Slashdot Mirror
Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD Not Over Yet
samkass writes "Here is a good summary of the latest technical wheeling-and-dealing between HD-DVD and Blu-Ray. Among things that were new to me: the addition of a "red" 9GB HD format to Blu-Ray that would make initial Blu-Ray content (that fits) even cheaper than HD-DVD. Also, more discussion about managed copy (AACS, BD Plus, and ROM Mark) and iHD (HD-DVD) vs BD-J/Java (Blu-Ray)."
Isn't Blu-Ray Sony's technology? Does it come with a free rootkit?
Sounds like a good text-based game..
"You won't eat our meat, but you'll glue with our feet.." --Some cow
I'll be damned it I buy with my own money a device that decides where, how and in what way I watch the media I buy with my other money. Get me a DRM-Free device and I'll rush to buy it.
What would porn choose?
I don't get it.
From TFA: Some analysts who have been following the saga have already predicted a winner. Ted Schadler, vice president at Forrester Research, released a report that proclaimed, "Blu-ray Will Win a Pyrrhic Victory Over HD-DVD." Schadler says he's long believed that Blu-ray held the edge due to its superior capacity and the fact that Sony's PlayStation 3 will play Blu-ray movie discs. Oh really, and MS support via the 360 for HD-DVD won't have a cancelling effect on this? Oh and Warner will release content on both formats? Well, there's a surprise! Did anyone expect them to pick a side and alienate a potential market? Hmm, slightly cynical today methinks!!
"The resulting disc will be encoded with a high-definition video codec, and though it will be a red-laser disc (not a blue-laser disc as used by the other formats within the Blu-ray Disc specifications), it will only play back in Blu-ray Disc players and recorders. Even though vendors will be able to manufacture the disc on existing DVD production lines, it is clearly not the same as an HD-DVD. (One of HD-DVD's strengths is its purported ability to be produced at a low cost on existing, albeit modified, DVD production lines)."
If it's existing DVD production, is it readable by *existing* DVD players like those in a computer. In other words can I get a codec and play it in a PC, (even if I need to update the DVD firmware to do it)?
Sure the codec means it won't immediately be playable on the DivX/MPEG4/DVD boxes, but can it play on a PC?
If they can do that, that would be a HD-DVD killer.
Every article about HD-DVD vs Blu-Ray makes arguments about content.. This one even quotes:
"Assuming equal pricing and availability of hardware"
The thing is, I don't forsee it being equal availability of hardware.. I don't know how many PS2s have been sold, or were sold within three months of release, but I'm sure it was a lot larger number than the number of early adoptors that would run out and buy a brand new HD-DVD player.
I guess my point is, if there are for sure going to be millions of Blu-ray players in houses all over the US, and there's no such assurance about HD-DVD players, I can't see places stocking shelves full of HD-DVDs.
The contest is over. Precisely because it won't *really* matter. While all these corporations squabble endlessly over proprietary formats, hardware specs, marketing schemes, and temporary alliances, the fact is that the true future of digital content distribution WILL be online. So all this cacophony is for a temporary technology. A few people will buy some discs and fewer hardware players during a very short period. Then, it will be looked back upon as having been over before it began.
And once that pan flashes, a few people in management are going to be revealed as dumbasses for misjudging technology.
Anything that supports Sony's Blu-Ray will not be supported by me personally, or grudgingly from my company. When you can't trust your supplier's scruples, you can't sell their products to the end user.
So, personally, anything using Blu-Ray will not be purchased by me.
Company wise, Blu-Ray will only be used at the express request from the customer.
I don't care! I don't care if BluRay is technologically superior to HD-DVD. I don't care if I can fit a whole extra GB on one type of disk, or if the other uses a slightly higher laser frequency, or if one can be be-rewritten 2billion times instead of "only" 1.7billion. Don't give a shit, thanks anyway!
Just agree on a fucking format and stick with it. I won't be buying anything; either BluRay or HD-DVD, until one format is clearly ahead. That means you; every single one of you petty little bastards, will lose out. Just like you all lost on on DVD writer format wars. Do I care what the difference is between DVD-R & DVD+R? Have I ever even seen a DVD-RAM disc? Fuck no, I just want to write a DVD that can be read in other drives. How much R&D did you all waste? How much additonal design is required to acomodate all these different standards? How many sales oppurtunities have been wasted because you've confused the market?
Same thing here. Now get on with it.
At 9GB the short answer is no. Most likly the laser spacings will be tighter, this adjustment can be done easily on the production lines, but much more difficult to do on the average player.
Given Sony's track record, I wonder if we'll find, for example, LAME binaries in the firmware of their Blu-Ray drives.
One irony, though, is that the DMCA would prevent software authors from accessing the firmware to make the determination as to whether their own copyrights were being violated.
All this has happened before and will happen again.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VHS#VHS_vs._Betamax
..And the people bowed and prayed, To the neon gods they made.
You can't polish a turd, no matter how big and blue it is.
it's the porn industry that will decide anyway. not m$ or *cough* sony.
#
#\ @ ? Colonize Mars
#
Isn't it just a 2 layer DVD (or even a double side single layer DVD!)?
They say it can be made in standard plants, so it must be damn similar to a standard format presumably?
Oh really, and MS support via the 360 for HD-DVD won't have a cancelling effect on this?
This keeps getting stated on here, and it is entirely untrue. People are confused because Microsoft tepidly put their backing behind HD-DVD, yet the Xbox360 actually uses neither - it is standard old school 9GB DVD.
"The number of people that enjoy watching DVDs on their computer is only slightly larger than the number of people with HTPCs"
If its basically a DVD compatible thing that PCs can play with a codec/firmware tweak, then it is only a matter of time before the dirt cheap $50 DIVX/MPEG4/DVD players add support as a firmware change.
That market is huge, just look in an electrical store and they stack those buggers on pallets for volume sale.
That's what I'm thinking there, that this disk could become the volume market item, playing on computers and slightly more modern DVD(+mpeg4+divx) players together with PCs, and if you then go out and buy a HD TV, you get the high definition version too without upgrading your DVD's which would be another plus.
More like Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD Hasn't Started Yet. I have yet to see a single Blu-Ray or HD-DVD player for sale. How can a format war be over before it starts?
The same thing will probably happen as it did with DVD-r and DVR+R, both format will stay around long enough that the hardware will start supporting both disc, and be backwards compatible. Unlike VHS and Betamax, the physical media is the same size. Someone will invent the laser that can do both such as cd-r and DVD-R. Like now no one cares if it's DVD-R and DVD+R
Freedom of Speech only include discussion that are approved by the RIAA, MPAA and DMCA.
If Sony's new tech patent that allows discs to "lock in" to the first device they play on makes it into Bluray, you can bet your ass I'll be buying HD-DVD. While one could argue "but PS3 is going to be bluray!" I'll argue back that PS3 isn't looking all that hot these days. Personally, I'll be buying the format whose copy-protection is most flawed. I intend to keep my movies for longer than 5 years, and I don't think the solution to bit-rot is to buy the damn discs again in 10 years.
------- "From bored to fanboy in 3.8 asian girls" ----------
Not that I like Sony or anything. Basically, I despise them. But, quite frankly, I despise MS a lot more. At least Sony has to actually compete, whereas MS just throws its 800 lbs around to get its way. Every single new product they put out, they burn billions of dollars in an attempt to corner the market. Year after year, they just burn cash by the billions, not even looking ahead to profitability, just intent on cornering the entire market. Office and Windows just subsidise everything.
I'd love to say that I'll never support either company again. But I'll be honest, I'm a fucking media-whore. I love video games and movies and music.
Interestingly, ok, and offtopic :), in the case of music, if I can't copy it somehow, it's entirely worthless to me. So, they can only go so far before I *do* stop supporting them. I'm not going to buy something I can't even *use*.
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
Am I the only person who absolutely does not care about high def DVDs? Regular DVDs have more than enough quality for me. It's not like I am going to marry and spend the rest of my life with the disc. I just want to watch a movie every know and then. I have ZERO desire or incentive to buy movies on this new medium. I don't need them for storage either. Maybe I am just dumb but I don't understand it.
The main reasons I switched from VHS to DVD were:
1) The ability to jump chapters
2) Never have to rewind
3) Easier to store
Better picture quality just came "free" with all the benefits, IMHO.
I for one welcome our new DRMed smurf colored overlords :)
You take the blue laser and the story ends. You wake in your bed and you believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red laser and you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the data pits go.
The bottom line is which format holds more data, is cheaper and is consumer-friendly, IMHO.
From http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/#1.5 and http://www.hddvdprg.com/hddvd/hddvd_3.html
---How much data can you fit on a Blu-ray disc?
A single-layer disc can fit 23.3GB, 25GB or 27GB.
A dual-layer disc can fit 46.6GB, 50GB or 54GB.
HD-DVD can hold 15, 30, 32GB
---How much video can you record on a Blu-ray disc?
Over 2 hours of high-definition television (HDTV) on a 25GB disc. About 13 hours of standard-definition television (SDTV) on a 25GB disc.
HD-DVD can hold 4hrs HDTV on 15GB disc, 8hrs HDTV on 30GB disc
---How fast can you read/write data on a Blu-ray disc?
According to the Blu-ray Disc specification, 1x speed is defined as 36Mbps.
HD-DVD speed is 36.55Mbps
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
The next generation of home movie watching is not going to be disc based. It will be streamed through the internet or by your tv provider. The advantages are clear (if you want me to list more I will, just let me know), and the Content Makers prefer this method. For the end-user, its easier, faster, and they don't have to worry about movies getting scratched, lost, stolen, whatever.
These new discs only "use" at the end of the day will be for computer storage, but flash drives are about to hit 100gig, so even for that use the new generation discs will be irrelevant.
Just remember you heard it here first. These discs won't gain the type of saturation that DVD and VHS have had. These both will have market share more like beta. The true winners will be companies like Verizon and SBC who are brining fiber to everyone's door. Comcast also has a pretty sweet strategy for delivering content on demand.
The only reason that I can see for upgrading (not that we will have the choice) would be if either standard better consumer value:
No more £60 box-sets (you'd never pay that for one disc - I reckon publishers will use the excuse of high definition etc to continue using multiple discs to cover TV series)
Use some of the spare capacity on the discs to back-up the data in other areas (hopefully making them more durable / resistant to scratches - no more skipping discs!)
I'm not against Blu-Ray or HD-DVD per se, as far as I'm concerned technology progression is a great thing, I just can't help thinking that either format will fail to benefit consumers as fully as it might. Also, will either standard be available (soon) in an R/W format?
For me what matters is disk capacity. The more the better.
While this is usually the main desire for most people, I'd personally be just as interested in a slightly more durable material. I try to take good care of my DVDs, but invariably one will get a nick or a scratch on it, and then it's a hit-or-miss game of trying to repair it.
If you could store 100TB on a disc, only to have one scratch render half of it unreadable... that would suck.
And physical medias as distribution method are on their way out. As such, the whole 'war' pretty much becomes irrelevant; whoever will be able to offer the best price/GB and the lowest drive price will win.
Sounds like something 3D is afoot.
While all these corporations squabble endlessly over proprietary formats, hardware specs, marketing schemes, and temporary alliances, the fact is that the true future of digital content distribution WILL be online.
Not likely. Perhaps when FIOS becomes commonplace and available to every person on the face of the planet, but there is no chance that the mainstream user will accept on-line access as the only way to gain video in the near future.
A two-hour movie in really good, MPEG-2 quality takes up approximately 7-8 GB, depending on audio options. Even with a 6 Gb cable connection, that takes roughly three hours to download. (For those who hadn't noticed, that means that it would take longer to download than to watch, so streaming at full quality is not an option.)
Now, bring in HD. About 75 minutes of HD-quality material takes roughly the same amount of space. Expand that to a 2-hour movie and you're looking at anywhere between 12-14 GB of data. That same 6 Gb cable connection would take about six hours to download that movie. In the same amount of time, I could have run to the nearest BR/HD-DVD rental store, watched the movie -- possibly twice -- and returned it. This of course assumes that your "unlimited use" ISP doesn't then knock your ass down for using up "too much" of your "unlimited use" bandwidth after downloading three or four HD movies. And don't even THINK about doing streaming HD unless you've got some enormous network pipe to your house!
Even discounting the fact that every house will NOT be connected via FIOS (or even broadband) in the coming years, thus requiring a physical medium in order to watch the video content, people want a physical medium without restrictive DRM. That has been proven time and time again. The recent Sony debacle should be proof enough of that. People are obviously buying physical discs even though the music is available on-line.
Video games are also sold on-line by a lot of different vendors for a discounted price, yet boxed media are still preferred. Why? Because there is a comfort factor in having the disc in your hands, not worrying about if your computer is connected to the Internet in order to install and play it. There's also no concern about downloading it again or having to authenticate it again (for the most part), and so on.
Ah, so then comes the argument about backing the movies or games off to another medium in the event of a recovery or for backup purposes. Oh, wait. We can't use that argument because there is no need for physical media if everything is distributed on-line! You said so yourself.
On-line definitely has its place. The success of iTunes and the recent announcements by major networks to have their shows distributed electronically is definitely a step toawrds on-line distribution. But unless you plan on every house in the world having a dedicated DS3 connection, the notion that all material - particiularly HD - will be distributed exclusively through digital means is preposterous at best and will likely not come in any of our lifetimes. I guess that you also expect people to have multi-terrabyte storage for each system as well. After all, all of that content has to be stored somewhere when it's downloaded. Or did you actually expect people to be on-line for every movie that they want to watch? Well, I guess that makes a market for automotive broadband on the newest Winnebago line, doesn't it?
Oh, and by the way -- ALL technology is "temporary" because new technology is always evolving from old technology. So, your statement about "temporary technology" alone is fallacious.
In the meantime, please let us know what it is that you have been smoking because it seems like it's some really good shit. The fact that you've been modded as "Insightful" is staggering - or else it's indicative that mod points shouldn't be handed out as much as they are.
The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
show me an ISP that can feasibly deliver 30-50gb of data in less than 2-3 days to EVERY one of its clients at ANY time, and your argument will have merit.
The truth is that the world can't support online distribution yet, and it will only be around when the whole HD/BluRay has been decided, and they're looking at the next gen format.
disclaimer: I've been known to store numbers in my ass for which to dig out when quantities are required.
I favor the boycott approach to both formats for now.
e ature_id=01&tree=&itempath=&model_id=MDL101546
There are several formats that can be used to create HD content on existing DVD disks.
Windows HiDef Media
Divx
Quicktime (via h.264/mpeg4)
H.264 (mpeg4)
H.264 is the future of HD broadcast and you can fit an entire 2 hour HD (720p or 1080i/p) movie on existing DVD disks with room to spare
JVC already has a player out that plays all these formats including m2t files (HDV in mpeg2 format)using existing DVD writable formats.
We should simply bypass Sony and Toshiba and finally use our PCs and home theater servers the way we want to.
And it would all be legal.
Funny thing is, for once, MS is on our side, even if it's for the wrong reasons.
here is the link to the jvc SRDVD-100U
http://pro.jvc.com/prof/Attributes/features.jsp?f
Has built in ethernet and streaming capabilities (movies, audio...). Pretty cool, but may be to expensive to some.
All I saw was "HD-DVD 9GB HD HD-DVD AACS, BD Plus, and ROM Mark iHD (HD-DVD) vs BD-J/Java (Blu-Ray)"
My acronym cup runneth over...
"Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
Microsoft and Intel think that media centre type devices are big money. They want consumers copying media around to different devices because they want to be the ones providing the devices and software. Nothing would make them happier than for you to have a media centre PC in each room and a server in the closet.
Also they have no vested intrest in DRM past making the media companies happy. Microsoft owns no record labels or studios I'm aware of. They make software, not media. So it's in their intrests to make the consumers as happy as possible, while still appeasing the media companies. Happy consumers buy more Microsoft toys. Sony's intrest is in screwing consumers so they make the most money on their media.
VHS, by a resounding, total victory. This despite the fact that neraly all broadcast material was produced on the professional Betacam format. So why'd +- both survive where there was only one video format? Compatibility. It is trivial to build drives that can write both + and - disks, in fact I can't find one that won't write both any more. Also, both read in almost all drives. There are some that have problems with one or the other, but it's pretty rare. So, that being the case, consumers don't give a shit. They'll just buy whatever is cheap and/or convenient.
Not the case with HD-DVD and Blu-ray. They aren't compatible and it looks like no plans to make it so. So you need one player for one, a different one for the other. History has shown that shit won't fly. People will buy one format, not two. So there's very likely to be a winner and a loser in this format war unless dual HD-DVD/Blu-ray players come out.
So what is the attraction of high-density video disks? HD content, of course... But where has HD content gone so far? Basically nowhere... Why? Competing standards, conflicting hardware, confusing specs... All for content that's better than conventional content, but not to the degree to really capture any significant market. So why is this?
It's all about TV, right? I don't know about you, but for me, I'm watching less TV, not more. HD quality doesn't really make the material any better. Why would I care if a crappy program looks better?
My prediction? Both formats will fall on disinterested comsumers, simply because they really don't care that much about HD. When the industry shakes out to the point that HD gear is as easy to use as conventional, then maybe this stuff will get a foothold. Until then, most consumers don't want to go through the hassle of HD, even if it means that their movies look better.
Can't imagine why I think this? Consider the DVD-Audio market and you'll see the same issue. CD's are "good enough". Why mess with DVD-Audio? (Fold in some DRM nonsense, and it looks even bleaker for HD...)
Actually it is associated with some nasty DRM. But the alternative, HD-DVD, is the one Microsoft REALLY wants to use instead. I'd almost take Sony's offering based on that alone. Luckily, Blu-Ray is also technically superior.
A lot of the article is about how HP is pushing for Blu-Ray to drop the Java based menu system and go with iHD (Microsoft's menu format), in addition to making sure Blu-Ray supports managed copy (which someone later in the article claims it does already and extra layers will not prevent that from working).
While it's not much of a surprise to see HP licking Microsofts boots and demanding people use the MS menu standard, I am surprised that anyone in the Blu-Ray consortium would take them very seriously. In terms of support for the format the people that really matter are the studios as they are the ones that will be providing content compelling enough to make or break the system.
Now Warner Brothers arguing for support of the BD-9 disc - that I could see happening, and would probably help the format gain a little adoption in the short term. I think though in the long term it will slow adoption because too many studios will be tempted to put out overly-compressed releases on BD-9 and not a higher quality feed that needs the storage capacity of the larger BD-25 discs. People will not buy into HD-DVD or Blu-Ray if the benefits are perceived as marginal.
Blu-Ray still has a giant ace in the hole with the PS3 supporting the format, millions of people suddenly having Blu-Ray players will not hurt much at all! And since HD-DVD has pretty much decided to sit out this Christmas season I just can't see HD-DVD player sales ramping up fast ebough to get even close to the volume of PS3 launch day.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
People are happy with DVD, and will be for a while yet. I think that this storm will blow over before people become unhappy with DVD. Many do not even realise that their DVDs that they are watching on their HD TVs aren't HD, because they are better than analogue SD.
That said, I will consider HD-DVD or Blu-Ray only when it appears that there is a clear winner, and it is compatible with my TV. Compatible means that it either puts out a 1080i analogue signal on component jacks, or that I am ready to replace my TV for some other reason.
On another front, I noticed that there is now a HD version of Divx ;-). It is capable of storing an HD movie in DVD-sized files.
www.wavefront-av.com
Read the article, Blu-Ray allows just as much freedom in copying media (which is to say a vrey protected version of same).
Consider that Apple and Sony and HP and Dell are all in the Blu-Ray consortium, whereas over on the HD-DVD side there's Microsoft and... I'm not sure who else but not many other major tech companies. Which format do you think is going to be more able to allow copying between many different devices from different manufacturers (again all protected of course) instead of just between different Microsoft products?
If your idea of freedom is being able to buy whatever form of Microsoft box you like to play media - count me out!
I'm sure neither of course will let you play media on Linux, so to say you prefer one over the other is to proclaim allegence to only one particular brand of salt to the exclusion of all others.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Hey brainiac, Sony makes consumer devices AS WELL AS movies. Don't you think they'd have just as much an interest in making conumers happy from that end, so they would actually buy Sony equipment?
Did you not even know that the Blu-Ray consortium includes Apple, Dell, and HP? I don't recall any of them making media either. Would not your same arguments apply equally to them?
Lastly remember that Microsofts interests are not making the conumer happy, they are in forcing the consumer to buy Microsoft gear. The Managed Copy model fits that pretty well since you'd most likley only be able to copy media between Microsoft devices.
Lastly, to the meat of the matter - Microsoft is behind HD-DVD because they would get royalties from the various Microsoft-specific technologies in the standard (like the iHD menuing language). They don't get that from Blu-Ray which is the real issue at work here. Why would Microsoft give up on all that free money to be had from every player making tithing to Microsoft?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley