backtop


Print 89 comment(s) - last by daftrok.. on Feb 27 at 12:56 AM

Microsoft's Xbox 360 add-on gets another price cut

There has been quite a bit of turmoil in the HD DVD market over the past month. With movie studios shifting their alliances from HD DVD to Blu-ray, Toshiba took the drastic step of slashing the MSRPs on its HD DVD players.

Microsoft is following suit and today cut the price of its Toshiba-manufactured Xbox 360 HD DVD player to $129.99. According to Microsoft's Major Nelson, the price cut is effective immediately in the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

The player originally retailed for $199 when it launched in late 2006 and received a price reduction to $179 in July of 2007.

While $129.99 is the new official price, some retailers are offering the Xbox 360 HD DVD player for even lower prices. Best Buy is offering the player for a low $119.99 on its online site.

For night owls that were browsing the Internet early this morning, Amazon had the peripheral on sale for $79.99 with free shipping for a short period of time according to Engadget.

Microsoft's Xbox 360 HD DVD player ships with an Xbox 360 universal remote and a copy of King Kong on HD DVD. Users can also hook the player up to a Windows-based machine with the proper drivers.

In addition to the new $129.99 price tag, customers are still eligible to receive five free movies via mail-in rebate [PDF] courtesy of Toshiba. The selection of movies won't set any hearts racing, but free is free.



Comments     Threshold


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

Internal HD for the 360
By masher2 (blog) on 2/6/2008 2:25:36 PM , Rating: 5
Though Microsoft continues to deny it, I strongly suspect we'll see an internal HD drive for the 360 within a year or so.

Now whether that HD drive will be HD-DVD, Blu Ray, or a combo format, I won't hazard to say...




RE: Internal HD for the 360
By Radius3000 on 2/6/2008 2:35:09 PM , Rating: 2
The problem with an internal drive is that Xboxes die like black people in Baltimore(at least on The Wire). At least with the external drive you can continue to use it while waiting for Microsoft to ship your next box.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By bhieb on 2/6/08, Rating: 0
RE: Internal HD for the 360
By theflux on 2/6/2008 5:43:49 PM , Rating: 5
You can hook it to a PC. However most people like to pretend that you don't have to own $100 software to make it work.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By blaster5k on 2/6/2008 5:46:29 PM , Rating: 2
It works just fine when you plug it into your computer's USB port. All you need is some software to play the movies with.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By jtesoro on 2/7/2008 7:24:56 AM , Rating: 2
But if you use Vista, you may not see movies in maximum possible HD resolutions unless your monitor is connected via HDMI and your video card fully supports HDCP.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By Aikouka on 2/7/2008 8:43:14 AM , Rating: 2
DVI is fully compatible with HDCP; so no... you do not need HDMI.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By omnicronx on 2/7/2008 8:52:21 AM , Rating: 2
Still only newer cards support HDCP over DVI, and many cards that are a year+ old that say support it, sometimes do not provide the codes to do the HDCP handshake.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By erikejw on 2/6/2008 5:48:46 PM , Rating: 2
It works fine connected to a PC.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By Samus on 2/6/08, Rating: -1
RE: Internal HD for the 360
By daftrok on 2/27/2008 12:56:11 AM , Rating: 1
I think you are confusing them with the Police.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By jadeskye on 2/6/2008 2:48:35 PM , Rating: 2
i think an external blu-ray drive is very likely.
i sold my external hd-dvd drive for my xbox some time ago when i saw what direction the market is moving in.

some people say that microsoft made a mistake by not including the hd-dvd drive internally. maybe they did, but they deffinately have redemption in how they can switch to blu-ray at a moment's notice.

Either way, xbox or PS3, hd is in almost all cases better on a standalone player. which will be my personal choice when the market finally gains some stability.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By Spuke on 2/6/2008 3:02:34 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Either way, xbox or PS3, hd is in almost all cases better on a standalone player.
My standalone player is better than either xbox or PS3.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By elmikethemike on 2/6/2008 3:16:57 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
My standalone player is better than either xbox or PS3.


Your stand-alone player is far better than the HD DVD addon for the 360, absolutely, but not better than the PS3. I own both a PS3 and Toshiba HD-A30. The PS3 is simply a better, faster player. I'm not trying to be a fanboy, just having seen the two in action, the PS3 is superior in everything from movie playback, speed, to the remote control lauyout(I'm not referring to the sixaxis).

I own both formats and could honestly care less who wins this war. What's nice about it though is that MANY people are ditching their HD DVDs for cheap on ebay, and I've been making out like a bandit.

As far as MS's addon, I owned that for a while also, and why anyone would get that over a Toshiba model is beyond me. Between the 360,its power brick, and the add on, it's just way too much space, and WAY too loud.

Take it from an early adopter of this crap, stay away from the add on.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By Spuke on 2/6/08, Rating: -1
RE: Internal HD for the 360
By daftrok on 2/6/2008 4:17:04 PM , Rating: 2
Which stand alone player do you have?


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By rninneman on 2/6/08, Rating: 0
RE: Internal HD for the 360
By daftrok on 2/27/2008 12:54:43 AM , Rating: 2
It happens. I shudder to think of the outrage PS3 owners would feel if Blu ray lost.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By AlphaVirus on 2/6/2008 4:30:56 PM , Rating: 3
Actually I dont think his statement is far from fact. The PS3 is far superior than the standalones. The HDDVD addon may be better if you dont mind a bunch of clutter and the turbojet noise of the 360.

The PS3 does in fact run faster than a standalone. It makes fairly similar noise since it has only a single fan. Which at times you might not even know its running if you dont look at the Power light. There is no difference in quality since they both can play 1080p.

So other than picture quality, the PS3 is better than standalone. Also remember that the PS3 can play games, has a hard drive, easy firmware updates, and can Fold@home for Stanford University.
Can your standalone do that?


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By jadeskye on 2/6/08, Rating: -1
RE: Internal HD for the 360
By rninneman on 2/6/2008 5:34:47 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
what do you base that on? it's pretty much an accepted fact, like i said at the start of this thread, that stand alone players are significantly better then their console counterparts.


I didn't realize it was accepted fact that standalone players are better than consoles. Show me where this is accepted fact.

In fact, the fundamental nature of how the PS3 and Xbox360 are designed and are programmed, gives them the potential for better performance than SA players. This is because of their powerful general purpose CPUs.) I cannot speak from personal experience with the Xbox360, but it is probably similar to the PS3 in that it can decode directly to 1080p whereas virtually every SA player decodes to 1080i and then deinterlaces back to 1080p because the ASICs for decoding to 1080p are basically non-existent. The PS3 scores perfect in every category except noise reduction on the Silicon Optix HQV benchmark. I bet the Xbox360 would have similar results on the HD-DVD version of the HQV benchmark. Firmware updates to the PS3 and Xbox360 can do more for their respective video and audio processing than an SA player.

quote:
Although i haven't tested many recent blu-ray players i'm sure that many of the new and upcoming ones far outperform it.


You are making assumptions. The only thing the new Pioneer and Panasonic players have on the PS3 is the ability to decode DTS-HD Master Audio (which will probably be added to the PS3 in a future firmware update) and integrated IR control. This is not to say this won't change in the future, but for right now, the PS3 is among the best performing players available.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By omnicronx on 2/7/2008 8:39:36 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I didn't realize it was accepted fact that standalone players are better than consoles. Show me where this is accepted fact.
I didn't realize someone could manipulate the facts, and get rated a 5. The PS3 is the best BD player.. why ? not because its a console, not because of its shiny black finish. The PS3 is the best BD player solely because of Sony's dreaded profiles. The PS3 is the affordable player that will be fully compatibly with future profiles (updated to 1.1, and eventually will be 2.0).
quote:
I cannot speak from personal experience with the Xbox360, but it is probably similar to the PS3 in that it can decode directly to 1080p whereas virtually every SA player decodes to 1080i and then deinterlaces back to 1080p because the ASICs for decoding to 1080p are basically non-existent.
Only first gen player did this, all newer 1080p players output the frames progressively.

