Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD

[Wild Cobra]

So you're figuring you can't fit more on a blu-ray than a regular dvd?

No, you can fit almost six times as much on a Blu-Ray than a standard DVD format. However, the purpose of both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD is for High Definition television. HDTV uses six times the resolution as regular telivision. Therefore, Blu-Ray is comprable for time for the format it is designed to support.

Now if you put standard NTSC programs on either, the Blue Ray would hold almost 24 hours of programming, or an entire TV series. HD-DVD would hold just over 14 hours. It would take two HD-DVD disks to hold a TV series in NTSC format that has more than 18 episodes, with no special features.

Standard TV (NTSC) is a 720 by 480 pixils. 720 x 480 = 345,600 pixils. HDTV at 1080 i/p uses 1920 by 1080 for 2,073,600 pixils, exactly six times that of NTSC. Now maybe HD-DVD limits it's quality to 720p which is 1280 x 720, or 921,600 pixils for programs longer than movies using more than 140 minutes of disk space?

[DarkReign]

They have this thing..it's ultra-super-high-definition, live streaming, 3-dimensional with Super-mega-ultra digital quality sound..

It's called LIFE.


You should try it sometime

Ok, I lol'd.

[Whisky Dog]

They have this thing..it's ultra-super-high-definition, live streaming, 3-dimensional with Super-mega-ultra digital quality sound..

It's called LIFE.


You should try it sometime

That's great for the people who have the large bills to be sitting front row center for all the great sports games, but for the regular guy watching in HD is the next best thing.

[Mark in Austin]

Rooting for the better format to fail is dumb. I'm speaking in strict technical terms here. More storage space on Media=less compression=better picture/sound quality, that's the simplest way to put it and everybody knows it to be true. Even the people behind HD DVD do, otherwise they wouldn't now experiment with a very difficult and unreliable 3rd layer technology to try to close the gap to Blu-ray. All the other reasons that both sides are coming up with are BS and their goals are not in the best interest of the consumers.

Slomo, I always pay attention to what you write about technology issues, but in this case I have to disagree. While you're right that Blu-ray has more storage capacity, I don't think that matters as much as you say it does. We all know that the end game here is digital content downloaded from the internet and stored digitally- it's already happening to a certain extent. HD-DVD and Blu-ray are just one more stop along the way. I, and I believe most consumers who are looking for an HD player aren't necessarily looking for the format with the most capacity, we just want to watch movies in HD. (I've read some reports of some sound compression issues that HD-DVD is having though- if true that would be something that might change my mind if it can't be dealt with.) But after looking at both of them on a 46" 1080p LCD, I see no difference between the two. Since that is going to be my display for the next decade, even if Blu-ray is technically superior I'm not going to be able to tell the difference.

As far as being in the best interests of consumers, I doubt you'll find many people who think that Sony or Toshiba have ever put the consumer first. Corporations never do. If the price gap between players continues, than I think you'll see HD-DVD continue to build market share. I think most consumers will find that the incremental (but true) superiority of Blu-ray does not justify it's higher cost. We don't have to look all the way back to VHS vs Beta to see an inferior product win in the marketplace for reasons aside from pure technical performance, though. Just look at the Wii vs PS3 and XBOX360. (And if HD-DVD's interactive features continue to be superior / less of a pain to use, it helps this scenario further along.)

Blu-ray is not about Sony anymore so this sort of argument is stupid because it confuses the real issue. It is true that Sony gets to gain the most from blu-ray but the same can be said for Toshiba in the case of HD DVD so unless you're a big shareholder of either companies you really shouldn't give a - I don't.

Hmmm. If Sony stands to gain the most from Blu-ray winning how is it not about Sony? If it's not about Sony than why did Sony ship EVERY PS3 with Blu-ray instead of making it a more expensive model choice? Sony did everything it possibly could to pre-dispose the market towards Blu-ray. I'd say it's still about Sony. Consumers always take other things beside performance into consideration when making a big purcahse. For me, how companies behave is one of those factors. If the only thing that mattered to the consumer was pure performance, then nobody would run Windows, we'd all have rented/bought porn in the 90's on BetaMax, drive Tucker Automobiles, and still be able to buy the die-cast metal Transformer toys for our kids (or ourselves) instead of the ty plastic ones they now sell.

If the decision was purely technical we would have moved ahead from this debate a couple of years ago and would now be discussing how to make it even better/cheaper.

Exactly. Product performance can be measured in all sorts of ways other than in purely technical metrics. For instance, the quality of customer service a company delivers can effect it's sales. Just ask Dell. Reliability and ease of use are two other examples.

And you don't need a bunch of engineers to tell you what is good and what's not - level the field and the consumer will make the choice for you - just leave company politics out of it.

What would be a level field? Both sides entering the market at the same time, with the same products available in both formats, and with the same level of game console saturation? Although that would allow the formats to compete on an equal footing and provide a clear winner in the price vs performance debate, I'm not holding my breath.


just my $.02.

-Mark

[Slomo]

Slomo, I always pay attention to what you write about technology issues, but in this case I have to disagree. While you're right that Blu-ray has more storage capacity, I don't think that matters as much as you say it does. We all know that the end game here is digital content downloaded from the internet and stored digitally- it's already happening to a certain extent. HD-DVD and Blu-ray are just one more stop along the way. I, and I believe most consumers who are looking for an HD player aren't necessarily looking for the format with the most capacity, we just want to watch movies in HD. (I've read some reports of some sound compression issues that HD-DVD is having though- if true that would be something that might change my mind if it can't be dealt with.) But after looking at both of them on a 46" 1080p LCD, I see no difference between the two. Since that is going to be my display for the next decade, even if Blu-ray is technically superior I'm not going to be able to tell the difference.

As far as being in the best interests of consumers, I doubt you'll find many people who think that Sony or Toshiba have ever put the consumer first. Corporations never do. If the price gap between players continues, than I think you'll see HD-DVD continue to build market share. I think most consumers will find that the incremental (but true) superiority of Blu-ray does not justify it's higher cost. We don't have to look all the way back to VHS vs Beta to see an inferior product win in the marketplace for reasons aside from pure technical performance, though. Just look at the Wii vs PS3 and XBOX360. (And if HD-DVD's interactive features continue to be superior / less of a pain to use, it helps this scenario further along.)



Hmmm. If Sony stands to gain the most from Blu-ray winning how is it not about Sony? If it's not about Sony than why did Sony ship EVERY PS3 with Blu-ray instead of making it a more expensive model choice? Sony did everything it possibly could to pre-dispose the market towards Blu-ray. I'd say it's still about Sony. Consumers always take other things beside performance into consideration when making a big purcahse. For me, how companies behave is one of those factors. If the only thing that mattered to the consumer was pure performance, then nobody would run Windows, we'd all have rented/bought porn in the 90's on BetaMax, drive Tucker Automobiles, and still be able to buy the die-cast metal Transformer toys for our kids (or ourselves) instead of the ty plastic ones they now sell.



Exactly. Product performance can be measured in all sorts of ways other than in purely technical metrics. For instance, the quality of customer service a company delivers can effect it's sales. Just ask Dell. Reliability and ease of use are two other examples.



What would be a level field? Both sides entering the market at the same time, with the same products available in both formats, and with the same level of game console saturation? Although that would allow the formats to compete on an equal footing and provide a clear winner in the price vs performance debate, I'm not holding my breath.


just my $.02.

-Mark

Mark,

Well I'm not holding my breath either. The BS that goes with every new format is getting very old and I've been through quite a few. My problem is not with Sony, Toshiba or Philips coming up with new designs/patent and selling it to others. The problem is that the big names all play games with it and decide who can and who can't have the licence. When I'm talking about a level field I'd want to make the technology available to everyone who wants to pay for it (I'm dreaming I know). It would drive development forward a lot faster and would actually mean more money for the technoology inventor (sell more licenses). It would open the door for smaller outfits to come up with inovative designs which would make them players in the market - and that's what the bigs are really afraid of, it's all about controlling the market.


I can not root against technology because of the name that is behind it, since in my book the big names are all the same, so all I care about anymore is how good the stuff is and what can I do with it.

Which brings me back to the storage issue. When discussing storage media there are two main factors - space and transfer speed - and a plethora of others who while important only come into play after the first two - reliability, error correction, sturdiness of the media itself...

The main problem with video is the amount of data you have to process in a single frame and then repeat that 24 times (or 25 time or 30 times) for just a second of video. Just as an illustration the required bandwidth for uncompressed 1080i is 1,5Gbps, double that (3Gbps) for 1080p. Even broadcasters right now haven't figured out all the problems of just moving those signals around their facilities (specially 1080p). Anything similar in a consumer device is out of the question, so they use video/data compression technology to lower the bandwidth to a manageable level. Now when they do that they are not thinking about the best in terms of quality but in terms of the best quality that they can fit on a single DVD/Blu-ray. Blu-ray has more storage space (now and in the future upgrade path) and has a faster read/write speed which allows the authoring facility to put more=better data on it. The problems with HD DVD that you are mentioning are a direct result of that. If there were no politics behind the story everybody including Toshiba would be using Blu-ray which would clear the air and make room for the next big thing (format wars hold back development).

As for the media-less distribution of content the problem is again with the big names - studios this time. DRM doesn't work and as it is right now is even more limiting than the alternative (cassettes, CDs, DVDs...). If a solution could be found for the copyright issues we would today be looking at the ability of downloading through legal bitorrents (I think it's the best/fastest available at the moment) a DVD quality film within roughly 24 hours. That's actually not too bad, but then I think people would want to store it somewhere, archive it if you will - and we come back to storage media. And as it stands CD size Blu-rays that can hold rougly 5 DVD at a price of approx. 1$ per GB is pretty good and can only be beat by digital cassettes (roughly 0,5$ per GB).

But for the rest of your post I agree with you. The best way to improve customer support is to take away the quasi monopolistic position that some manufacturers have. Look at open source software where money is made by offering superior quality services as oposed to selling software licenses and using the profit not to improve the software but to sue the out of anybody who wants to improve on it.

As a side note we have been using the pro version of blu-ray (XDCAM) for 3 years now, and it is almost without compe ion in the pro world, because nobody else is offering anything remotely similar (HD DVD was never a factor). We are now moving toward solid state storage media - it's smaller, can be lightning fast but also costs more (at least 10 times more per GB).

[Wild Cobra]

I simply belive Blu-Ray will end up winning because it has about 67% more record time available (dual layer 50GB vs. 30GB) for the same quality, and can stream 50% faster too (54 MB/Sec vs. 36 MB/Sec).

[Burn531]

Bump.

Blu ray les are buy 1 get 1 free at Best Buy, Target, and Fry's. Amazon has the same deal only with more movies to choose from. Fry's online had Sony films for $10 starting this past Sunday but sold out most of there stock really fast. There's still a few for 10 bucks last I checked.

[Wild Cobra]

Back to my argument, I believe it has to do with recording time. Both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD are comparable in quality. Even though Beta was better than VHS for video quality, VHS won out because of record time available!

Maybe the developers of Blu-Ray kept that in mind when they developed it?

[Milo]

No, you can fit almost six times as much on a Blu-Ray than a standard DVD format. However, the purpose of both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD is for High Definition television. HDTV uses six times the resolution as regular telivision. Therefore, Blu-Ray is comprable for time for the format it is designed to support.

Now if you put standard NTSC programs on either, the Blue Ray would hold almost 24 hours of programming, or an entire TV series. HD-DVD would hold just over 14 hours. It would take two HD-DVD disks to hold a TV series in NTSC format that has more than 18 episodes, with no special features.

Standard TV (NTSC) is a 720 by 480 pixils. 720 x 480 = 345,600 pixils. HDTV at 1080 i/p uses 1920 by 1080 for 2,073,600 pixils, exactly six times that of NTSC. Now maybe HD-DVD limits it's quality to 720p which is 1280 x 720, or 921,600 pixils for programs longer than movies using more than 140 minutes of disk space?

The thing you forgot is that the compression schemes used by regular DVDs and Hi Def DVDs differ.
regular DVDs are limited to MPEG2 video compression; hidDef DVDs (HD-DVD and Blu-Ray) can use MPEG2, VC-1 or AVC (H264)
So, while Hi Def DVDs have to store 6 times more pixels per frame than DVD, they can achieve a 2 times better compression using VC-1 / AVC, compare to the older MPEG2 compression; resulting in space requirement of only 3 times more.
Meaning, a movie stored in low res, mpeg2, on a regular DVD (9 GB) needs roughly 3x9 = 27 GB to be stored in hi-def with proper video compression, all other things being equal.
And HD-DVDs are 30 GB, so that fits perfectly.

Now the comparison HD-DVD vs Blu-Ray:
while Blu-Ray has more room for improvement and potential for better video quality (more disc space) the reality is that 60% of all Blu-Ray discs released so far are pretty badly produced: simple upconversion of regular DVS, video compression in mpeg2 instead of VC-1/AVC, etc.
Besides, the technology is not as mature as HD-DVD (more imcompatiblities with some discs, firware upgrades needed) and most importantly the Blu-Ray players are much more expensive than the HD-DVD players. You can now find a Toshiba HD-DVD player for as low as $200.

The way I see it, HD-DVD could win it all based lower prices and technological maturity, even though Blu-Ray is potentially better.
About the same thing that happened with VHS vs Betamax...

[Slomo]

the reality is that 60% of all Blu-Ray discs released so far are pretty badly produced: simple upconversion of regular DVS, video compression in mpeg2 instead of VC-1/AVC, etc.

True (I couldn't believe it when I saw some of the first releases), but it's a disc authoring issue not the format's fault. And judging from latest les the issue is rapidly improving.

Besides, the technology is not as mature as HD-DVD (more imcompatiblities with some discs, firware upgrades needed)

Actually Blu ray has been used in the broadcast industry in every day productions for over two years now (mostly in ENG which most critics predicted would never work). The technology is mature and very robust. The issues that you are citing have to do with the extras on the discs (Java programing) not the content itself which again can be traced back to the authoring process/regulations - and are easily resolved.

and most importantly the Blu-Ray players are much more expensive than the HD-DVD players. You can now find a Toshiba HD-DVD player for as low as $200.

That was one of the big reasons behind the VHS victory and potentially the main problem for BR.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Wal-Mart on Blu-ray bandwagon
Retailer will only sell Sony's hi-def movie discs, phasing out Toshiba's HD-DVD discs in its 4,000 Wal-Mart and Sam's Club stores this year.
February 15 2008: 11:28 AM EST

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- National discount retailer Wal-Mart announced Friday that it had decided to only sell Sony's Blu-ray hi-definition movie discs, and will phase out Toshiba's competing HD-DVD formatted discs over the next several months.

Wal-Mart said that by June, its 4,000 Wal-Mart and Sam's Club stores would sell only Blu-ray discs and Blu-ray hardware players. Blu-ray and Toshiba's HD-DVD format are not compatible.

"We've listened to our customers, who are showing a clear preference toward Blu-ray products and movies with their purchases," said Gary Severson, Wal-Mart's Senior Vice President of Home Entertainment in a statement.

Wal-Mart said it would continue selling HD-DVD products, but over the next 30 days, customers will see a significant shift in emphasis to Blu-ray in both brick-and-mortar stores and online. The retailer said it will continue to sell DVDs and standard-definition hardware.

Wal-Mart is the latest movie vendor to choose Blu-ray over HD-DVD. Earlier this week, online movie rental company Netflix (NFLX) announced its support for Blu-ray, and said it would phase out HD-DVD as well. Video publishers Walt Disney (DIS, Fortune 500), Sony's Sony Pictures, News Corp.'s (NWS, Fortune 500) Twentieth Century Fox, and Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer have all endorsed Blu-ray.

In a rivalry that mirrors the Betamax-VHS dispute of the 1970s, Sony (SNE) and Toshiba have been battling each other to define the industry's hi-definition video standard. The winner will see a boost in the sale of hardware needed to play the hi-definition discs. To top of page
Netflix switches to Sony DVD format

http://money.cnn.com/2008/02/15/tech...rss_topstories

[T Park]

niiiiceeee

As someone that owns a ps3 this is awesome news.

[sabar]

I hope HD-DVD wins because blu-ray is a dumb name for a format of data storage and HD-DVD is cheaper.

I wonder how much Sony is kicking-back to retailers like Walmart and Netflix?
They undoubtedly are doing it seeing as how the future of their console is on the edge of failure.

[spurscenter]

STICK

WITH

HD-DVD or HD Downloads

DO NOT SUPPORT BLU-RAY

The studios are not there for the consumer

Its the same as siding with the RIAA.


read about the 1948 paramount decree.

the studios are colluding with each other.

its really bad for the consumer,

im not knocking your PS3.

I own both Ps3 and XBOX.

I only support HD-DVD

you have no idea whats really behind this format war.

the studios want to control the DRM and the pricing.

the technology is not better , hd-dvd is a better technology with HDi alone.

Blu-ray is actually still in beta and rushed to the market to compete with HD-DVD

they are now trying to outspend Toshiba with PAYOLA.

dont reward that crap.

again, keep playing your PS3, this is not a knock at your PS3

this is about your movies and HD-DVD is the one for the consumer.

Just by the fact that HD DVD are ALL REGION free is a clear sign they are there to develop the technology.

Blu-Ray still has Region coding at $29.99 ! gimmie a break.


The studios want to run the table and your gonna have to pay more in the end to own your media and have more restrictions.


read more and you will find the real truth .

[Heath Ledger]

Your resistance is futile, hd dvd is dead in the water, Wal Mart is going to stop selling HD Dvd Players and Hd Dvd's, same with Best Buy, Circuit City.


HD DVD is officially dead in the water. Game over

[Heath Ledger]

Even Toshiba is throwing in the towel!

http://www.reuters.com/article/busin...37974620080216

[ATRAIN]

Blu-ray won.

[ATRAIN]

I got a free Blue Ray player when I bought my tv so im happy.

[Wild Cobra]

I hope HD-DVD wins because blu-ray is a dumb name for a format of data storage and HD-DVD is cheaper.

I wonder how much Sony is kicking-back to retailers like Walmart and Netflix?
They undoubtedly are doing it seeing as how the future of their console is on the edge of failure.

I don't think kick-backs are the issue.

I'll bet the HD-DVD is cheaper because they take less profit, maybe a loss, and expect retailers to make less. There is really little difference in the technology. In Wal-Marts marketing view, they would take the Blu-Ray because they are forward looking rather than quarter-to-quarter, and it yields a higher profit margin.

It is said that HD-DVD disks are cheaper. Sure they are. A single layer HD-DVD is cheaper than a Blu-Ray DVD by I think $0.04 per disk. Same with the double layer formats. However... That's not the whole story...

About half the Blu-Ray releases are on single layer formats. Nearly all the HD-DVD releases are on double sided format. This is because the Blu-Ray holds enough extra data. When this occurs, Blu-Ray is cheaper! Store like Wal-Mart, Circuit City, etc. have a higher profit margin on the movie sales, which is where the real profit is at. In my house, for every DVD player I have, I have maybe 100 disks between movies and TV series box sets.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

niiiiceeee

As someone that owns a ps3 this is awesome news.

Bring on the $35 BR movies, all brought to you by Sony's bought format war

[Wild Cobra]

The thing you forgot is that the compression schemes used by regular DVDs and Hi Def DVDs differ.
regular DVDs are limited to MPEG2 video compression; hidDef DVDs (HD-DVD and Blu-Ray) can use MPEG2, VC-1 or AVC (H264)
So, while Hi Def DVDs have to store 6 times more pixels per frame than DVD, they can achieve a 2 times better compression using VC-1 / AVC, compare to the older MPEG2 compression; resulting in space requirement of only 3 times more.
Meaning, a movie stored in low res, mpeg2, on a regular DVD (9 GB) needs roughly 3x9 = 27 GB to be stored in hi-def with proper video compression, all other things being equal.
And HD-DVDs are 30 GB, so that fits perfectly.

Double layer HD-DVD disks are 30GB, more costly than the sinle layer 25GB Blu-Ray!

I didn't look too deep, but here's what I found. H.264 at 1080P requires 20 Mbit/sec, 25 Mbit/sec, 60 Mbit/sec, or 80 Mbit/sec for low quality to very high quality compression. I also found two rates for VC-1, at 20 Mbit/sec and 45 Mbit/sec for low to high.

Blu-Ray has a standard data rate of 54 Mbit/sec, whereas DH-DVD only has a 36 Mbit/sec standard data rate. At what qualities of compression for 1080P can Blu-Ray play vs. HD-DVD?

Blu-Ray is the clear winner here in my eyes, besides just cost per GB.

[exstatic]

Bring on the $35 BR movies, all brought to you by Sony's bought format war

I ain't payin' that . Gonna scoop a $120 HD DVD player, and pick up movies at CD Exchange when the herd stampedes to Blu-Ray. Even the stampeding studios back catalogs on HD DVD will be available.

[resistanze]

Like I've said for the past few formats, just wait for the price of <insert format here> burners to come down!

[T Park]

Did the price of VHS tapes make them unaffordable as compared to betamax after betamax lost?

[Xolotl]

HD-DVD put up a better fight then I thought would happen....I thought when the PS3 came out it'd be over...but we've all seen how great the PS3 has sold