If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot. More details on our policies, especially our Own the Source rule are available here. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.

Poll: Which is better?
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
I own a BD player.
100.00%
1 100.00%
I own an HD-DVD player.
0%
0 0%
I own BOTH formats!
0%
0 0%
I hate them all.
0%
0 0%
I don't own an HD format, but if I did it would be BD.
0%
0 0%
I don't own an HD format, but if I did it would be HD-DVD.
0%
0 0%
I don't own an HD format, I'm waiting to see which prevails.
0%
0 0%
I don't own either but I'd probably buy both when the time comes.
0%
0 0%
I'm an undecided patron.
0%
0 0%
Total 1 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

BD Vs HD-DVD
#1
Here's the thread to dissect the formats... Let me start off by saying I can't stand the BluRay Disc format. I believe it's a complete rip-off to consumers and that it doesn't contain any features other than "gimmicks" above HD-DVD. I believe the things that matter are the following:

Disc Standards:
[Image: bh1il3.jpg]

Capacity:
BD: 25 & 50GB
HDVD: 15 & 30GB

Mandatory Codecs:
BD and HD-DVD - Video: MPEG-4 AVC (H.264), VC-1, MPEG-2

BD - Audio (Lossy): DD (640 Kbit/s), DTS (1.5 Mbit/s)
BD - Audio (Lossless): PCM

HD-DVD - Audio (Lossy): DD (504 Kbit/s), DTS (1.5 Mbit/s), DD+ (3.0 Mbit/s)
HD-DVD - Audio (Lossless): PCM, Dolby TrueHD

Optional Codecs:
BD - Audio (Lossy): DD+ (1.7 Mbit/s), DTS-HD High Res (6.0 Mbit/s)
BD - Audio (Lossless): Dolby TrueHD, DTS-HD Master Audio

HD-DVD - Audio (Lossy): DTS-HD High Res (3.0 Mbit/s)
HD-DVD - Audio (Lossless): DTS-HD Master Audio

Secondary video decoder (PiP) & Secondary audio decoder:
HD-DVD - Mandatory
BD - Optional ... Mandatory from 31/10/07

Internet support:
HD-DVD - Mandatory
BD - Optional

Region Coding:
BD: Yes
HD-DVD: No

Copy Protection:
BD: AACS, BD+, BD-ROM Mark
HD-DVD: AACS

We have here, plain and simple higher specifications that HD-DVD players must conform to - they must support more audio codecs, as well as PiP - and all discs sold world-wide. The downside to BD is that their players must artificially segment market by region, and include BD+, which forces consumers to update their hardware every 18 months to continue watching BD discs, and consumers will have to pay for these updates.

Furthermore, HD-DVD's of the same movies as BD's currently contain more special features, due to Sony using a Java-based scripting language which is notoriously difficult to master. Because of this the reality is that in the current short term period, BD players will be region-locked, contain lower capabilities then HD-DVD players (none of the initial BD players support PiP, internet access - or the advanced codecs all of which are mandatory on HD-DVD players). BD has a higher specification for Dolby Digital - but as the lowest quality codec this has little meaning to audiophiles, they contain lower specifications for every other audio codec compared to HD-DVD (with the exception of DTS-HD High Resolution which is an Optional codec on both formats).

And finally, I am deeply concerned about disc integrity. As we all know, there's not a CD or DVD in the world that will "last forever". As we've learned from experience, pressed CD-ROM or DVD-ROM discs outlast all recordable discs, whether CD-R/RW or DVD+/-R/RW by a long margin - and CD-R's outlast DVD-R's by a long way as well.

It's hard to understand why this is if you're not a complete geek, but I suppose the simplest explanation is simply that CD-R's and DVD-R's use a different material to pressed commercial discs (ie recording dyes) - and these dyes are not equal to the quality of the recording layer in a commercial disc.

BD uses exactly the same technology as HD-DVD, make no mistake. The Laser Wavelength is 405 nm, and as such is capable of picking up exactly the same amount of information as the other format. HD-DVD's 15GB single-layer is pushed to the maximum - it's not a lower technology disc then BD's 25-GB single layer. The difference is the disc structure of the BD is designed to facilitate the laser picking up more material by exploiting the disc's integrity. Instead of the protective plastic layer, they spray on a "hard-coating" layer.

On the surface it sounds just fine, except that this "hard-coating" was designed so the disc could be exploited - the disc wasn't designed to facilitate it, it was designed because it was necessary for the disc. To say it's "paper-thin" is an understatement, this "protective" layer is far thinner then paper. In fact it's so thin that it's only a fraction the width of a human hair - and I do mean fraction as in 1/20th or so. And because it's propriety, some manufactures have decided to use "their" own, for instance Verbatim uses their own formula instead - for better or for worse.
Reply
#2
are you working for microsoft or other HDDVD support company? Wink
Reply
#3
No, but I don't work for Sony either. You know the only real thing I see as being on BD's side is their more advanced "BD-J" or whatever they call their java-thing... but then I consider that largely a gimmik. I have seen photographs (genuine) of notes packed with BD drives informing customers being they have to pay for the BD+ updates (every 18 months)... let me see if I can find one.

Now I'm sure even you can't possibly tell me that this is fair on consumers:

http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/10/03/fo ... l-players/

What if the consumer doesn't have internet access - or doesn't have a CD burner (and has a BD player that can't connect to the internet) - and what if the manufacturer of their player has gone out of buisness? Not to mention that these "updates" are charged at the consumers expense by some companies, and other's haven't even provided them... ick.
Reply
#4
I will buy hd (ps3) for "reason"........the reason is "guns of the patriots"....I dont care about the rest.......really.....
Reply
#5
i've just not been very impressed with what they are churning out on these new formats...

when the criterion collection adopts a new format perhaps i'll decide then Smile

...but seriously i'm not even close to caring yet
Reply
#6
PS3 is Blu-ray
Reply
#7
i own both formats and there is no doubt that clearly Blu-Ray is superior in Video quality and Audio quality i even stopped buying HD-DVD picture quality is a total joke on HD-DVD
Reply
#8
You know that is interesting, most reviews put it the other way around, but still this is largely a short-term difference, especially as they're using first gen encoders - remember when there were first gen dvd's many people said laserdisc was still better quality!
Reply
#9
Morpheus Wrote:i own both formats and there is no doubt that clearly Blu-Ray is superior in Video quality and Audio quality i even stopped buying HD-DVD picture quality is a total joke on HD-DVD

i couldnt agree more the ownly thing i dont like about the ps3 its not muti reigon on the bluray discs but the games are very strange.
Reply
#10
The PS3 is not region free on the games, a point I've made before when discussing Sony's dishonesty. Currently most or all PS3 games are region-free - however the PS3 is fully region locked for all its media (PSX/PS2 games, PS3 games, DVD and BD).

This is also a blatent double-standard - howcome the PS2 and PS3 are region-locked when all other Sony DVD players are region free?
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)