As a rule of thumb, more components equals more interference, so this is why I have always believed S/A players are better than consoles.(Just as a soundcard is better than onboard).

quote:
The only thing the new Pioneer and Panasonic players have on the PS3 is the ability to decode DTS-HD Master Audio
The Ps3 will not support DTS-MA bitstream, probably ever. Its an incompatibility with the PS3's HDMI chip, although it supports DTS-MA over multichannel LPCM. (decodes it on the machine)

I'm not hating the PS3. I just do not think saying consoles are better than standalones is correct. Especially when it is the the lackluster design and rollout of the BD profiles are really to blame, for the pour quality of BD S/A's. If this war had gone the other way to HD-DVD, you would be singing a different song. Having no profiles makes HD-DVD S/A's much better than their console counterpart.

P.S I own an S/A HD-DVD player and a PS3 for BD's.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By omnicronx on 2/7/2008 9:12:24 AM , Rating: 2
P.S The Ps3 does not support any high def audio codec via bitstream over HDMI. Not that i care as i believe they are the same thing, but many audiophiles believe decoding on the receiver is the way to go. I guess the PS3's advanced architecture is so powerful, it's just too good to pass-through the audio via bitstream, which in theory should be an easier, and less processor intensive process than doing the decoding on the player.

The only reason i can think of that sony would leave out this support is cost, figuring most people would 'make due' without bitstream audio. Yet another compromise that has to be made when mixing a console with a movie player.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By BansheeX on 2/7/2008 1:56:06 PM , Rating: 2
It makes no difference where the decoding of a compressed audio track is taking place, especially when its lossless, which most blu-ray discs are. As long as the receiver is capable of taking LPCM over HDMI, you're fine.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By omnicronx on 2/7/2008 2:38:20 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It makes no difference where the decoding of a compressed audio track is taking place, especially when its lossless, which most blu-ray discs are. As long as the receiver is capable of taking LPCM over HDMI, you're fine.
Not true at all, for an audiophile, as i mentioned there is a difference. If you have ever heard of 'jitter' you would know what i was talking about. Although both formats would theoretically produce bit-error free data, jitter can cause slight changes in the waveform, so that it although it is close to the original signal, it isnt the same. Letting the receiver decode allows the signal data to be passed through straight to the receiver, and essentially only processed when it hits the DACS (digital to analog converters).

The rule of thumb is for most(me included), Multichannel PCM is perfectly fine, but if you are going to spend 400+ dollars on a BD player and who knows what on stereo equipement, you expect the best.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By rninneman on 2/7/2008 3:46:18 PM , Rating: 2
Jitter can affect the compressed or uncompressed formats equally. Jitter affects any digital information transported through any medium that doesn't have error control such as HDMI.

You should try reading more before you go spreading BS.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By omnicronx on 2/7/2008 4:01:40 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Jitter can affect the compressed or uncompressed formats equally. Jitter affects any digital information transported through any medium that doesn't have error control such as HDMI.
Ha you obviously don't know what you are talking about, Jitter occurs even when there is error control. Jitter does not result in bit-data error, jitter is accurate 'analog' time-clock information sent down with the LPCM signal... which governs the DAC process. So those 100% accurate bits are converted to analog voltage at a slightly improper time... resulting in a waveform that isn't shaped exactly like the original... even though you have 100% bit-accurate data.

Cat cought your tongue?


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By rninneman on 2/7/2008 4:51:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Ha you obviously don't know what you are talking about, Jitter occurs even when there is error control. Jitter does not result in bit-data error, jitter is accurate 'analog' time-clock information sent down with the LPCM signal... which governs the DAC process. So those 100% accurate bits are converted to analog voltage at a slightly improper time... resulting in a waveform that isn't shaped exactly like the original... even though you have 100% bit-accurate data.


Lets go back to Electronics 101... Jitter affects all types of electronic communications. Jitter is what causes a significant percentage of bit errors. One of the main purposes of error correction and buffering is to virtually eliminate the effects of jitter. (If it didn't, the computer you are reading this on would hardly function.) So yes, jitter affects the signal over HDMI regardless of whether it is compressed or uncompressed. In fact, it could be argued that in compressed form, jitter can degrade the signal more because the if the same number of bits are lost, it affects a greater percentage of the compressed signal's data.

quote:
Cat cought your tongue?


Are you retarded? Do you even know what that expression means?


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By omnicronx on 2/7/2008 6:14:18 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
One of the main purposes of error correction and buffering is to virtually eliminate the effects of jitter.
Did i not just say one has nothing to do with the other, you can have 100% data accuracy and still have jitter. If you need proof, a its a simple internet search away)http://avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=123895...
quote:
jitter can degrade the signal more because the if the same number of bits are lost, it affects a greater percentage of the compressed signal's data.


10% of 10 is 1, 10% of 20 is 2, 10% of 30 is 3..... all of which are the same ratio.. get where i am going with this? 10% signal loss, is 10% signal loss as the ratio is the same.. ... you will lose the same amount of data regardless of how it is sent. (all 1/10th of the original amount of data sent)

Whats funny is ive read the same argument you are making on various other sites, only to be debunked by anyone that can do simple math.

quote:
Are you retarded? Do you even know what that expression means?
Nope i don't, I just wrote it hoping nobody would notice...


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By rninneman on 2/7/2008 8:27:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Did i not just say one has nothing to do with the other, you can have 100% data accuracy and still have jitter. If you need proof, a its a simple internet search away)http://avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=123895...


I think you are missing the point. Due to the nature of how HDMI transmits data, jitter can cause data loss regardless of the data being transmitted. HDMI is not feeding the DAC directly. (There is more than one type of jitter and they can affect electronic communications in different ways.) All data is equally susceptible over HDMI; jitter doesn't care if it's LPCM, TrueHD, or video for that matter. You need to bone up on how HDMI works.

quote:
10% of 10 is 1, 10% of 20 is 2, 10% of 30 is 3..... all of which are the same ratio.. get where i am going with this? 10% signal loss, is 10% signal loss as the ratio is the same.. ... you will lose the same amount of data regardless of how it is sent. (all 1/10th of the original amount of data sent)

Whats funny is ive read the same argument you are making on various other sites, only to be debunked by anyone that can do simple math.


You have it backwards. If you lose 10 bytes out 100 bytes of LPCM; you've lost 10%. If that same LPCM data can be packed into 50 bytes through MLP (TrueHD compression), those same 10 lost bytes amount to 20% data loss. That's twice as much lost data in this example but the actually difference will depend on the efficiency of the compression which varies with content. I'm not claiming that sending LPCM is definitely better from this perspective; I'm pointing out that technical problems exist with doing it either way. Since decoding in the player offers more functionality, that wins.

I hope that was simple enough arithmetic for you.

quote:
Nope i don't, I just wrote it hoping nobody would notice...


Or did you hope I wouldn't reply so you could look like you had the last word?


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By rninneman on 2/7/2008 3:42:08 PM , Rating: 2
Your ignorance knows no bounds.

quote:
I didn't realize someone could manipulate the facts, and get rated a 5. The PS3 is the best BD player.. why ? not because its a console, not because of its shiny black finish. The PS3 is the best BD player solely because of Sony's dreaded profiles. The PS3 is the affordable player that will be fully compatibly with future profiles (updated to 1.1, and eventually will be 2.0).


What facts have been twisted? Well you didn't point out any, so I guess none. As for the "dreaded profiles" you speak of, customers are so pissed off about them, Blu-ray is out selling HD-DVD 3 to 1. Even though profiles will go largely unnoticed by the general population, HD-DVD fanboys bring them up any chance they get.

quote:
Only first gen player did this, all newer 1080p players output the frames progressively.

As a rule of thumb, more components equals more interference, so this is why I have always believed S/A players are better than consoles.(Just as a soundcard is better than onboard).


Just because the player has 1080p output doesn't mean that the decoder outputs 1080p. Why do you think all of these players now tout the Silicon Optix deinterlacers? It's not just for DVD upscaling. The MPEG/VC-1 decoder outputs 1080i and the deinterlacer converts it back to 1080p. I know this sounds backward, but don't blame me; I don't design these things. Remeber when Samsung released the first Blu-ray player, the BDP1000, and it got panned for its poor 1080p image quality? It was improved with firmware updates, but the problem was what I just described. I'm not even sure if the newest SA players can decode directly to 1080p. If someone else has any info to shed light on the subject, I'd be interested.

quote:
The Ps3 will not support DTS-MA bitstream, probably ever. Its an incompatibility with the PS3's HDMI chip, although it supports DTS-MA over multichannel LPCM. (decodes it on the machine)


You are correct that the PS3 doesn't support TrueHD or DTS-HD over HDMI. (You are wrong about it currently decoding DTS-HD MA though.) It doesn't matter though. Once discs are authored in advanced mode (like every HD-DVD released thus far), the decoder in the receiver becomes absolutely useless. The players will have to decode the HD audio to LPCM to take advantage of those tracks. (Which ironically will only require an HDMI 1.1 receiver.) Since decoding TrueHD and DTS-HD is like decompressing a Zip file, it doesn't matter whether it is done in the player or the receiver with respect to sound quality. With the decoding d

quote:
I'm not hating the PS3. I just do not think saying consoles are better than standalones is correct. Especially when it is the the lackluster design and rollout of the BD profiles are really to blame, for the pour quality of BD S/A's. If this war had gone the other way to HD-DVD, you would be singing a different song. Having no profiles makes HD-DVD S/A's much better than their console counterpart.


What HD-DVD player can decode DTS-HD MA? None. As for a more complete format; you are naive to believe the HD-DVD format would not change over time if it lasts. DVD has changed a lot. The first players didn't support DTS at all, seamless branching, progressive scan, HDMI up-scaling, DVD-R/RW+R/RW discs, picture discs, Divx files, and on and on. Time to face reality; all technology changes and evolves over time, even "standards."

quote:
P.S The Ps3 does not support any high def audio codec via bitstream over HDMI. Not that i care as i believe they are the same thing, but many audiophiles believe decoding on the receiver is the way to go. I guess the PS3's advanced architecture is so powerful, it's just too good to pass-through the audio via bitstream, which in theory should be an easier, and less processor intensive process than doing the decoding on the player.


LPCM is considered to be HD audio so the PS3 does support the most important of the 3. As I've already explained, the other 2 won't be necessary in the very near future.

quote:
The only reason i can think of that sony would leave out this support is cost, figuring most people would 'make due' without bitstream audio. Yet another compromise that has to be made when mixing a console with a movie player.


Yes, Sony probably left it out because of cost reasons but it was also because they were probably pressed for time because HDMI 1.3 was ratified so close to the launch of the PS3. Silicon Image probably didn't have an HDMI transmitter ready for Sony that was truly 1.3 compliant. Not to sound like a broken record, that functionality is useless in the long run so the only people who care are people like yourself that are looking for flaws in the PS3's BR functionality. The only drawbacks are lack of IR and have to deal with the XMB which are not performance related.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By omnicronx on 2/7/2008 5:01:37 PM , Rating: 1
Wow long post.. where do i begin..
quote:
As for the "dreaded profiles" you speak of, customers are so pissed off about them, Blu-ray is out selling HD-DVD 3 to 1
HD-DVD S/As were outselling BD S/A's by a fair margin before the Warner announcement. Of course we were not talking about sales at all, we were talking about why the PS3 is considered the best BD player but ok.. (the PS3 as a BD player still dwarfs the amount of S/A BD players sold). Makes sense, as it's cheaper and does more than the expensive players, WOW
quote:
Even though profiles will go largely unnoticed by the general population, HD-DVD fanboys bring them up any chance they get.
Once again, I have a PS3 and an HD-DVD player, I am far less biased than most people on this site, probably including you.
quote:
Just because the player has 1080p output doesn't mean that the decoder outputs 1080p. Why do you think all of these players now tout the Silicon Optix deinterlacers? It's not just for DVD upscaling. The MPEG/VC-1 decoder outputs 1080i and the deinterlacer converts it back to 1080p.
Your an idiot, you read one google article and you think you know all. Every BD and HD-DVD disc contains 1080p/24 information. As not all TV's are compatible with 24hz output, your player (whether it be PS3, HD-DVD or BD S/A) needs to convert the signal so that it is compatible with your TV.
There are 3 steps your player can take to process the information on a 1080p player.

1. You have a 1080p player with a 24hz compatible TV, and your player merely outputs a 1080p/24 signal directly to the TV, with no deinterlacing done by the player or TV.
2. Your TV is 1080p but does not support 24hz. Your player player reinterlaces the signal to 1080i/60hz and then deinterlaces the signal to 1080p/30hz and outputs to your TV.
3. Your TV is 1080p/30 and your player converts the signal to 1080i, outputs to your TV, and lets your TV do the deinterlacing.

ALL new high end, and some entry level BD players output in 24hz, the PS3 is not the only player that can pass the signal to the TV without decoding, and even when doing so, your TV must be 24hz to take advantage. Just in case you need me to simplify my point, All players including the PS3 do some kind of processing unless your TV is 24hz. '
quote:
What HD-DVD player can decode DTS-HD MA?
To my knowledge none do, but we were talking about BD players, and by May we will have BD players that will support TrueHD and DTS-MA bitstream (Samsung 1500, Panasonic's DMP-BD50 will both do it) . The fact remains the PS3 will never be able to send DTS-MA over bitstream, not that this has anything to do with this topic, I was merely stating that the PS3 can't support DTS-MA because of incompatibilities in the HDMI chip, because the op said they might with a firmware update.

quote:
LPCM is considered to be HD audio so the PS3 does support the most important of the 3. As I've already explained, the other 2 won't be necessary in the very near future.
Thats nice, but M LPCM still falls under the domain of jitter, as explained in my other post. And the 'other two' wont go away in the near future, we will always have a bit for bit format of some kind.

quote:
Silicon Image probably didn't have an HDMI transmitter ready for Sony that was truly 1.3 compliant.
*looks up definition of crippled* 'Crippled: Lamed; lame; disabled; impeded.'. Glad we got that out of the way, sound familiar? <caugh>Profiles</caugh>
I'm glad I have a PS3 and i don't have to worry, oops.. didn't mean to rub it in..


