http://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/ Engadget HD Comments for HomeTheaterBlog: Blu-ray vs. HD DVD Fact vs. Fiction http://hd.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://hd.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2009 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/http://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/Jun 29th 2006 11:02AMhttp://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/http://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/
Dual layer discs and newer codecs need to arrive sooner than later with the realease of the Sony and Pioneer BD players or HD DVD may become the next standard.

The only true x factor I see at this time is that of content.
]]>Jun 29th 2006 11:21AMhttp://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/http://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/
If Apple were to say that they're going to deliver a new 8GB iPod nano in a few weeks, we believe them. They might be a little late, sure, but we don't say "it's a myth that Apple has an 8GB nano". What we say instead is "Apple's 8GB nano is coming soon". But it seems to be fashionable to beat on Sony these days, so we make myths out of molehills.]]>Jun 29th 2006 11:43AMhttp://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/http://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/
http://www.hdbeat.com/2005/09/28/microsoft-explains-hd-dvd-over-blu-ray-choice/

http://www.hdbeat.com/2005/09/30/today-on-days-of-our-lives/

I was willing to take their statement on faith at the time since neither format was out, but here we are and no dual-layer discs. They should be out in a few months according to thier current release dates, but until they are theres at least a hint of suspicion about why something that was being produced 9 months ago isn't on shelves right now.]]>Jun 29th 2006 11:54AMhttp://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/http://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/
What has Blu-Ray done.

1. Delayed players. Sony until Oct, Pioneer until Sept.

2. Sony has delivered poor quality bitstarved movies.

3. Priced players beyond the early adopter impulse buy range of $500

To quote Sean Connery "I'm waiting to be impressed"

I think we'll eventually see BD-ROM 50GB discs in 2007. And the movies will improve but as a consumer I've got to be more than a little worried that Sony was so keen on again promising me the world and then underdelivering. This is their modus operandi though. I remember when the Playstation 2 was supposed to be a world beater and while it was good it wasn't great until a couple of years of letting developers catch up.

Why should I give Blu-Ray the same when HD DVD is here looking good and priced right. if the Playstation 3 is a capable BD player I'll pick it up. My main goal is great looking HD. ]]>Jun 29th 2006 12:13PMhttp://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/http://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/Jun 29th 2006 12:24PMhttp://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/http://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/
But I think my comparison to Apple IS fair. Why call 50GB BD a myth? It's not a myth at all. "Myth" implies something that doesn't exist. The dual-layer spec DOES exist, and it's been finalized. A dual-layer player exists today which is capable of reading dual-layer discs (according to Samsung - and why should we not believe them?). The discs just haven't been delivered yet.

When Toshiba delayed the HD DVD introduction from late last year to late spring of this year, did people call HD DVD a myth? No, that's simply absurd. Just because something that's planned for isn't available yet, that doesn't make it a myth.

45GB HD DVD and 100GB BD, on the other hand - THOSE are myths. We might see them some day for computer applications, but not for home movies. You can't splinter the market like that. Studios won't release 45GB HD DVD movies or 100GB BD movies, because they won't play in all players. So that's not going to happen. You can call THAT a myth if you want to, and I won't dispute you.]]>Jun 29th 2006 12:33PMhttp://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/http://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/
http://cdrsavings.stores.yahoo.net/tdkbd-re50-1.html
]]>Jun 29th 2006 12:52PMhttp://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/http://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/
whether or not you want to call that a myth is semantics, there are specs for hundreds of things that don't and never will come to fruition, and I'm not even putting blu-ray into that category however I would not question whether someone else does until a time comes that such discs are available.

I think your characterization of the reactions to HD DVDs delay is inaccurate because people had actually seen the hardware, whether or not it existed was not in question, we are talknig about a capability right now.

f we were talking about capabilities being added to the ipod you are purchasing now, it would be relevant, but your comparison does not include that.

what size discs the samsung blu-ray player will read is pretty useless until you can actually buy said discs, unless you gain enjoyment from reading spec lists in lieu of watching movies.]]>Jun 29th 2006 1:14PMhttp://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/http://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/
It is too early yet to have these discussions, but that doesn't mean it isn't fun. The guys at AVS forum will pick ANYTHING apart and that is why we love them. After a month we should know more, but everyone has to be disappointed with the initial quailty(not just PQ) from both camps. Although HD DVD doesn't seem to have as many PQ problems as Blu-ray. Lets also not forget that we have already had a firmware update from Toshiba. ]]>Jun 29th 2006 1:58PMhttp://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/http://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/
Even HD DVD at 30GB with VC1 will outperform Blu-Ray with its eventual 50Gb if they continue to use MPEG2.

I've heard that the yield on dual layer Blu-Ray discs is dismall, with the fact that they are also more expensive to produce in the first place, I can't say its looking good for Sony. I just wish someone other than Toshiba would come out with a HD DVD player, regardless of cost it would show the average consumer (who I'm still not convinced is gonna buy into either format) that it's not Toshiba vs the world. After all how are they to know all the backers of HD DVD.]]>Jun 29th 2006 2:31PMhttp://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/http://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/
1. 1080p-So this guy is okay smashing Blu-ray because the 50 GB discs are not being sold (yet... they will soon), but then defends HD DVD by saying... 1080p is coming later? You can't have it both ways, sir.

2. Lossless-I have no comment. This isn't really important, and this guy is pretty much right. But again with the "it's coming..." as a positive for HD DVD.

3. More capacity-He even said it, 50 GB is coming. But he paints it as a bad thing. In about about a month or two, Blu-ray will be dual layer. It'll have, (I'll even keep it on the low side) 1.5 times the bits than the current movies. 50% MORE! Imagine if your local HD channel went from 18 mbps to 27 mbps. Huge difference!

4. Image quality-This debate irks me. Let me break it down:

Low bit rate (HD DVD or SL BD): VC-1 > MPEG-4 > MPEG-2
High bit rate (DL BD): MPEG-2 > MPEG-4 > VC-1

Codec efficiency isn't linear. At some point, they slow down in their ability to compress. High efficiency codecs slow down earlier than low efficiency. For example, you wouldn't use AAC-Plus at 128k, as regular AAC wouldsound better. (Never heard of AAC-Plus? It's what XM and HD radio use to compress.) But when you need something at, say, 40k (many XM music channels for example) you would use AAC-Plus.

So, by my logic, it was a bad idea for Sony and Lion's Gate to use MPEG-2 on SL. And I admit, it was! But calling MPEG-2 "ancient" and outright "bad" is wrong. I can't wait for 50 GB BDs with MPEG-2.

My thoughts: Don't buy either yet. These things are going to change quickly, so once we see how DL BDs come out, you can make a decision.]]>Jun 29th 2006 4:45PMhttp://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/http://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/Jun 29th 2006 4:59PMhttp://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/http://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/
1.8 What video codecs will Blu-ray support?

MPEG-2 - enhanced for HD, also used for playback of DVDs and HDTV recordings.
MPEG-4 AVC - part of the MPEG-4 standard also known as H.264 (High Profile and Main Profile).
SMPTE VC-1 - standard based on Microsoft's Windows Media Video (WMV) technology.

Please note that this simply means that all Blu-ray players and recorders will have to support playback of these video codecs, it will still be up to the movie studios to decide which video codec(s) they use for their releases.

So, hummmm, it's not Blu-ray the format that decides which codec to use after all. EUREKA!!!

Also, there have been many, many, many press releases over the years concerning issues such as production costs, etc. The fact is that Blu-Ray discs are the same price as HD-DVD discs (at my Wal-Marts and Best Buys at least) and there have been articles posted using Amazon.com prices that show that Blu-Ray is on average CHEAPER than HD-DVD. GASP!!! How can this be so? The production costs are so much more expensive (supposedly)!

May 25, 2005 - Blu-ray Disc Ready for Cost Effective Manufacturing
Blu-ray Disc Association

The Blu-ray Disc Association (BDA) today announced that Blu-ray Disc manufacturing is ready to go. Broad acceptance and adoption of Blu-ray Disc has contributed to process improvements and cost efficiencies that bring the long-term cost of manufacturing BD-ROM discs in line with current DVD replication costs. "There are a lot of companies trying to stake out a position in various aspects of BD-ROM manufacturing," said Kazuhiro Tsuga, executive officer of Matsushita Electric. "As a result, we are seeing multitudes of improvements in processes and technology, as well as the effects of economies of scale that make replication extremely cost effective." With these developments in the industry, replication facilities in the United States are setting up and preparing to mass produce BD-ROMs. Technicolor is establishing a complete pilot BD disc manufacturing process by July 2005. Cinram which already has a pilot replication line is awaiting the delivery of commercial lines.

HD-DVD IS inferior when it comes to the specs, and believe it or not, you can't produce something that the specs don't support.

Also, this is for today. I understand that. And if I could afford to buy a new player for every day of the week I would. But I can't. I have to plan how I spend my $500 - $1200 in advance and hope it lasts a bit. I don't see this happening with HD-DVD.

And don't even start with that 1080p soapboxing reteric. We've heard it a million times. There are TV's that exist that ACCEPT a 1080p signal and doesn't have to depend on deinterlacing. If I'm going to spend $500 on a player for my 1080p TV, it better output in 1080p. Period.

The war is not over because of people defending an inferior format.

I witnessed HD-DVD firsthand at CEDIA 2005. It was great! I loved it! I was excited! And then I learned about BluRay.

So, go ahead and hold your breath for double-side or hybrid HD-DVD discs.

I'll go with the format that has the specs and support to stand the test of time.

Signed,
Someone who is very irritated with the ignorance of people who attack Blu-ray without researching it for themselves!]]>Jun 29th 2006 6:14PMhttp://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/http://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/
2. Both formats are a step up audio wise over DVD. No complaints here either.

3. ATSC maxes out at 19.x MBps so there will be no 20+ Mbps broadcast rates. The extra storage will be nice sor mini-series on disc though. I don't want to see 50GB discs filled with MPEG2. Both formats support Mandatory Managed Copy which means you have the ability to record a movie to your drive. With that in mind I'd rather have a movie take up 20GB of space rather than 40GB of space. Sony's love affair with MPEG2 isn't quality related it's financial. They get royalties on it. Why should I pay in more of my HDD space?



4. VC-1 and AVC were designed for maximum quality and minimum datarates. Both are clearsly superior to MPEG2 at sub 20Mbps rates.

5. ]]>Jun 29th 2006 6:22PMhttp://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/http://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/
A lot of talk but you still haven't explained why HD-DVD looks better today vs the "superior" Blu-Ray. Superiority is a subjective term. Blu-Ray is superior in ways that today don't translate to giving consumer a better picture. Any 1080p set worth its salt will have a good deinterlacer in it. Regardless of whether you are caught up on specs or not. ]]>Jun 29th 2006 6:31PMhttp://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/http://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/
"Than" has an a, not an e.]]>Jun 29th 2006 7:18PMhttp://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/http://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/Jun 29th 2006 9:48PMhttp://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/http://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/Jun 29th 2006 11:05PMhttp://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/http://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/
That doesn't matter, the only Blu-Ray discs available today are MPEG2 on 25Gb, Why bother to use MPEG2 for the initial titles if its not your codec of choice? Why bother with single layer if dual layer is so easy?

Sony overpromised and underdelivered, whilst Toshiba did the exact opposite - at half the price.]]>Jun 30th 2006 12:02AMhttp://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/http://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/Jun 30th 2006 12:10PMhttp://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/http://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/
http://www.dvdtown.com/article/toshibavs.samsung-hd-dvdvs.blu/3595/
http://reviews.cnet.com/Samsung_BD_P1000/4505-6463_7-31799185.html

this reviewers say once DL blueray releases come out things may change.]]>Jul 7th 2006 10:46AMhttp://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/http://hd.engadget.com/2006/06/29/hometheaterblog-blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-fact-vs-fiction/I know its tape, but it was the first HD format for recording and prerecorded DTHEATER movies and I am just wondering if it is superior in HD P.Q..
Thanks]]>Jul 7th 2006 4:29PM