Is there a differnece? and if so, which is better?

-

well they say PS3's Bluray is the way of the future there starting to make films all in blue ray taht should be out later,and now that the PS3 price has been lowwered i think the blue ray will win,though there are them flaws at the moment arent there hene why teh UK RELEASE DATE WAS DELAYED!!!!!

This post is entirely retarded. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

For one thing, Sony says Blu-Ray is the future. The rest of the market is undecided.

The price of the PS3 has NOT been lowered. My mistake here. However, only the 20GB PS3 was reduced. The 60GB version is still set to be priced at the retailer's discretion. And considering how limited the quantities of the 20GB version will be (20% of all PS3s produced), that doesn't seem like a drastic move. Also, a price drop has not been announced for regions outside of Japan.

Movies are being released on HD-DVD also. My local Best Buy carries them in equal quantities.

Now, aside from the bullshit-hedging, I'd like to add that the difference is that the HD-DVD drive for Xbox360 is entirely optional. You can't really say that either one is better because they each have their own high points.

HD-DVD has a lower storage capacity than Blu-Ray discs, but they're easier and cheaper to manufacture, which could possibly mean lower prices at retail. HD-DVD discs also can be made in a dual layer format like normal DVDs, a feature that has not been demonstrated in Blu-Ray discs, effectively doubling their storage capacity and allowing them to surpass Blu-Ray discs released so far.

It's almost guaranteed that HD-DVD will become the preferred format for use with home computing. It's not guaranteed that it will dominate in other applications, however, although the cheaper price of HD-DVD players and greater availability will definitely give it an edge among early adopters of high-definition players.

lol they didn't even spell blue right sony is pretty dumb

HD-DVD has a lower storage capacity than Blu-Ray discs, but they're easier and cheaper to manufacture, which could possibly mean lower prices at retail.

I realize I'm probably not the average consumer; but price has never been an issue for me so long as the quality is high. But returning to the market in general, while HD-DVD has the edge now, in a couple years time blu-ray discs will be able to be produced faster and cheaper as well... and whilst consumers might not be too far-sighted, companies who live and die by the success of their supportive technologies most certainly do... I'd hazard a guess and say blu-ray is on their minds at the moment, maybe not for today, but for tomorrow.


HD-DVD discs also can be made in a dual layer format like normal DVDs, a feature that has not been demonstrated in Blu-Ray discs, effectively doubling their storage capacity and allowing them to surpass Blu-Ray discs released so far.

HD-DVDs provide 15GB of storage per layer; do doubling it up still doesn't quite stack up to 50GB provided by blu-ray, sure blu-ray discs may not have commercially demonstrated that size yet but they have in the lab. Besides there are a handful of techs working on dual layering the blu-ray disc as we speak, it hasn't been successful yet but its probably only a matter of time and storage capacity will no longer be grounds to compare the two discs. I mean 100GB to 30GB? Forget about it, blu-ray wins hands down.

The real advantage for HD-DVD at the present time is history. Think back to the BETA vs. VHS war, which despite the superior quality of BETA saw VHS win. The reason was because VHS was readily available and cheap as chips, which meant it got a strangle-hold on the market in huge quantities very quickly. It essentially became the standard before BETA even had a chance to put up a fight. That has to happen now if HD-DVD is to survive well into the future, and I don't know if enough promotional might has been put behind HD-DVDs to make that happen, time will tell I guess.

bunnie u should change your name to dr. bunniesworth b/c a dr. is higher ranking than a man like mr. JUST MY OPINION even if u aren't a doctor b/c man this is the internet nobody knows and u can just lie and u can make up that u know famous movie stars too that would be cool i mean everybody here on the shrine would be saying dang i wish i was bunnieworth he gets to go out and party with celebrities and is making big time money as a doctor dang man that is what we would be thinking

IHD-DVDs provide 15GB of storage per layer; do doubling it up still doesn't quite stack up to 50GB provided by blu-ray, sure blu-ray discs may not have commercially demonstrated that size yet but they have in the lab.

Yes, I'm aware of all that. That's why I specifically mentioned that Blu-Ray discs have only not shown the capability so far. I never claimed they weren't capable of it.

Also, I'd like to mention (since I didn't do so clearly before) that the Blu-Ray discs released so far have only had a 25 GB capacity.


Besides there are a handful of techs working on dual layering the blu-ray disc as we speak, it hasn't been successful yet but its probably only a matter of time and storage capacity will no longer be grounds to compare the two discs. I mean 100GB to 30GB? Forget about it, blu-ray wins hands down.

Now here we run into a couple of interesting questions.

First, if Blu-Ray discs are so difficult to dual layer, that would inevitably drive their prices higher were they to begin producing them that way. Price is certainly a major factor in the equation, so that has to be considered.

Second, how much storage space does a disc need? Will any movie (or game, for that matter) ever require more than 30 GB? I find it extremely hard to believe that the size difference could be a major factor.


The real advantage for HD-DVD at the present time is history. Think back to the BETA vs. VHS war, which despite the superior quality of BETA saw VHS win. The reason was because VHS was readily available and cheap as chips, which meant it got a strangle-hold on the market in huge quantities very quickly. It essentially became the standard before BETA even had a chance to put up a fight. That has to happen now if HD-DVD is to survive well into the future, and I don't know if enough promotional might has been put behind HD-DVDs to make that happen, time will tell I guess.

A minor correction here. The biggest reason for the success of VHS over BETA was Long Play. Sony refused to make tapes that were LP capable because they claimed it would make the picture quality too poor. However, demand for it was great enough that the decision ultimately backfired on them.

Frankly, I have no idea which, if either, format will come out on top. It's entirely possible that DVDs have become so entrenched now that it will be impossible for something new to uproot them until HD has become the standard, rather than the high end. On top of that, the competition between the two formats could also put consumers off. Many people are waiting on the fence to see which one becomes dominant. There are a lot of factors that can still affect the market.

Now here we run into a couple of interesting questions.

First, if Blu-Ray discs are so difficult to dual layer, that would inevitably drive their prices higher were they to begin producing them that way. Price is certainly a major factor in the equation, so that has to be considered.

That's true, blu-ray is certain to remain more expensive then HD-DVD regardless of anything. Over time the price gap will dimmish, but it will always be there.


Second, how much storage space does a disc need? Will any movie (or game, for that matter) ever require more than 30 GB? I find it extremely hard to believe that the size difference could be a major factor.

True enough; but at least there is additional potential there. Imagine say, the "Lucas Film Collection" on blu-ray DVD. Featuring the entire Star Wars and Indiana Jones sagas and all the various Young Indiana Jones titles in true high definition with a truckload of extra features and audio commentary, all on one disc. It could happen, and it would be sweet...


A minor correction here. The biggest reason for the success of VHS over BETA was Long Play. Sony refused to make tapes that were LP capable because they claimed it would make the picture quality too poor. However, demand for it was great enough that the decision ultimately backfired on them.

I actually wasn't aware of that at all, cheers for that. But I'm struggling to think of an analogous situation for both new DVD formats; dual layering would come close but even if blu-ray can't get a leg-up there they still have the size edge. I'm sure there is one I just can't think right now...


Frankly, I have no idea which, if either, format will come out on top. It's entirely possible that DVDs have become so entrenched now that it will be impossible for something new to uproot them until HD has become the standard, rather than the high end. On top of that, the competition between the two formats could also put consumers off. Many people are waiting on the fence to see which one becomes dominant. There are a lot of factors that can still affect the market.

The one thing both formats have going for them is total backwards compatibility, so everyone's existing library of movies won't become redundant. I think its inevitable that one will come out as the new standard, but you're spot on, there's a hell of alot out there that could tilt either camp in front.

Yes, I'm aware of all that. That's why I specifically mentioned that Blu-Ray discs have only not shown the capability so far. I never claimed they weren't capable of it.

Also, I'd like to mention (since I didn't do so clearly before) that the Blu-Ray discs released so far have only had a 25 GB capacity.

http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/#bluray_capacity_data


Now here we run into a couple of interesting questions.

First, if Blu-Ray discs are so difficult to dual layer, that would inevitably drive their prices higher were they to begin producing them that way. Price is certainly a major factor in the equation, so that has to be considered.

Second, how much storage space does a disc need? Will any movie (or game, for that matter) ever require more than 30 GB? I find it extremely hard to believe that the size difference could be a major factor.

You do realize that games would easily require that amount of space if developers were consistent in the "all HD, all the time" promise of image quality for their games, right? Especially in cinematic-loaded games like Final Fantasy and Metal Gear.

Someone on another forum suggested that some developers will probably use the extra space to forego the image compression algorithms they typically use to try and save space on current media and allow the processing power of the next-gen consoles to focus more on in-game physics and the like rather than imaging.


A minor correction here. The biggest reason for the success of VHS over BETA was Long Play. Sony refused to make tapes that were LP capable because they claimed it would make the picture quality too poor. However, demand for it was great enough that the decision ultimately backfired on them.

Well, that coupled with JVC being pissed at Sony for them giving them the "scraps" in the deal they previously had during the whole U-Matic thing.


Frankly, I have no idea which, if either, format will come out on top. It's entirely possible that DVDs have become so entrenched now that it will be impossible for something new to uproot them until HD has become the standard, rather than the high end. On top of that, the competition between the two formats could also put consumers off. Many people are waiting on the fence to see which one becomes dominant. There are a lot of factors that can still affect the market.

Same. But "BLU-RAY MORE LIKE BETAMAX" people need to shut the fuck up, the comparison between that format revolution and this one is asinine, to say the least.

The Betamax vs. VHS "war" started from a direct branching off in design from what was once a partnership, whereas the HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray are two completely different disc formats developed by totally seperate teams of engineers (even though there is a hybrid disc format currently developed and in the works to be put on the market (http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/09/20/blu_ray_hd_dvd_hybrid/)).

I heard several months ago that the hybrid format had died. Since I can't read the link right now, can you tell me how recent the news is?

Posted on the 20th of this month, Time-Warner patented the disc format.

Link to patent: http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220060179448%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20060179448&RS=DN/20060179448

To be able to properly view the diagrams, it'll cost you $3 to order an unofficial "hard" copy of the patent with all related pictures, sketches and diagrams to explain the patented invention and have it mailed to you.

There is a link to view the images, but whoever scanned them did a piss-poor job and only got the top 1/3 of each image in the database.

I heard about the hybrid format a while ago. Its nice in theory, but last I heard about it (gees at least two months ago) the rumour was it that it was no longer backwards compatible with the ordinary DVD format. You can't do that its ridiculous, that will most likely squash any real support for the hybrid.

*sighs* I love how Sony is able to "revolutionize" technology and formats, I just wish they wouldn't do it so often and without trying to update/replace such a main-stream format.

I heard about the hybrid format a while ago. Its nice in theory, but last I heard about it (gees at least two months ago) the rumour was it that it was no longer backwards compatible with the ordinary DVD format. You can't do that its ridiculous, that will most likely squash any real support for the hybrid.

Read the link from my previous post. One side of the disc will feature both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray formats on the same side of one disc (because information is burned and read at different depths on the disc surface), and normal DVD on the other side of the disc.

True enough; but at least there is additional potential there. Imagine say, the "Lucas Film Collection" on blu-ray DVD. Featuring the entire Star Wars and Indiana Jones sagas and all the various Young Indiana Jones titles in true high definition with a truckload of extra features and audio commentary, all on one disc. It could happen, and it would be sweet...
Oh yeah, not having to switch between a few discs instead of just lying on the couch for countless hours of footage sounds pretty sweet to me.

Oh yeah, not having to switch between a few discs instead of just lying on the couch for countless hours of footage sounds pretty sweet to me.

Kind of like lying on the couch for countless hours of gaming.

:D Did anyone realise that the price of Xbox 360 and PS3 is roughly the same?

Because the PS3 comes already with a blu ray player. That is why i think it's such a high price. But if you get a Xbox 360, you have to shell out an extra US$179 (I think) to get a HD player.

Anyway, just because Blu-Ray (yay for Sony :)) has a higher capacity, doesn't mean it will beat the HD DVD in the long run. I think that Betamax had a superior sound and picture quality of VHS, but VHS triumphed.

Personally, I think that the battle of Blu Ray and HD DVD will greatly depend on the PS3 and Xbox 360. I mean, no one is gonna spend over A$150 for 10 blank HD DVDs to find that they're computer can't even burn onto them.
And with PS3 coming ready installed with a blu ray player, consumers will be tempted to try the Blu Ray Format for movies, and if they like what they see the Blu Ray may come superior.

Anyway, since games don't need over 60GB of space (yes, even final fantasy doesn't take that much *GASP*), the only good reason i can see the use for Blu Ray and HD DVD is burning 100 movies onto the disk and selling them for OMG ONLY $20! You will be RICH!!!!

I mean, no one is gonna spend over A$150 for 10 blank HD DVDs to find that they're computer can't even burn onto them.

That can't conceivably happen. Microsoft and Intel (among others) have thrown their support exclusively behind HD DVD. Therefore, it is reasonably safe to say thet even if the format loses in the entertainment front, HD DVD will certainly be the dominant format for home computing applications.


And with PS3 coming ready installed with a blu ray player, consumers will be tempted to try the Blu Ray Format for movies, and if they like what they see the Blu Ray may come superior.

That's actually not very likely. Most consumers looking at the PS3 will be considering it as a gaming console, not a movie player. Even if they were considering it as a movie player, it's just as likely that they'd decide to buy a standalone HD DVD player because of the lower price.


Anyway, since games don't need over 60GB of space (yes, even final fantasy doesn't take that much *GASP*), the only good reason i can see the use for Blu Ray and HD DVD is burning 100 movies onto the disk and selling them for OMG ONLY $20! You will be RICH!!!!

Not exactly true, but I don't know the finer points well enough to argue it. I'll leave that to someone else.

That can't conceivably happen. Microsoft and Intel (among others) have thrown their support exclusively behind HD DVD. Therefore, it is reasonably safe to say thet even if the format loses in the entertainment front, HD DVD will certainly be the dominant format for home computing applications.



That's actually not very likely. Most consumers looking at the PS3 will be considering it as a gaming console, not a movie player. Even if they were considering it as a movie player, it's just as likely that they'd decide to buy a standalone HD DVD player because of the lower price.

The whole thing from a gaming rig perspective is likely a moot point anyway, given that all three console developers seem to be leaning towards a system similar to Valve's Steam distribution program for their PC games (there are others, but Steam should be the most well known around here).


Not exactly true, but I don't know the finer points well enough to argue it. I'll leave that to someone else.

Well, jail time if the person doing it isn't doing so under the auspices of a movie studio's permissive will.