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By omnicronx on 2/7/2008 7:17:32 PM , Rating: 2
I really hope i was rated down for my last comment, as the rest of the comment is nothing but fact.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By rninneman on 2/8/2008 2:14:59 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
HD-DVD S/As were outselling BD S/A's by a fair margin before the Warner announcement. Of course we were not talking about sales at all, we were talking about why the PS3 is considered the best BD player but ok.. (the PS3 as a BD player still dwarfs the amount of S/A BD players sold). Makes sense, as it's cheaper and does more than the expensive players, WOW


Oh really? Got data to back that up? Let's look at some to the contrary.
http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6505633.htm...
http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/Industry_Tr...
http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6509196.htm...
The first article shows that at the end of November, HD-DVD player sales totaled 750,000 including the Xbox add-on. The second article shows that at that time, the Xbox add-on accounted for 269,000 players sold thus far. That leaves fewer than 500,000 HD-DVD SA players. The third article shows that Blu-ray players in the US had reached 2.7 million. Of the 2.7 million, the PS3 was 2 million. This leaves 700,000 Blu-ray SA players. Last time I checked, 700,000>500,000. You are wrong.

quote:
Once again, I have a PS3 and an HD-DVD player, I am far less biased than most people on this site, probably including you.


Just because you have both, doesn't make you unbiased. You clearly are ignoring fact which biases you towards SA players. As for unbiased, from the outset, I gave the Xbox360 the benefit of the doubt that it could do similar things with its video processing and for HDMI version, similar things with its audio. I could be wrong about the Xbox because I just haven't seen detailed enough technical information about it. I also stated that SA players in the future will compete and beat the PS3 in many aspects, but that time is not now.

quote:
Your an idiot, you read one google article and you think you know all. Every BD and HD-DVD disc contains 1080p/24 information. As not all TV's are compatible with 24hz output, your player (whether it be PS3, HD-DVD or BD S/A) needs to convert the signal so that it is compatible with your TV.
There are 3 steps your player can take to process the information on a 1080p player.

1. You have a 1080p player with a 24hz compatible TV, and your player merely outputs a 1080p/24 signal directly to the TV, with no deinterlacing done by the player or TV.
2. Your TV is 1080p but does not support 24hz. Your player player reinterlaces the signal to 1080i/60hz and then deinterlaces the signal to 1080p/30hz and outputs to your TV.
3. Your TV is 1080p/30 and your player converts the signal to 1080i, outputs to your TV, and lets your TV do the deinterlacing.

ALL new high end, and some entry level BD players output in 24hz, the PS3 is not the only player that can pass the signal to the TV without decoding, and even when doing so, your TV must be 24hz to take advantage. Just in case you need me to simplify my point, All players including the PS3 do some kind of processing unless your TV is 24hz. '


Again, you prove your blatant ignorance. While every BR and HD-DVD contains the 1080/24p information, BR actually stores it as 1080/24p whereas HD-DVD stores it as 1080/30p with frame repeat flags. You do not need a TV that supports 1080/24p to use a 1080p signal. Most players also support 1080/60p output for TVs that do not support 24p.

Most, if not all, SA players with 24p output employ video decoders that output 1080/60i regardless of source material. That signal is then fed internally in the player so a deinterlacer such as a Silicon Optix Reon VX or a Faroudja FLI2310. The deinterlacer then outputs the 1080/24p or 1080/60p signal depending on what the player is set to.

I don't believe there is a player in existence that supports 1080/30p. (Careful, just because it has the same scan rate as 1080/60i doesn't make it the same.)

The PS3 can pass the signal without decoding? How does it even work then? You've misunderstood what I've been trying to tell you from the beginning. The PS3 decodes directly to 1080/24p so it requires no deinterlacing for Blu-ray discs when set to a progressive output resolution. SA players don't have this advantage. In the future, this will most likely change as the necessary ASICs become more readily available.

quote:
To my knowledge none do, but we were talking about BD players, and by May we will have BD players that will support TrueHD and DTS-MA bitstream (Samsung 1500, Panasonic's DMP-BD50 will both do it) . The fact remains the PS3 will never be able to send DTS-MA over bitstream, not that this has anything to do with this topic, I was merely stating that the PS3 can't support DTS-MA because of incompatibilities in the HDMI chip, because the op said they might with a firmware update.


You are wrong yet again. (See a pattern emerging?) Both the Pioneer BDP95FD and the Panasonic DMPBD30K both support bitstream output of all formats and both are currently available. My OP stated that decoding to LPCM would be available in future firmware. I never minced words about the current PS3 not being able to ever send TrueHD or DTS-HD over HDMI.

quote:
Thats nice, but M LPCM still falls under the domain of jitter, as explained in my other post. And the 'other two' wont go away in the near future, we will always have a bit for bit format of some kind.


As I explained in my other post, jitter does affect all formats. You are right in that TrueHD and DTS-HD won't go away in receivers any time soon; that doesn't mean they are going to be used though. As I have stated ad nauseum, once discs are authored in advanced mode (which will probably be around the time the first profile 2.0 discs start arriving), the players will not even be able to transmit them over HDMI whether you want to or not. So yes, those 2 formats will not be necessary in the receiver in the near future.

Wait, but you have an HD-DVD SA player so you should know all about that since every HD-DVD is authored in advanced mode already requiring the decoding be done in the player. Tell me again how you are not biased.

quote:
*looks up definition of crippled* 'Crippled: Lamed; lame; disabled; impeded.'. Glad we got that out of the way, sound familiar? <caugh>Profiles</caugh>
I'm glad I have a PS3 and i don't have to worry, oops.. didn't mean to rub it in..


Was that an attempt at humor? What is this "caugh" you speak of? Thanks for restating that you are the owner of a PS3 yet again; I think the whole world must know by now. What are you rubbing in? Are you assuming that you have a PS3 and I don't? I haven't discussed anywhere what equipment I have so how would you know?


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By omnicronx on 2/8/2008 9:48:25 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Oh really? Got data to back that up? Let's look at some to the contrary.
I am glad you can read, because 'arguably' means the numbers are Sony's and are probably wrong.
quote:
That arguably gives Blu-ray set-tops a 700,000 piece of overall format unit sales. But the picture is muddied somewhat by the likely gangbuster PlayStation 3 sales in November due to the introduction of the relatively cheap $399 PlayStation 3
'Arguably' is not a dependable source, all other sites i have seen from that time period put sony down to around the 500k range.

quote:
Just because you have both, doesn't make you unbiased. You clearly are ignoring fact which biases you towards SA players.
How am i ignoring fact? If we want to bring fact into the the matter heres a fact. Historically STANDALONE PLAYERS ARE BETTER THAN CONSOLES!
Even if the PS3 used exactly the same components for BD playback, it still would be inferior. More parts closer together = more interference, theres nothing more to argue about here. Just because BD group has no good players out do not make consoles better. Your argument also makes little sense, as the PS3 is the only console that is currently better than any good S/A player. And for the record, my ps3 sucks for uscalling DVD's compared to my HD-DVD player.

quote:
Again, you prove your blatant ignorance. While every BR and HD-DVD contains the 1080/24p information, BR actually stores it as 1080/24p whereas HD-DVD stores it as 1080/30p with frame repeat flags.
haha, why would you have repeat flags on a 1080/30p signal? Its the other way around genius. repeat flags are added to the 24p signal so that 6 frames out of 24 every second (approx) are repeated, resulting in a 30p signal(IVTC, 2:3 pulldown whatever you want to call it). Stop reading forum posts from september 2006, where nobody knew what they were talking about. Some people believed that HD-DVD stored the signal in 1080i/24 with flags so that it is possible to convert easily to other resolutions, but that was never proved, nor would it change the fact that the signal can be combined with 0 signal loss with no difference in quality. I will sum it up one last time "IF BD AND HD_DVD PLAYED THE SAME MOVIE ENCODED WITH THE SAME CODEC,BOTH ON 1080p/24 PLAYERS THEY WOULD LOOK EXACTLY THE SAME"
You are kidding yourself if you think otherwise, yet another piece of Sony propaganda filling your head.

"Hey bestbuy guy, whats the difference between BD and HD-DVD"
"BB Guy: TWICE THE RESOLUTION, OBVIOUSLY!!!"

quote:
You are wrong yet again. (See a pattern emerging?) Both the Pioneer BDP95FD and the Panasonic DMPBD30K both support bitstream output of all formats and both are currently available.
??? Thanks for proving my point? You asked if any players support bitstream output, as you bit my head off after mentioning no DTS-MA support on the PS3. I said to my knowledge there are none(because i didnt know), but there will be some for sure this spring.
Now you are starting to scare me because you are way past contradicting yourself, you are now on to forgetting your own questions.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By omnicronx on 2/8/2008 9:58:06 AM , Rating: 2
P.S I can guarantee there will be a better S/A BD player in the next year than the PS3, in terms of video quality. Care to make a wager?

In fact many people on the stupid blu-ray.com forum have already stated that top of the line $800-1000 players, already surpass the PS3.

This leaves me to believe that price, and profiles are what drives reviewers to state the PS3 is the best BD player, not necessarily video quality, as there are countless BD fans out there that will totally reject your statements. They must be bias too though right?


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By rninneman on 2/8/2008 1:47:38 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
P.S I can guarantee there will be a better S/A BD player in the next year than the PS3, in terms of video quality. Care to make a wager?


So are you admitting that the PS3 is the best one right now and then better ones will only come out later? I suggested in this thread before you that better SA players will eventually come out, so unless you are betting against that, we don't have a bet.

quote:
In fact many people on the stupid blu-ray.com forum have already stated that top of the line $800-1000 players, already surpass the PS3.


You just said the forum was stupid so how can we rely on the information posted there? Just because there are more pinheads like you posted the same BS in another forum doesn't make it correct. If someone posted in your favorite forum that the Earth was flat, would you believe that too?

quote:
This leaves me to believe that price, and profiles are what drives reviewers to state the PS3 is the best BD player, not necessarily video quality, as there are countless BD fans out there that will totally reject your statements. They must be bias too though right?


You are entitled to believe whatever you like; it doesn't mean it's right though. For many people the PS3 is not the best choice for them, but then again, for most people convenience is more important than performance. (Why do you think iPods are so popular even though regular CDs sound better than compressed music?) There probably are countless people that refuse to accept the PS3 has performance on par with the best players out right now. You are committing another logical fallacy though; consensus does not make something fact. Unfortunately, bias is often caused by people like you that are hell-bent on spreading FUD and your own agenda.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By rninneman on 2/8/2008 1:32:15 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I am glad you can read, because 'arguably' means the numbers are Sony's and are probably wrong.

quote:
That arguably gives Blu-ray set-tops a 700,000 piece of overall format unit sales. But the picture is muddied somewhat by the likely gangbuster PlayStation 3 sales in November due to the introduction of the relatively cheap $399 PlayStation 3

'Arguably' is not a dependable source, all other sites i have seen from that time period put sony down to around the 500k range.


You are resorting to arguing semantics because you have no data to back up your claims. If you actually read the articles I linked to, you would see that the numbers are corroborated with numbers from NPD as well. Not to mention, why would Toshiba be any more reliable than Sony?

quote:
How am i ignoring fact? If we want to bring fact into the the matter heres a fact. Historically STANDALONE PLAYERS ARE BETTER THAN CONSOLES!
Even if the PS3 used exactly the same components for BD playback, it still would be inferior. More parts closer together = more interference, theres nothing more to argue about here. Just because BD group has no good players out do not make consoles better. Your argument also makes little sense, as the PS3 is the only console that is currently better than any good S/A player. And for the record, my ps3 sucks for uscalling DVD's compared to my HD-DVD player.


Well, you've ignored just about every fact I've presented because it contradicts your misguided view. So you are basing your opinion that SA DVD players have been historically better than the PS2 or original Xbox at playing DVDs. It is a logical fallacy to assume the PS3 is automatically worse than all SA players because of other consoles. If we go by your "more parts = more interference" false logic, that means players with no secondary video and audio decoders and no ethernet and no local storage should perform better than newer units that will support Profile 2.0. The number of components is irrelevant if the device is designed well. The PS3 is a better BR player than most SA players. I have this several times already, but you can't get it through your thick skull; the PS3 is among the best BR players out. The only players that compete at the moment are the DMPBD30 and BDP95FD. Even then the PS3 still has its advantages over those 2 players so there is no clearcut "best" player. I'm glad we have you on record about your completely unbiased feelings on the PS3's DVD upscaling vs your HD-DVD player. I thought we were discussing Blu-ray playback. While we are on the subject of DVD up-scaling, when setup correctly with recent firmware, the PS3 can score over 120 out of 130 points on the Silicon Optix HQV benchmark. So the only thing that your SA player probably does better than the PS3 is noise reduction which only matters for discs with noisy transfers.

quote:
haha, why would you have repeat flags on a 1080/30p signal? Its the other way around genius. repeat flags are added to the 24p signal so that 6 frames out of 24 every second (approx) are repeated, resulting in a 30p signal(IVTC, 2:3 pulldown whatever you want to call it). Stop reading forum posts from september 2006, where nobody knew what they were talking about. Some people believed that HD-DVD stored the signal in 1080i/24 with flags so that it is possible to convert easily to other resolutions, but that was never proved, nor would it change the fact that the signal can be combined with 0 signal loss with no difference in quality. I will sum it up one last time "IF BD AND HD_DVD PLAYED THE SAME MOVIE ENCODED WITH THE SAME CODEC,BOTH ON 1080p/24 PLAYERS THEY WOULD LOOK EXACTLY THE SAME"


It's obvious you know very little about video codecs and how they are implemented on Blu-ray and HD-DVD. You refuse to listen to correct information and you refuse to do any reading on real information about the formats. You continue to hang on other forum posts which are probably wrong. I cannot help you since you do not want to help yourself. You are absolutely wrong about how HD-DVD video is encoded. Just because both formats use the same codecs, doesn't mean they are implemented the same way. Just like you have no idea how the formats implement each codec, you have no idea how each player decodes each format.

quote:
??? Thanks for proving my point? You asked if any players support bitstream output, as you bit my head off after mentioning no DTS-MA support on the PS3. I said to my knowledge there are none(because i didnt know), but there will be some for sure this spring.


I didn't ask anything that wasn't a rhetorical question. (That means I already knew the answer.) I knew there are no HD-DVD players that support DTS-HD bitstream out or internal decoding to LPCM. I also knew about the Panasonic and Pioneer players; in fact I told you about them. I also knew that the PS3 will never bitstream out TrueHD or DTS-HD. You refuse to accept the fact that the lack of bitstream out is not a downfall if the player supports internal decoding. You refuse to accept the fact that discs authored in advanced mode will render bitstream outputs useless. I have not contradicted myself, but at least you are starting to admit that you don't know what you are talking about.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By elmikethemike on 2/6/2008 7:33:46 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
the Playstation 3 was one of the very first blu-ray players, an admirable undertaking. but technology improves with time..


You ought to do some research on the topic. It's clear you either just don't like Sony or refuse to accept the fact that the PS3 is regarded as a top tier blu ray player, if not the best available. Just google it.

The fact of the matter for most people is that any blu ray player puts out 1080p picture and high-def sound. They all do that. But the PS3 has so much more to offer, namely simple firmware updates and extremely fast speed (when compared to ANY other high def player). Not to mention the rest of what the console can do.

Get it out of your head that standalones are better players by simple virtue of being a standalone.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By omnicronx on 2/7/2008 8:50:00 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
But the PS3 has so much more to offer, namely simple firmware updates and extremely fast speed (when compared to ANY other high def player).
So let me get this straight, because Sony royally screwed up with their profile system, leaving BD S/A players crippled and incompatible with newer profiles this makes consoles better in general?

quote:
Get it out of your head that standalones are better players by simple virtue of being a standalone.

Why? In general BD profiles aside, give me one good reason?
Because sony purposely priced the ps3 below all their BD players? Because putting a bunch of hardware in one box doesn't add extra interference? Or because using your Console for movies wears does not down the drive faster (see ps2).

The PS3 is the best BD player hands down, but thats about where it ends. Lackluster BD S/A designs do not prove your theory of S/A's being better in general one bit.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By BansheeX on 2/7/2008 2:06:20 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
So let me get this straight, because Sony royally screwed up with their profile system, leaving BD S/A players crippled and incompatible with newer profiles this makes consoles better in general?


You're argument is dependent on the gross exaggerations you're making about the profile issue. 1.0 profile players are not capable of PiP bonus content on newer profile discs, should those discs have it. That's it. It can still play the movie and everything else. Nobody even complained about PiP bonus content with DVD. It's a fluff bloat feature that HD-DVD fans turned into a rallying point over blu-ray, inflating its real value in an attempt to combat blu-ray's much more important advantages. They used words like "crippled" as though people who bought the 1.0 stand-alones had been screwed from playing new discs entirely. They're not, and you get the Fox News award for unbiased journalism.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By omnicronx on 2/7/2008 3:11:03 PM , Rating: 2
Profiles make the ps3 the only update able BD player. Are you seriously saying that being feature proof has no effect whatsoever on a reviewer when he says 'the ps3 is the best console'.

If the PS3 was a 1.0 player and non update able, people would consider the PS3 a 'crippled' product, because its missing features, Plain and simple! Both HD-DVD and BD outlined the features that would be in their players, HD-DVD delivered, BD did not.

Profiles are a Sony bandaid to get BD players out to the public before HD-DVD players saturated the market. Furthermore most of the up and coming 2.0 features were suppose to be in the initial BD release. Its nice you don't use the network features or pip, but BD is much more advanced than DVD, i think many more people will start using these features and studios will start implementing such features when High Def players become more mainstream. Your claim is that we should be stuck in the age of DVD, just because 'you think' nobody uses these features, or they are uneeded is baseless, and just a stupid thing to say in my mind.

You always come to the defense of the BD profiles, but regardless if you think the differences are meaningless, IT IS one of the main reasons the PS3 is considered the best BD player, the very thing we are debating in this thread


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By blaster5k on 2/6/2008 5:52:33 PM , Rating: 2
There is an advantage that the standalones have -- lower power consumption. Also, generally lower price. The fancy processor and graphics capabilities are overkill for movie playback, but do allow for that extra responsiveness.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By rninneman on 2/6/2008 5:58:19 PM , Rating: 2
The best you can come up with is power consumption? Plus, I'd like to see your data on the power consumption of a PS3 playing a movie (not a game) vs a standalone player and also an Xbox360's power consumption playing a movie (not a game) vs a standalone. The difference is probably negligible.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By Nanobaud on 2/6/2008 6:15:22 PM , Rating: 4
High-Quality content looks fine from a decent standalone, crap still looks like crap coming out of a console. I don't see much point in arguing the suitability of hardware. A good HTPC spanks them both on performance, but still has limited ability to come up with a better HD picture stream (except using obscure HD formats, but that's not a level comparison).


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By ElrondElvish on 2/7/2008 3:21:03 AM , Rating: 2
Uh, crap looks like crap coming out of any media player, standalone or not. Garbage in, Garbage out.

High-Quality content looks fine from a decent standalone or a decent console.

The PS3 is the best quality (and, by far, the most upgradeable) Blu-Ray player one can buy.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By robinthakur on 2/7/2008 6:06:38 AM , Rating: 2
With the advent of Bluray and HDDVD and the relevent content protection of both systems, HDCP/AACS, plus the fact that there's no solution at the present time (as far as I know) to outputting full uncompressed bitstream audio through HDMI output, my HTPC is gathering dust and is no longer used for much. This is not helped by the fact that playing upscaled DVD's through the PS3 is quicker, quieter and looks just as good as ffdshow can muster. As for playback of HD optical media, HTPC's dropped the ball, because there's no integrated way in Vista Media Centre to just play either format, it has to fire up Power dvd or whatever, and then push you back to the Vista mc interface afterwards, which is not always reliable. That's just rubbish. Then you've got the worry of disc compatibility which is less than the PS3/a standalone and the lack of Hi def audio, and you have to wonder why anyone would bother with them anymore....For SD yes, for HD NO!


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By walk2k on 2/6/2008 3:25:26 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
some people say that microsoft made a mistake by not including the hd-dvd drive internally. maybe they did, but they deffinately have redemption in how they can switch to blu-ray at a moment's notice.
well, it's probably a good thing after all that they didn't use HD-DVD since the format's future doesn't look bright.

however it was certainly a mistake to limit games to DVD-9.

already there are 3-disc games for the 360, and a likely 6-disc game in development... meanwhile launch titles for the PS3 were happily clocking in at 20GB with a single disc (Resistance) - let alone what we may see in 2-3 years.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By maverick85wd on 2/6/2008 4:07:46 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
well, it's probably a good thing after all that they didn't use HD-DVD since the format's future doesn't look bright.


I would argue that if Microsoft had put internal HD-DVD players in the 360 from the start the BD vs. HD-DVD outcome would be a lot different; the PS3 being used as a BD player is one of the reasons BD has become the more popular player... an internal player in the 360 very well could have made the difference.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By dubldwn on 2/6/2008 4:14:04 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
well, it's probably a good thing after all that they didn't use HD-DVD since the format's future doesn't look bright.

It doesn’t look bright because MS didn’t include and HD-DVD drive, which was a wise choice anyway.
quote:
however it was certainly a mistake to limit games to DVD-9.

With the inclusion of HD-DVD, the console would have been much more expensive and, therefore, MS would have moved less units. I can’t underscore this point enough. In November of ’05, the question on everyone’s lips was, “I wonder how well MS and Nin will do against Sony. I wonder how much market share they’ll get compared to Sony”. Thanks to Sony’s hardware bungling, MS changed perceptions dramatically. MS wouldn’t change there current position for anything.
quote:
already there are 3-disc games for the 360, and a likely 6-disc game in development

A couple Japanese developers felt compelled to include a bunch of unnecessary cut scenes. The price you pay is every 12 hours you have to get up and change a disk so you can watch their little movies.
quote:
let alone what we may see in 2-3 years

Just speculating, but you’ll probably see a new xbox with a Blu-ray drive, at just about the time Blu-ray is economical and required.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By BansheeX on 2/7/08, Rating: 0
RE: Internal HD for the 360
By Gio6518 on 2/6/2008 4:54:44 PM , Rating: 1
exactly 360 is limited to dvd9

they'll either have to integrate a hd drive but it probabally wont be BLU-RAY it'll be HD-DVD since its a dead format they can pick up cheap and have the space for future gaming, either that or they'll release a whole system


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By Steve Guilliot on 2/6/2008 8:21:43 PM , Rating: 2
DVD9 will be the only game format on the 360. The currently installed base requires it.

HD will come to xbox games no earlier than the 720 (?), which is probably 3-5 years away.


By StevoLincolnite on 2/7/2008 3:29:44 AM , Rating: 2
If they Include a Blue-Ray or HD-DVD Drive, games still won't be released on HD DVD or Blue-ray as the Install base will be split, which is not good for sales.
BUT - Blue-Ray and HD DVD is backwards compatible, so seeing it included in the consoles in the future may be possible - But I think it will only be used for movies, not for gaming.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By kilkennycat on 2/6/08, Rating: -1
RE: Internal HD for the 360
By SirLucius on 2/6/2008 3:46:24 PM , Rating: 3
Microsoft will (most likely) never release games on a Blu-ray or HD-DVD disc for the 360. Why? Because they'll split their user base. People who currently have 360's will have to buy new ones capable of reading either format. And while there a probably a few people out there dedicated to the 360 enough that they would in a heartbeat, the majority of people aren't going to want to shell out for a more expensive system. Especially since the price has been one of the reasons the 360 has sold so well. Even if they were to release games in two versions, one on a HD disc, the other on multiple DVD's, it would just add confusion to a market that has historically been very straightforward. Not to mention I just don't see it being cost effective.

But even if they did decide to sell a system with HD games, it probably wouldn't sell very well. It would be closer in price to the PS3, and with the way PS3 sales have been going, it wouldn't make much sense to release a more expensive Xbox that splits the user base. I don't know sales figures for all the different Xbox models out there, but I'd be willing to bet the cheaper ones sell better, especially now that they all include an HDMI port. Plus 360 owners have by and large shown that they could care less about the HD format war. At least in relation to the console market.

It's plausible that Microsoft would release a 360 that could play HD movies and market it as a more media-capable machine. But I'm almost entirely positive that the Xbox will continue to use DVD's until whatever new Microsoft system comes out.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By Pirks on 2/6/2008 5:30:55 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Microsoft will never release games on a Blu-ray or HD-DVD disc for the 360. Why?
Because you have no clue. They will do it, and they will release games in multi disc DVD version for older consoles and new single disc BRD version for new consoles. Two versions of the same game, just like software used to be released on floppies AND on CDs at the same time. Yeah, people like you forget history and then start spewing bs around.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By TerranMagistrate on 2/6/2008 7:51:58 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry but the Xbox 360 is a console and not a PC. Therefore Microsoft has little choice but to cater to the install base they have and not create a new section of 360 owners which will make the early adopters feel riped off. Consoles only get minor hardware updates.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By Pirks on 2/6/2008 8:02:34 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Consoles only get minor hardware updates
Replacing DVD with BRD in Xbox 360 is a minor update - it has no effect whatsoever on its core functionality, which is running games.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By BansheeX on 2/7/2008 1:25:57 PM , Rating: 2
Only if the BD/DVD combo drive is intended to add support for BD movies and not both BD movies and BD games. There's no way in hell you're going to see BD 360 games. It makes no sense financially as you can sell to the the full install base with a DVD release, and frankly two formats of games on the same console will be very confusing on the shelf and to consumers who aren't terribly savvy.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By SirLucius on 2/7/2008 1:22:49 AM , Rating: 2
I haven't forgotten history at all. I don't see how floppies and CD's, or even CD's and DVD's dual lives on computers are similar to the console market. PC's have always been more open ended than consoles. I'd consider each to be a major update to modern computers as well. And upgrading to a HD drive is a major update which concerns core functionality. It makes it so that everyone who owns an older system is incapable of playing new games.

I'm not saying that Microsoft won't include a HD-capable drive in their new system, but I highly doubt they'd go through the trouble of adding an internal HD drive in the 360 when it could separate their user base and cause consumer confusion.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By boing on 2/7/2008 4:45:07 AM , Rating: 2
That's idiotic, lets say by 2009 there are 25M 360's out there, then they release a more expensive version with BR, what game developer will write a BR game for a zero install base when he can put the same game on DVD and sell to a market of 25M ?

they will release games in multi disc DVD version for older consoles and new single disc BRD version for new consoles

if you could fit the game on DVD why put it on BR?


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By Gio6518 on 2/7/2008 12:57:19 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
That's idiotic, lets say by 2009 there are 25M 360's out there, then they release a more expensive version with BR, what game developer will write a BR game for a zero install base when he can put the same game on DVD and sell to a market of 25M


probabally the same developers that use BLU-RAY for PS3


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By omnicronx on 2/7/2008 9:26:14 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Because you have no clue. They will do it, and they will release games in multi disc DVD version for older consoles and new single disc BRD version for new consoles.
Never going to happen, that would create far too much customer confusion. Microsoft wants to keep their console universal, and if that means a little extra texture compression, and multiple discs, then so be it. Microsoft has always stood firm on the fact that the 360 will be DVD-9 throughout its lifetime. What we are going to start to see more of is a lot of downloadable content, mainly stuff that will fit on a BD disc, but not on a DVD. Don't be surprised if up and coming titles for the 360 like UT3 (which is already out for the PS3) do so.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By MFK on 2/6/2008 3:36:49 PM , Rating: 4
I fail to see why the Xbox 360 needs an internal HD drive.

It just doesn't.
It's doing fine the way it is, it will stay the way it is.
Its a console first, its games come on DVDs. Why would they want to launch another SKU with an internal HD?
Doesn't make sense, atleast to me.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By BansheeX on 2/7/2008 1:43:59 PM , Rating: 2
Judging by how many people whine about added clutter in their entertainment center, integrating the feature might be an overall cheaper and more appealing solution to some people than buying two separate things. I know many people who enjoy not having two separate hookups for games and movies with their PS3, and the feature in no way afflicts its gaming functionality. That is unless you believe the Wiitards who say that such a feature makes games less fun and developers blurry-eyed and unfocused, simply from the fact that the console now does more than play games.


RE: Internal HD for the 360
By theflux on 2/6/2008 3:56:33 PM , Rating: 2
I would be very surprised if they were to create an internal drive within a year, especially given the current state of studio support. The Live video marketplace has more studio support than HD DVD ever did, why would they add competition to themselves when they get paltry royalties (if any) from it?

Also, May is rapidly approaching.

Don't forget our gentleman's agreement.

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=7163&...


By TerranMagistrate on 2/6/2008 7:55:59 PM , Rating: 2
Not a chance, masher2.

Do you remember what Microsoft said? "We're all about choice with the Xbox 360" or something along those lines.

And besides, the 17 million current owners probably won't take kindly to a major upgrade on what is supposed to be a largely stationary architecture.


Costco already has them for $129
By LTG on 2/6/2008 2:20:25 PM , Rating: 1
Costco full stand alone HD-DVD players for $129.

What are the benefits to buying the MS add-on when you can get a separate player for the same price or even a higher stand alone player for a little more?

For me to bite the XBox add on would almost have to be $49.95.

Unless there is some big benefit to their player I'm missing...

LTG
iPhone ecards
http://www.hdgreetings.com




RE: Costco already has them for $129
By R Nilla on 2/6/2008 2:22:52 PM , Rating: 4
One nice feature is that you can plug it into your PC via USB and Windows will recognize it. Nice feature for the HTPC crowd. There are probably internal drives that aren't much more expensive, though.


RE: Costco already has them for $129
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 2/6/2008 2:26:10 PM , Rating: 1
Cheapest Internal HD/Blu drive is $300. It's from LG. So for 129.99 that isn't too shabby. The combo drive is probably better value since you join the Purple team and can watch it all. I'm planning to join the purple team later this year.

Purple FTW!


RE: Costco already has them for $129
By Gio6518 on 2/6/08, Rating: -1
RE: Costco already has them for $129
By altintx on 2/6/2008 5:18:02 PM , Rating: 2
Look again Gio, your product is only BluRay. MK said HD/Blu combo.


RE: Costco already has them for $129
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 2/6/2008 5:41:19 PM , Rating: 3
Yea, he didn't really take the time to read before posting but that's ok. He's just blind trolling.

HD DVD Only External Drive - 129.99
Blu-Ray Only Internal Drive - 179.99
Total - 309.98

Combo HD-DVD/Blu-Ray Internal Drive - 273.98
http://www.amazon.com/LG-Blu-Ray-Rewriter-Combo-GG...

Looks like the best option for a HTPC which was the topic of discussion in the first place. Why buy two drives one internal and one external when there is a combo internal drive that does it all and saves money? Purple, the smart decision.


RE: Costco already has them for $129
By BansheeX on 2/7/2008 1:47:59 PM , Rating: 2
Purple is stupid and you're promoting it out of self-interest. It perpetuates two formats which will permanently doom HD movies from becoming as mainstream and as cheap as DVDs have become today. You have nothing to worry about when buying a blu-ray player today besides the delayed blu-ray released of what are now HD-DVD exclusives.


By omnicronx on 2/7/2008 3:33:38 PM , Rating: 2
Don't you have a "I buy Sony Because My Sh*t don't Stink public awareness meeting" that you have to get to?

quote:
Purple is stupid and you're promoting it out of self-interest.


You posts are always extremely biased towards BD, I guess thats out of public interest though, right?


RE: Costco already has them for $129
By Gio6518 on 2/6/2008 5:59:28 PM , Rating: 1
my badd
i didnt realize for combo since i cant imagine anyone wanting HD-DVD anymore


RE: Costco already has them for $129
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 2/6/2008 6:49:08 PM , Rating: 3
I can.

-People who want to watch whatever regardless of format. (Both sides have exclusives)
-People who don't want to just throw out the HD-DVD movies they purchased.

Given the economy right now, HD-DVD adopters are unlikely to U-Turn and buy a BR Player and rebuy all their HD-DVD titles in Blu-Ray right away. Some (Transformers, Shrek3, etc...) aren't even available on Blu-Ray due to studio's taking sides. For the moment due to titles and to soften the transition from one to the other, Combo players are very palatable.

You also need to remember that Toshiba hasn't given up either. Dropping prices on players will push adoption from people who don't pay attention to the format war. I think the studio's are hoping by standing behind one format that will push for fast adoption of high-def media. When this fails to happen there is the possibility of studio's going neutral again. High-def implementation simply has bad timing. With the economy in the U.S. slowing down, and the global economy taking hits as well due to the ripple effect. People are spending less on high-def, prices of both the movies and the players are significantly higher than DVD's. The slumping DVD sales are fueling the fire under the studio's to push for high-def adoption to bring in new revenue.

My $0.02

On amazon currently.
HD-A3 720p/1080i - 118.49
HD-A30 1080p - 151.68
HD-A35 1080p - 226.00


By Gio6518 on 2/7/2008 12:49:33 PM , Rating: 2
thats wishful thinking to believe that studio's will go neutral again, chain stores like best buy and circuit city etc etc, are already making plans to discontinue HD-DVD sales in the next month or two, and as far as toshiba saying were not giving up is more BS theyre saing that right now to try to keep sales going so they can sell out of movies and players, hence the lower price on the 360 add-on, now if they were honest right now and said they're going to quit the fight, no one would buy anything, leaving them with alot of inventory, which means lots more revenue losses.

i do agree with you that they are trying to market to the uninformed consumer, but that again is to clearance out the remaining equipment.if i were to guess right now, id say they'll make an official announcement by june or july that theyre going to throw in the towel and you'll see universal and paramount titles on BLU-RAY, my other predictions have come true on related articles, (which were rated down cause people dont like to hear the truth just what they want to hear). theres only one possible future for HD-DVD if theyre going to stick around and that would be for M$ to integrate into the XBOX so they can provide more space for game data


By rninneman on 2/6/2008 5:54:29 PM , Rating: 2
You can't compare an HD-DVD only drive to a HD/BR combo drive on price. The more expensive one gives you more features. Wow, imagine that!


RE: Costco already has them for $129
By deeznuts on 2/6/2008 2:38:29 PM , Rating: 2
You can get the toshiba SD-S802A on ebay for a little more than $80. That's the drive inside the 360 add-on.

There is no benefit from the 360 add-on and probably is more of a detriment. It just really isn't that good of a HD DVD player. Advanced sound codecs cannot be passed through/decoded, and DVD upscaling isn't great.

would definitely buy a standalone or drop the bare drive into a properly configured HTPC. But if you want to just add it to a 360, then by all means go for it.


By cubdukat on 2/6/2008 5:31:49 PM , Rating: 2
So even if I have PowerDVD 7.x, which claims it can decode TrueHD and DTS-HD Master (are there EVEN any DTS-HD Master titles on HD-DVD?), it won't pass it over USB to be decoded?

Now I'm thinking twice about getting this thing for my Vista PC.


RE: Costco already has them for $129
By MFK on 2/6/2008 5:57:52 PM , Rating: 2
I'm looking to build one for my living room, and I have a couple of ideas with what I want to do.

But I just wanted to know what you guys think a properly configured HTPC should consist of.

Thanks


Good.
By daftrok on 2/6/2008 3:59:01 PM , Rating: 5
Now do the following to all your other accessories:

Wireless card: $29.99 (original price or OP: $99.99)
120GB HDD: $99.99 (OP: $179.99)
20GB HDD: $49.99 (OP: $99.99)
512 MB flash card: $9.99 (OP: $49.99 wtf)
64 MB flash card: $2.99 (OP: $39.99 WTF?!)
HDMI cable with optical/RCA out: $29.99 (OP: $49.99)
Component cables: $9.99 (OP: $39.99)
VGA cables: $9.99 (OP: $39.99)
S-video cables: $4.99 (OP: $19.99)
Quick charge kit: $19.99 ($OP: 29.99)
Wired Headset: $9.99 (OP: $19.99)
Wired controller: $29.99 (OP: $39.99)
Play and charge kit: $9.99 (OP: $19.99)
Rechargeable battery: $4.99 (OP: $11.99)
Universal Media Remote: $9.99 (OP: $19.99)
Wireless controller: $39.99 (OP: $49.99)
Wireless headset: $39.99 (OP $59.99)
Keyboard attachment: $19.99 (OP: $29.99)
Racing wheel: $59.99 (OP: $99.99)
Xbox web camera: $29.99 (OP: $39.99)




RE: Good.
By sweetsauce on 2/6/2008 8:00:12 PM , Rating: 2
Or they can ignore your brilliant business advice and keep the prices where they are which makes them more money. I wonder which they will choose...


RE: Good.
By TerranMagistrate on 2/6/2008 8:02:36 PM , Rating: 2
Those accessories sell pretty well so it's not likely to happen.


AU context
By homeroids on 2/6/2008 5:52:05 PM , Rating: 1
The article mentions the price drop will happen in Australia as well. Last I read, Blu-ray had 92% of the market here or higher. MS had sold a measley 3k units. BD is so prevalent here, it's not funny. This, I'd hate to say it, in the Australian context, is nothing more than a fire sale.




RE: AU context
By Timeless on 2/7/2008 1:03:46 AM , Rating: 2
I wouldn't think so. Take a look at console sales for the Xbox360 in Japan. As everyone knows, Japan is overwhelmingly Nintendo and Sony. Despite that fact, Microsoft cuts the cost of the 360 in Japan to try and boost sales. I'm thinking they are still backing HD-DVD more then having a fire sale.


Meh
By IceTron on 2/6/2008 3:18:13 PM , Rating: 1
Meh, ill wait till the combo HD/Blue ray players are cheaper in a few years. I don't like the idea of watching movies and letting my 360 HDD spin the whole time, slowly reducing its life span.




"We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk." -- Apple CEO Steve Jobs














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki