backtop


Print 69 comment(s) - last by BenSkywalker.. on Aug 2 at 12:42 PM


LG BD199 Blu-ray player - Image courtesy CEPro.com
LG goes back to supporting only Blu-ray

It had been reported in March the LG Electronics had shelved plans to release its BD199 Blu-ray player. Instead the company considered working on a hybrid Blu-ray/HD DVD player to cover both sides of the field. Well, it looks as though LG is now falling back to supporting just the Blu-ray disc standard. While it appears that LG won't be resurrecting the BD199 for a quick release, the company will make an announcement later this year as to its future Blu-ray product plans.

Late last year, LG Electronics claimed the company would sit in the Blu-ray-only camp.  Although LGE is not as popular as some of the other Japanese brands in the US, in Asia and Europe LGE remains one of the largest electronics brands.  Now with LGE firmly back in Blu-ray territory, many analysts are already starting to adjust their high-definition outlooks.

There were also previous rumors that Samsung would release a hybrid Blu-ray/HD DVD player, but company representatives shot down that notion rather quickly. Ricoh, on the other hand, has already announced a set top hybrid player that is scheduled to hit store shelves before the end of next year. And to add another twist to the whole hybrid craze, Toshiba has been pushing for a unified disc standard which combines the best of Blu-ray and HD DVD instead of complex hybrid players.





Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

I wonder...
By masher2 on 7/31/2006 12:43:35 PM , Rating: 2
How many of these hybrid cancellations, if any, have been due to pressure by Sony.




RE: I wonder...
By Knish on 7/31/2006 12:44:18 PM , Rating: 2
Pot calling the kettle black?


RE: I wonder...
By kkwst2 on 7/31/2006 3:42:46 PM , Rating: 2
Heh, that has to be one of the worst misuses of a saying or reference that I have seen in a while.

Are you suggesting that masher2 is also pressuring people into cancelling hybrid devices??


RE: I wonder...
By TomZ on 7/31/2006 3:46:37 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Are you suggesting that masher2 is also pressuring people into cancelling hybrid devices?

LOL, masher2's influence on the entire industry simply cannot be understated. (Kidding.)


RE: I wonder...
By Pirks on 7/31/06, Rating: 0
RE: I wonder...
By masher2 on 7/31/2006 12:46:55 PM , Rating: 3
I'm not sure I understand your reference.


RE: I wonder...
By Knish on 7/31/2006 12:51:08 PM , Rating: 1
Eh, nevermind. I think it should be obvious that this is Sony pressure.


RE: I wonder...
By masher2 on 7/31/2006 12:55:31 PM , Rating: 2
Its possible, surely. But given the total lack of evidence either way, I think its "obvious" only to someone gladly willing to believe in conspiracy theories.


RE: I wonder...
By Knish on 7/31/2006 12:59:47 PM , Rating: 2
Well I think it was pretty clearly stated somewhere before that any Blu-ray members who got an HD DVD license would be removed from the royalty group.


RE: I wonder...
By Seer on 7/31/2006 1:09:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Well I think it was pretty clearly stated somewhere before that any Blu-ray members who got an HD DVD license would be removed from the royalty group.


That sounds real definitive oO


RE: I wonder...
By masher2 on 7/31/2006 1:30:21 PM , Rating: 2
> "Well I think it was pretty clearly stated somewhere before that any Blu-ray members who got an HD DVD license would be removed from the royalty group"

True enough, however that was common knowledge before LG announced their player. Since they made plans for a hybrid subsequent to this, logically we can conclude nothing from it.


RE: I wonder...
By Alexvrb on 8/2/2006 2:06:12 AM , Rating: 2
Or you can conclude that few thought they'd really enforce it. So they pushed their luck, and now retreat from Sony with their tails between their legs.


RE: I wonder...
By BenSkywalker on 7/31/2006 1:17:30 PM , Rating: 2
BluRay group will not allow hybrid players- they have stated this publicly in the past. I had this particular LG player thrown in my face as evidence that it will happen, and now it is gone.

People love to make out the comparison of BluRay to Betamax because of Sony- but why not talk about VHS instead? That was Matsushita's standard and their current next gen standard is also BluRay. All of the largest electronics manufacturers and all but one of the major studios are on the BluRay bandwagon. The war is long over for the next standard.

For the person who said they can't see the difference between upscaled DVD and HD feeds- what kind of TV are you using? Check it out on a good TV, say a SXRD and if you can't see the difference then you are likely legally blind, even from 15' away it is crystal clear.


RE: I wonder...
By DigitalFreak on 7/31/2006 3:07:07 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The war is long over for the next standard.


Oh boy. Another Blu-ray shill. BTW, if you're going to be a shill for something, at least spell it right (Blu-ray, not BluRay).


RE: I wonder...
By FITCamaro on 7/31/2006 4:10:34 PM , Rating: 2
I guess I'm legally blind then. Because I can't tell the difference between a DVD and 1080i or 1080p. The average person can't either. "Crystal clear" is subjective.

The only thing I ever plan to use BD for is data backup. Would be nice to fit 50GB on one disc. Would make backing up hundred of gigs of video a lot easier. For actual movies though, I'm with HD-DVD.


RE: I wonder...
By BenSkywalker on 8/1/2006 8:49:19 AM , Rating: 2
What equiptment are you using to view it with? The difference is seriously night and day, I haven't had anyone have a hint of a problem telling the difference on my setup- even those with rather poor vision without their glasses on.

Why is it that you would rather HD-DVD btw? For me it isn't about me wanting to see BR take out HD-DVD- it is simply observing the fact that every major electronics manufacturer and all but one studio is on the BR bandwagon while HD-DVD has a couple of small manufacturers and a couple of studios supporting them. The situation is far more in favor of BluRay now then it was for VHS back in the 80s(I remember it then quite well). Even in the PC space, for all the talk of Intel and MS supporting HD-DVD, last year between the two of them they sold 0 PCs while both HP and Dell are in the BR camp. This has nothing to do with what I want to win, although this time aroung BR is on a technical basis superior, it is simply the market reality. You have the DreamTeam versus a bunch of middle school kids in a game of basketball.


RE: I wonder...
By masher2 on 8/1/2006 9:38:20 AM , Rating: 2
> "while HD-DVD has a couple of small manufacturers and a couple of studios supporting them"

Err, HD-DVD has Paramount Pictures, Universal Studios, New Line Entertainment, HBO Video, Warner Home Video, Studio Canal, and the Weinstein Co. Disney also says it will release in both formats, though it has no releases yet.

That's pretty much everyone, except for the Sony-owned studios.




RE: I wonder...
By BenSkywalker on 8/1/2006 2:12:09 PM , Rating: 2
Except for Sony owned studios, 20th Century Fox, Buena Vista and MGM. That's ten of the top twenty all time films, 24 of the all time top fifty that won't be showing up on HD-DVD. I'm not sure at this point if there are any studios not backing BR at this point in some manner or another(all of the major studios are on board). So you can buy car one which can drive down half the roads, or car two then can drive down them all..... tough choice ;)


RE: I wonder...
By masher2 on 8/1/2006 2:38:24 PM , Rating: 1
> "I'm not sure at this point if there are any studios not backing BR at this point in some manner or another(all of the major studios are on board). "

Oops, wrong again. Universal Studios is exclusive to HD-DVD.

> "So you can buy car one which can drive down half the roads, or car two then can drive down them all"

Except that the analogy fails. Most of the studios 'supporting' Blu Ray are, at present, not releasing any films. HD-DVD has a large lead in releases at present. And the public buys releases...they don't buy studios.


RE: I wonder...
By BenSkywalker on 8/2/2006 12:42:27 PM , Rating: 2
Universal announced support for BR already. BetaMax had an edge in released films for a brief period of time also.


RE: I wonder...
By sxr7171 on 8/1/2006 1:05:43 AM , Rating: 2
That's right. Sony, Philips and Matsushita. To date a format supported by those three together has never failed. So Toshiba and Sanyo? Yeah, that smells of success.


RE: I wonder...
By masher2 on 8/2/2006 7:03:07 AM , Rating: 2
> " So Toshiba and Sanyo? Yeah, that smells of success."

Don't forget NEC, RCA, Intel, and Microsoft.


RE: I wonder...
By kyp275 on 7/31/2006 5:49:10 PM , Rating: 2
Heh, personally speaking, most of the HD contents I've seen (all OTA) showed substantial improvement over upscaled dvd playback to 1080i on my Oppo. (Both on a 37" and 42" westinghouse lcd)

of course, it really depends on the contents (both HD and dvd) and the equipment involved. But generally speaking, I think it's safe to say that a good HD feed will most likely show some very noticable improvement over upscaled dvd playback.


Funny
By creathir on 7/31/06, Rating: 0
RE: Funny
By ElJefe69 on 7/31/06, Rating: 0
RE: Funny
By creathir on 7/31/2006 12:46:02 PM , Rating: 2
The only problem is, the 98% of the country that lives outside of NYC cannot afford a $3000 TV (when they just bought a $1500 HDTV 6 months ago) nor a $1000 DVD player.
I suppose there is a reason they say NYC has a high cost of living...;)

Seriously, most people CANNOT tell the difference unless it is a screen larger than 42" (possibly even 50"), so the market for Blu-Ray is high end enthusiests. The problem, as Sony found out with Betamax, is that Sony sells the product at a cost only entusiests could afford. This causes adoption rates to plumit, causing the eventual failure of the product. You would have thought Sony had learned its lesson 25 years ago... I guess they didn't.

- Creathir


RE: Funny
By mendocinosummit on 7/31/2006 12:56:19 PM , Rating: 2
I still like DVD's for movies, but BD's sound fantastic for PC use. That is the only place I will ever us BD's, but only if they are a dollar or more per disc.


RE: Funny
By Shoal07 on 7/31/2006 1:01:00 PM , Rating: 2
It's not just the size of the TV but the distance as well. I have a 65" HDTV and you can't tell the difference between an upscaled DVD and natural 720P or 1080i at the recomended viewing distance (in my case it's between 14 and 16ft depending on the seating position). This is true of many sets. The only place you'll tell a difference is in the store when you're a foot away from the screen. Actual "real life" viewing and you'll never notice.

Believe it or not there actually are limits to the Human eye...


RE: Funny
By TomZ on 7/31/2006 1:32:10 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Seriously, most people CANNOT tell the difference unless it is a screen larger than 42" (possibly even 50"), so the market for Blu-Ray is high end enthusiests. The problem, as Sony found out with Betamax, is that Sony sells the product at a cost only entusiests could afford. This causes adoption rates to plumit, causing the eventual failure of the product. You would have thought Sony had learned its lesson 25 years ago... I guess they didn't.

Sony made the same mistake and had the same challenges with SACD. I don't think they learned anything yet that I can tell.


RE: Funny
By Fox5 on 7/31/2006 2:26:42 PM , Rating: 2
HD-DVD is actually better than Blu-ray for movies. It uses superior compression and is already double layered whereas blu-ray is struggling with single layers.


RE: Funny
By tozz on 7/31/2006 2:35:57 PM , Rating: 3
They both use the same codecs and formats...
HD-DVD is running out of layers at low capacity while BR has very long to go (200gb capacity discs or higher).


RE: Funny
By TomZ on 7/31/2006 3:35:11 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
They both use the same codecs and formats... HD-DVD is running out of layers at low capacity while BR has very long to go (200gb capacity discs or higher).

I can't believe this post got rated down, since it is a pure statement of the facts.


RE: Funny
By Zoomer on 8/1/2006 9:38:42 AM , Rating: 2
That's right.

Blu-Ray - 1 Layer = 25 GB
HD-DVD - 2 Layers = 2*15GB = 30GB

The limit for HDDVD is 2 layers, while 4 layer Blu Ray disks have already been demostrated.



RE: Funny
By masher2 on 8/1/2006 10:37:28 AM , Rating: 2
> "The limit for HDDVD is 2 layers..."

Oops, Toshiba demoed a triple-layer HD-DVD disc well over a year ago.


RE: Funny
By masher2 on 7/31/2006 5:20:47 PM , Rating: 1
> "HD-DVD is running out of layers at low capacity while BR has very long to go (200gb capacity discs or higher). "

Given the troubles BD has had in releasing even dual-layer disks, I think its a safe bet that the 8-layer prototypes will never make it to market. Long before they become feasible, we'll be using UV-laser based readers.



RE: Funny
By Zoomer on 8/1/2006 9:40:24 AM , Rating: 2
The thing is, single layered blu-ray disks have almost the same capacity as a hd-dvd.

I would say that double layered bd is almost a given.


RE: Funny
By TomZ on 8/1/06, Rating: 0
RE: Funny
By Zoomer on 8/2/2006 10:51:58 AM , Rating: 2
I meant single layered bd has 25gb, while dual layer HD-DVD has 2*15GB=30GB.

That's almost the same.

When we get dual layered BD, it'll blow HD-DVD's 30GB away.


RE: Funny
By masher2 on 8/2/2006 12:38:58 PM , Rating: 2
> "When we get dual layered BD, it'll blow HD-DVD's 30GB away. "

Until we get triple-layered HD-DVD...until we get quad-layer BR...and so on and so forth.

But I think you're missing the point. For video discs, as long as you can fit the average Hollywood film on the disc at 1080p resolution at reasonable compression levels, you're golden. Any extra space is pretty much wasted. Sure you can use it for more extras...or to ship a entire season of some TV series on fewer disks. But if you think consumers are going to pay extra for that, you're mistaken.


RE: Funny
By sxr7171 on 8/1/2006 1:00:45 AM , Rating: 2
I can easily tell the diiference between upscaled DVD, broadcast HD and HBO HD. They all kind of suck with the artifacting that I seem to notice and catch all the time. Honestly I'd take a high resolution analog format than one that has these very unnatural looking digital artifacts. Since that ain't happening, I'll take the digital format with the highest bitrate capability.


RE: Funny
By masher2 on 7/31/2006 12:49:57 PM , Rating: 3
> "No one in NYC who has cash wants to know that they are getting the lesser level item. "

At the current point in time, HD-DVD is the higher-level item. BR releases are all single-sided MPeg-2 encoded, and thus have less image quality.

Even once (if?) this is corrected, HD-DVD and BR will be at parity, as far as videos go. Both now support 1080p, and a capacity large enough to hold your average film. BR may eventually be able to tag a few extras onto your average disk...but most buyers are not going to find this a strong selling point.


RE: Funny
By BladeVenom on 7/31/2006 1:56:41 PM , Rating: 2
Blue Ray stuck with the outdated mpg-2? Last story I read they said they were going to support better formats.


RE: Funny
By masher2 on 7/31/2006 2:02:51 PM , Rating: 4
The format supported advanced codecs...but all the BD movies to date are using Mpeg-2, on a 25GB SL disk.

In contrast, the current crop of HD-DVD movies are using VC-1, on a 30GB DL disk.


RE: Funny
By rklaver on 7/31/2006 5:29:41 PM , Rating: 2
BR releases are all single-sided MPeg-2 encoded, and thus have less image quality.

If that is the case then that codec was decided by the studios during encoding. Both BR and HD-DVD support 3 codecs which are VC-1, MPEG-2, and H.264.



RE: Funny
By DigitalFreak on 7/31/2006 3:01:57 PM , Rating: 2
Hello Mr. Shill!


RE: Funny
By sxr7171 on 8/1/2006 12:57:25 AM , Rating: 2
That's for sure. That $500 difference is like 25% of the rent on decent studio apartment out here.

Anyhow, I don't like the idea of an incremental solution being what we will be stuck with for the next 8 years either. But Sony better get off their asses and give us Dual Layer BD with VC-1 or AVC soon.


Erratum
By Le Québécois on 7/31/2006 1:14:16 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Although LGE is not as popular as some of the other Japanese brands in the US


Not to be rude, but LG Electronics is not a Japanese company.

It's South Korean.

The same goes for Samsung in case you should write about them.

http://www.lge.com/about/corporate/company_overvie...

And from what I know about racism in Asia, you don't want to do that kind of mistake.




RE: Erratum
By shadowzz on 7/31/2006 3:12:36 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe I didn't read into it the same way you did, but it seemed to me that they did not imply LG was Japanese, just that Japanese brands were more popular


RE: Erratum
By Le Québécois on 7/31/2006 3:40:11 PM , Rating: 2
I'm 99% french/english bilingual so you may be right but for me :
quote:
some of the other Japanese brands
should have been : some of the Japanese brands.

The "other" imply that Brandon seems to thing the LG is Japanese. At least, it's the way I understand it.


RE: Erratum
By TomZ on 7/31/2006 3:44:23 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry for my redundant post below; you must have submitted your post while I was typing mine. I guess we are in agreement.


RE: Erratum
By Le Québécois on 7/31/2006 3:47:55 PM , Rating: 2
No problem, I should in fact thank you for showing that my 99% bilingual thing is ok :P

But to that I will add that it should be Brandon think...not Brandon thing. That's what I get for beeing 1% not bilingual


RE: Erratum
By sxr7171 on 8/1/2006 1:12:01 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah, but yet your knowledge of English is better than the majority of people in the US who were only burdened with learning one language. It's really a sad state of affairs here.

By the way, you are right in what you pointed out.


RE: Erratum
By Le Québécois on 8/1/2006 2:30:00 AM , Rating: 2
Well, my nickname "Le Québécois" means the Quebecer ( from the province of Quebec in Canada. So I'm french Canadian and what does it means?
If you want to survive and do well in life when living on a region where french speaking people are outnumbered on a scale of 1:40 you have no choice to learn english. Granted my english is probably better than 95% of the one french Canadian can speak(if they can...)but still, if you're smart, you addapt.

As for my knowledge on LGE and Samsung and Asian countries beeing very racist about other asian countries, lets just say I had a real (only in canada 1 year befor I dated her) chinese GF for 3 years so I learned a lot of things about them (Asians countries in general).

In any case, thank you for you for your compliments on both subjects.


RE: Erratum
By Zoomer on 8/1/2006 9:49:24 AM , Rating: 2
Korea and Japan were historically enemies, with Japan attacking Korea in the past every now and then.

Then of course you have World War II, which didn't exactly make things better. Comfort women, wonton killing, etc.


RE: Erratum
By TomZ on 7/31/2006 3:42:52 PM , Rating: 2
No, I agree the article is not correct. Consider the difference in meaning between these two versions (my emphasis added):

Although LGE is not as popular as some of the other Japanese brands in the US...

Although LGE is not as popular as some of the Japanese brands in the US...

The word "other" in the article strongly implies that LGE is a Japanese brand as well.


Who gives a monkeys toss?
By freebaSe on 7/31/2006 3:01:32 PM , Rating: 2
Not until these corporations actually consider the interests of the actual consumer am I gonna have any interest in HD media players/recorders.
It's all so premature with relevant displays costing as much as decent small cars and media formats for which only high density data storage makes any kind of sense.
It's all just plain silly. If it's data capacity you need for the cost of all this equipment and the media to burn to you can buy a couple of TBs of removable hard disk. Fast, reliable and always getting cheaper.
Surely such HD optical media is already obsolete before it even makes mass market? With 'on-demand' delivery methods improving month by month there is no logic to the business model...
I only dropped in here as I felt a hybrid player/recorder to be the only sensible idea since the HD format confusion all began. Good luck to the company that brings that to market (as long as it also supports all CD/DVD read/write formats.)




RE: Who gives a monkeys toss?
By masher2 on 7/31/2006 3:06:50 PM , Rating: 2
> "It's all so premature with relevant displays costing as much as decent small cars..."

Did you consider DVD a premature technology? I paid just over $1300 for my first DVD player...a price higher than either HD-DVD or BR is charging.

> "Not until these corporations actually consider the interests of the actual consumer am I gonna have any interest"

Then you'll never buy another product for the rest of your lives. Just as you don't consider the best interests of a corporation when you buy a product, they don't consider yours. All they're concerned with-- and rightly so-- is whether or not they can turn a profit from the sale.


RE: Who gives a monkeys toss?
By DigitalFreak on 7/31/2006 3:10:49 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Did you consider DVD a premature technology? I paid just over $1300 for my first DVD player...a price higher than either HD-DVD or BR is charging.


Didn't read his post, did you? He said the DISPLAY, not the player, playah.


RE: Who gives a monkeys toss?
By shadowzz on 7/31/2006 3:13:47 PM , Rating: 2
whats wrong with the display? You can buy plenty of 1080p displays these days.


RE: Who gives a monkeys toss?
By Xavian on 7/31/2006 3:41:16 PM , Rating: 2
yes but if you read the post, he wants one that doesn't cost that of a small car. You know the prices before all this 'HD' crap started.


RE: Who gives a monkeys toss?
By segagenesis on 7/31/2006 4:53:52 PM , Rating: 2
The big screen high definition of 1954
http://www.earlytelevision.org/rca_ct-100.html

Rarely I would agree with masher2's normally unorthodox comments, but this is one of those times because I am sick of hearing the same groaning. Too many people are losing touch with reality and long term forecasts these days. $1000 in 1954 was just about as much as a small car, and while it took colour TV a while to gain a market hold it eventually did when the market actually needed it. So really, if you wait long enough the stuff will go down in price. Who cares if high definition components are for the less than 1% of consumers today? In a few years it will be for the remaining 99%. Is it envy?

Even in the remote chance that HD-DVD and Blu-Ray both fail, eventually the market will demand high defenition content for the masses in whatever shape or form. Like the discussions about people demanding $50 integrated graphics that performs like a $500 video card or those wanting $900 BD-ROM records to be $90... stop pretending that corporations owe you anything and will give away new technology for free.


RE: Who gives a monkeys toss?
By masher2 on 7/31/2006 5:29:13 PM , Rating: 1
> "He said the DISPLAY, not the player, playah."

Yes, I got that. HDTVs are extremely cheap now, if you're willing to settle for 720p. You don't need a 1080p set to enjoy the benefits of BR or HD-DVD...anything better than DVD's current 480-line standard qualifies.

As for 1080p itself, its really not that expensive. A 1080p wobulator DLP isn't that much more expensive than a standard DLP set of the same size-- a few hundred dollars or so difference. You don't find many small-format 1080p sets for the very good reason that the extra resolution is, unless you sit nose-to-screen, pretty much wasted.

New technology is more expensive than old, period. Compared to the introduction of past technological advances, both BR and HD-DVD can be had extremely cheaply. To anyone who spends hours whining about the price, I have a suggestion. Spend that time working instead...with the extra cash you'd make, you'd more than pay for a new display and player.


RE: Who gives a monkeys toss?
By sxr7171 on 8/1/2006 1:31:12 AM , Rating: 2
People today are spoiled by cheap crap eletronics. They don't realize what people have paid to get formats started in the past. $1200 for my first DVD player, I won't even say what for my SACD player that I love and still use today because it is worth it's price as a CD player just the same. My parents bought their first VHS player for around $1800 1978 dollars, when little Hondas were literally $3500.

People wait, and you'll get your cheap lightweight crappy version of the player we buy first. BTW, $500 for the Toshiba is a steal. I'm pulling for Blu-Ray, but man that level of player for $500 makes me want one.


RE: Who gives a monkeys toss?
By sxr7171 on 8/1/2006 1:21:44 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah bring me on-demand HD at 72mbps and I'll keep you in business. Also considering that native 1080p sets are available for as little as $2000, your idea of a decent small car must be different from mine.


Clearly
By threepac3 on 8/1/2006 6:34:23 AM , Rating: 2
Some of you are clearly drinking the juice. You actually think higher compression equal higher quality?--The opasite has always been true. That would be like saying MP3's are better quality then the files found on a music CD.

The probable reasons for the use of Mpeg2 vs Mp4 is either becuase the quality is better due to the lower compression. Or becuase of the lower licence cost vs Mp4. Maybe even both...

Anyways the BluRay forum have included all the same compression types that HD-DVD supports into its own standard.




RE: Clearly
By masher2 on 8/1/2006 8:43:52 AM , Rating: 2
> "Some of you are clearly drinking the juice. You actually think higher compression equal higher quality?--The opasite has always been true"

Your statement, while true, is irrelevant. You compare codecs at equal bitrates. Mpeg-2 requires a higher bitrate to achieve equal quality, when compared to advanced codecs such as VC1.

It's probable that the reason Sony chose to release the first BR movies in Mpeg-2 is simply due to licensing costs. Using Mpeg-4 or VC1 would have meant higher royalties, thus pushing the cost of the discs too far above those of HD-DVD.

> "Anyways the BluRay forum have included all the same compression types that HD-DVD supports into its own standard. "

True, as we've already stated within this thread. However, at present, none of those advanced codecs are being used.



RE: Clearly
By namechamps on 8/1/2006 10:02:26 AM , Rating: 3
Maybe u should stop drinking the joice.

Here are the facts
1) mpeg2 is less efficent than VC1 or AVC AT EQUAL bitrate. i.e a 20mbit VC1 stream will look better than a 20mbit mpeg2 stream. The VC1 steam is not more compressed it is more efficently compressed.

2) mpeg2 takes a bitrate aprox DOUBLE VC1 or AVC to get similar PQ.

3) All BD to date have been single layer (25GB) mpeg2 vs dual layer HD-DVD (30GB).

4) BD uses uncompressed PCM (space hog) which reduces available space for PQ. HD DVD used losslessly compressed TruHD.

So in summary BD has released disc with LESS space using a WORSE compression then wasted EVEN MORE SPACE by using PCM over TruHD. The end results BD titles look substantially worse than HD-DVD (closer to OTA HD or upconverted DVD).

Why would Sony do that? Greed. TruHD, Dolby Digital +, and VC1 would give royalties to other companies. Sony gets huge royalties from mpeg2 and uncompressed PCM is not covered by royalty agreements.

So take your Sony fanboy garbage somewhere else. So far HD-DVD has delivered and BD has failed (at 2x the price).


Bluetooth?
By Suomynona on 7/31/2006 12:41:07 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Toshiba has been pushing for a unified disc standard which combines the best of Blu-ray and Bluetooth instead of complex hybrid players.


Bluetooth or HD-DVD?




RE: Bluetooth?
By Suomynona on 7/31/06, Rating: 0
"Well, we didn't have anyone in line that got shot waiting for our system." -- Nintendo of America Vice President Perrin Kaplan













botimage
Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki