using a blue laser only a secondary red laser should be needed. pretty cost effective.

however as you said before about they need to convince consumers to take up new technology. several marketing factors can play in to this. i think 2 of the most important being what extra does the consumer get out of the new tech and how much is it. if there is a radical jump in what consumers get, as vhs to dvd was(i listed these things before), then thats something marketing can latch on to and exploit. backwards compatability becomes a secondary and not essential thing, though of course it would not hurt hence the 2 in 1 units.
if however all the consumer is getting extra is a better picture, for example, it becomes a much harder sell. in that case having backwards compatability adds value to the product and helps sell it.

[mpucoder]

I think you are both right, in different circumstances. New devices have to either be so dramatically different that everyone wants one, like DVD was to VHS, or CD to records. Or it has to provide backward compatibility to build on the established consumer base. And in the case of HD, I don't see it as being a quantum leap, but an incremental improvement.

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by mpucoder
I think you are both right, in different circumstances. New devices have to either be so dramatically different that everyone wants one, like DVD was to VHS, or CD to records. Or it has to provide backward compatibility to build on the established consumer base. And in the case of HD, I don't see it as being a quantum leap, but an incremental improvement. Agreed!

And it's not like you need new "mega GB" media such as Blu-Ray or HD-DVD to store high-def video images on a disc anyway!

Regular DVD media is more than adequate for high efficient codecs such as Mpeg4 and WMV. Both of which have already been approved for the new high-def media disc's!


Cheers

[dragongodz]

New devices have to either be so dramatically different that everyone wants one, like DVD was to VHS, or CD to records. Or it has to provide backward compatibility to build on the established consumer base. And in the case of HD, I don't see it as being a quantum leap, but an incremental improvement.
actually thats what i said...only in a slightly more long winded way. :D

[fccHandler]

@mpucoder

:goodpost:

[markrb]

dragongodz yes I am agreeing with you, but wording got in the way.

Backward compatability eases the pain of adoption and to some degree the cost if you can use already exhisting pieces and add just what you need.

Mark

[cyberVera]

The question is: is backward compatibility issue a drag or a push for new technology?

a drag

All new technologies are brave and are being invented by "digitally smart" people. Unfortunately, 99.99% of people are not able to catch up with them. It is a modern phenomena called "Digital Inequality". To make the majority to buy anything new, you have to simplify it and to make the pace less "scary".

[ukb008]

1. Everyone agrees: Tapes -> Discs was a Quantum Leap.
2. Is DVD -> Blu-Ray another quantum leap?

I say yes, to a large extent (but not if you are too strict):

1. New laser wavelength that had to be developed after prolonged research
2. Fundamentally different technology and that's why no inherent backward compatibility. (different disc-structure)
3. Radically augmented data holding capability [9 GB -> 200 GB] @ 25 GB per layer.

But if you consider similarities between DVD and Blu-Ray, then it may not seem like a quantum leap:

1. Circular objects: same size
2. Plays in a similar manner
3. Does not look and feel different to the consumer, most of whom are unable to differentiate between VCD and DVD as far as picture quality is concerned.

etc.

To be a quantum leap, the technology

1. must be new, heitherto unused commercially
2. must use new equipment
3. must must look and feel different.

VHS -> DVD satisfy all these criteria.

To be a real quantum leap, we must have a medium like the memory-sticks:

1. Different technology that the ones used in DVDs
2. Looks and feels different.
3. Uses different ports and has different portability.
4. Doesn't need a dedicated hardware drive/player at all
5. No moving parts: no wear and tear.
6. Differently priced: either cheaper or more expensive than DVDs

Whaddya say, PROs?

Regards.

[spuddog]

As SeeMoreDigital pointed out the present dvd technology is adequete to provide high quality video. I believe that all of the hoopla about higher quality is meerly a smoke screen to drm and/or encrypt more robustly the new format, something the media companys screwed up on dvds.

[dragongodz]

2. Fundamentally different technology and that's why no inherent backward compatibility. (different disc-structure)
buts its not fundamentaly different. yes its an advance but it still works on the same basic principles as dvds do. burn pits to layers by laser. :)

3. Radically augmented data holding capability [9 GB -> 200 GB] @ 25 GB per layer.
an increase in size again means nothing. HD-DVD is also larger because they changed things like the dot pitch etc. that doesnt make it radically new tech.

3. Does not look and feel different to the consumer, most of whom are unable to differentiate between VCD and DVD as far as picture quality is concerned.
i'll ignore the insult to the average consumer because i am sure there are some thats true for, saying most may be an overstatement though.
its not about does the disc look and feel different but what extra or new does it give the consumer, whats new for them to experience. just having a larger capacity so you can have a better picture or add more of the current extras doesnt cut it. thats just more of the same and as such will not persuade consumers to buy it.
I believe that all of the hoopla about higher quality is meerly a smoke screen to drm and/or encrypt more robustly the new format, something the media companys screwed up on dvds.
yes thats no doubt another thing the companies really want but thats also a different subject than whats being discussed here.

[sterlina]

Originally posted by ukb008
1. Everyone agrees: Tapes -> Discs was a Quantum Leap.
2. Is DVD -> Blu-Ray another quantum leap?

I say yes, to a large extent (but not if you are too strict):

1. New laser wavelength that had to be developed after prolonged research
2. Fundamentally different technology and that's why no inherent backward compatibility. (different disc-structure)
3. Radically augmented data holding capability [9 GB -> 200 GB] @ 25 GB per layer.
I remember one of my first PC had an hard-disk of 16 MB. Today there are HD of more of 200Gb, more plates and new head system, even new interface (serial ata) that cut-off backward compatibility.
So it respects all of 3 points, but would you say it is a "quantum leap"? I think is rather an advance due to a more know-how of a tecnology, and so for DVD -> blue-ray

[SeeMoreDigital]

I think this is one of those threads that might have benifited from having a poll as well...

Anyway, I say: -

No......to Blu-Ray
No......to HD-DVD
Yes... to current DVD using higher compression codecs such as, Mpeg4SP/ASP and AVC


Cheers

[Inventive Software]

I personally don't see what all the fuss is about.

I mean, can anybody honestly say they can tell the difference between HD content and DVD content?

If you can, you must have trained eyes! ;)

BTW, in Great Britain the distinct lack of HD content is not hurting us in any way whatsoever. I know that the BBC is developing a codec (Dirac) that will be able to deliver HD content, and I think they plan to use it to broadcast the HD content to TV screens across Britain.

However about the backwards compatibility issue... it depends in what context you put it. Nintendo tried it successfully with the GameBoy Color and the GameBoy Advance. They made the GBA successfully play GBC and GB games, and it worked for them. However, with the DS they went for a new data format. About time, because cartridges can be somewhat limited.

The main selling point of the PS2 was it's ability to play all the PS1 games. It meant that they could stop buying the PS1 in favour of the more versatile PS2.

The PS3 is gonna play PS1 and PS2 games, which will certainly be worth it. The PS3 games will also come on Blu-Ray discs, so expect richer graphics, larger and longer games, higher quality music etc.

Both Microsoft and Sony have said that their next-gen consoles will support HD content, whether this be on HD-DVD (Microsoft) or Blu-Ray (Sony).

I personally don't think it's a quantum leap in technology. Unless companies can convince us that HD content is significantly better than DVD content, it's a waste of money unless you are a videophile or you need the higher quality for the archival purposes for example.

The need for backwards compatibility is only needed if you have a very significant advance in the technology needed.

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by Inventive Software
I personally don't see what all the fuss is about.

I mean, can anybody honestly say they can tell the difference between HD content and DVD content? Errr, once - twice and thrice yes!

But only when the images are viewed via a suitable HD capable display device ;)


Cheers

[cyberVera]

One of the most interesting threads I've seen in this forum!

@ dragongodz

i'll ignore the insult to the average consumer because i am sure there are some thats true for, saying most may be an overstatement though

But you didn't :-) and it wasn't an insult at all: it was just a slight irritation. How a man being incapable to hear sounds with frequencies over 18KHz be insulted with the statement about such incapability? Word "average" does not suit well in environment of "some" and "most" words, does it? By saying "average" you confirmed your own attitude :-)
For some? Well, be sure it is true for 97-98% of the people. I already wrote about "Digital Divide" in my previous post, and there is a whole scientific project about that (digitaldividenetwork.org). On one hand, it is due to the fact that most people can not afford to buy new technologies every month, and on another hand due to ther mental incapability to accept new technologies. There will be always rich and poor, smart and ordinary, digitally capable and digitally incapable. And the proportion is far from being "average". It is a and according to scientists from California University it will even increase in the nearest time: "When technologies are being implemented very rapidly, they are aimed to that sector of population which will be the first to spend money on it". According to statistics, this golden % are white men, not poor, and well-educated. Look at this forum - all members are very advanced and smart (maybe except me :-) and they do such things with video and compression which most people are not able to do. There almost no women here. They are not satisfied with the "average" way to go and buy a DVD for 30$ just to watch it. And what the "average" consumer is doing right now? Running wildly around the shops to buy something and to be more attractive to another "average" consumer in order to spend a good evening :-)

Does not look and feel different to the consumer, most of whom are unable to differentiate between VCD and DVD as far as picture quality is concerned.

Absolutely true. Why the "average" consumer is such indifferent?
1. He is physically incapable.
2. Or, even worse, he just "can't be bothered".
3. Or, probably, his home equipment does not allow it. His money allows, but equpment does not. Summary - see item 2 :-)
So, how are you going to evaluate a DVD on a 17" pc display (or 21" tv, does not matter) and "home theatre" with tiny 2" speakers?
Besides, the "average" consumer is not that sick as we are to examine microblocks, to test a new codec, or to discuss a new software player resizing in a forum. He just watches a movie :-)

@ ukb008

To be a real quantum leap, we must have a medium like the memory-sticks

Perfect summary. It will happen, but later. Piracy DVD copies and self-made DVDs have already exploded the market, millions of DVD players and pc writers are sold, and you just can not stop it all and tell "No, you need a memory-stick player. Go and buy it." Besides, engineering can not produce now large capacity (at least above 5Gb) and low cost (below 5$) flash media to compete with laser discs. But it will happen :-)

[dragongodz]

But you didn't :-)
actually i did. i didnt go in to why this may not be the persons fault because of hardware etc etc etc. and no i am not going to waste half a apage pulling your post apart either, i have better things to do. :D

To be a real quantum leap, we must have a medium like the memory-sticks

Perfect summary. It will happen, but later.
actually its started now. you can put mpeg4 movies on memory sticks for the PSP. of course you need a reasonably good sized stick if you want good quality but the point is memory sticks as medium for movies is already here. larger sticks still would just be an extension or advance and not a leap. ;)

[bond]

might be slightly offtopic but here is my point of view on the Blu-ray vs HD-DVD format war:

imho the best situation for the consumer would be if there are two competing formats, thats because:

- we would get a far bigger competition than if there only is one monopoly format, which rules pretty much the HD market alone, setting the prices as it wishes (getting more money out of the consumer)
- this competition would force the producers to get down with their prices (more quickly) to win the "war" for the consumers approval (which has to be fought over the prices if the content (movies) is available in both formats)


this relies on the assumptions that
- the movie studios will release their movies in both formats (which i assume would happen, as the studios' main goal is surely to sell as much discs as possible (high movie production costs vs. low disc selling costs))
- the two formats will not collude and agree on a fixed pricing sheme for both formats (which i assume will not happen, at least in the beginning, as in that period each format will hope that it can win over the other and remove it from the market totally)


in total lame speak:
the more the two camps battle to win us, the better for us :D

[cyberVera]

@dragongodz

OK, I'm sorry for the average consumer. Forget about him, he will survive :-)

actually its started now. you can put mpeg4 movies on memory sticks for the PSP. of course you need a reasonably good sized stick if you want good quality but the point is memory sticks as medium for movies is already here

We speak about consumer media, not about media to temporary store pc files.

@bond

I'm afraid Sony will lose this battle. This company has very progressive ideas, but ...
ATRAC was superior to MP3, but copyright mechanism killed it. DVD Audio was nothing but a CD with extra capacity, and SACD was the only way to get rid the quantisation noise in audio. Now Blu-Ray ... Excellent name, but too complicated for average consumer. HD-DVD is still a DVD. The same happened when Intel wanted to call Prescott core a Pentium 5.

[ukb008]

Sorry for diverting a little: I'm interested in what you've written: the same happened when Intel wanted to call Prescott core a Pentium 5. Will you please give me a link?

Regards.

[dragongodz]

We speak about consumer media, not about media to temporary store pc files.
i think you have missed my point. that is that the technology to put movies on to memory stick media is already here so if they were to come out with movies sold on memory sticks in the future it would not then be a quantum leap at all. infact they could do it now but things such as cost and probably having to develop DRM solutions(probably involving proprietry format etc) are the likly reasons it isnt.

imho the best situation for the consumer would be if there are two competing formats
bond - i am not sure all those that bought Betamax would agree. ;) :D

[Dali Lama]

You guys said that Blue-ray/HD-DVD is not a quantum leap?

I say don't analyze the tech specs to determine if its a quantum leap or not. Look at what you can do with that technology. If I can put a large amount of high resolution video on them easily, then its a quantum leap for me. Of course, that means I think HD itself is a quantum leap (don't you?). HD doesn't just bring higher resolution (which is critical), but progressive viewing, higher framerates, and better image quality from new sensors that studios have to buy ;) (check out cinealta).

Analogy: When Canon brought out the CMOS sensor, people laughed, because that's the same technology that camera-phones use. They didn't realize/predict that this technology could be cleverly modified to produce some of the cleanest, highest resolution sensors at cost-effective prices. So in my book, that's a quantum leap in image sensors, even though the technology might be bland.

bye,

Dali

[Soulhunter]

Originally posted by SeeMoreDigital

I think this is one of those threads that might have benifited from having a poll as well...

Anyway, I say: -

No......to Blu-Ray
No......to HD-DVD
Yes... to current DVD using higher compression codecs such as, Mpeg4SP/ASP and AVC

Yes to HD-DVD using Mpeg4 ASP/AVC... :D :p ;)

Imagine, all parts of LOTR in 1080p on one disc !!!


Bye

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by Soulhunter
Yes to HD-DVD using Mpeg4 ASP/AVC... :D :p ;)

Imagine, all parts of LOTR in 1080p on one disc !!! Errr no!

Personally speaking, with movies this long, I would far rather view one movie per disc. Plus I very much doubt the producers, directors, distributors etc would ever opt to package such "mega features" onto one disc, when they can make more money from selling three disc's ;)


Cheers

[bond]

Originally posted by cyberVera
I'm afraid Sony will lose this battle. This company has very progressive ideas, but ...
ATRAC was superior to MP3, but copyright mechanism killed it. two things:
1) atrac3 is in no way superior to mp3! in fact its clearly worse... may i remind you of rjamorims excellent listening test which compared atrac3 with lamemp3 at ~128kbps:
http://www.rjamorim.com/test/multiformat128/plot18z.png
from my point of view the reason why companies develop and use their own format is not because they are so progressive or whatnot, but because it gives them the possibility to exclude competition (also wma9 is clearly worse than mp3 as you can see on the pic too, so superior quality is surely not the reason for the development of these formats)
2) atrac has never been discussed in the context of hd-dvd or blu-ray

[Soulhunter]

Originally posted by SeeMoreDigital

Errr no!

Personally speaking, with movies this long, I would far rather view one movie per disc. Plus I very much doubt the producers, directors, distributors etc would ever opt to package such "mega features" onto one disc, when they can make more money from selling three disc's ;)

Or they could do it like this... ;D

- LOTR I+II+III (1 HD-DVD) for 29,99

- LOTR I+II+III box (3 DVDs) for 23,99


Bye

[reepa]

"No......to Blu-Ray
No......to HD-DVD
Yes... to current DVD using higher compression codecs such as, Mpeg4SP/ASP and AVC"

I don't understand why you would want deliberately heavily compressed video when larger capacity discs were available. You don't want to buy new hardware? How many DVD players today can play back MPEG4 1080p from a DVD disc anyway?

[ukb008]

Quote:

I don't understand why you would want deliberately heavily compressed video when larger capacity discs were available.

There's an original idea you've got here. Truly, since compressions we're using are lossy, why don't we put uncompressed videos on discs? That will be well within our reach shortly.

Regards.

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally posted by reepa
I don't understand why you would want deliberately heavily compressed video when larger capacity discs were available. You don't want to buy new hardware? How many DVD players today can play back MPEG4 1080p from a DVD disc anyway? I doubt anybody here would be able to tell the difference between professionally encoded high-def Mpeg2 video and an high-def Mpeg4 video.

I think you may be forgetting that both would have started their life from an high-def un-compressed digital master (not from an Mpeg2 source), so the differences in the final encode would most probably be undetectable!

You only have to look at some of the currently available high-def Mpeg4/SP/ASP and AVC encodes (not to mention HD-WMV) to see how good such images could look...

As for 1080p... I'm not even sure Blu-Ray or HD-DVD will offer this right away. And if does, does anybody know the frame rate will be adopted?


Cheers

[Soulhunter]

Originally posted by SeeMoreDigital

You only have to look at some of the currently available high-def Mpeg4/SP/ASP and AVC encodes (not to mention HD-WMV) to see how good such images could look...

My observation...

- DivX HD trailers = Compression artifacts

- WMV HD trailers = Smooth / Low texture detail

And I dont even have one of this ultra-bright TFT monitors !!!


Originally posted by SeeMoreDigital

As for 1080p... I'm not even sure Blu-Ray or HD-DVD will offer this right away. And if does, does anybody know the frame rate will be adopted?

Well, 24fps would be enough... ;)

All progressive 1920x1080 sources are 24fps (film) anyway, no ???


Bye