Video Asylum

TVs, VCRs, DVD players, Home Theater systems and more.

Return to Video Asylum

Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

Fox renews Blu-ray exclusivity commitment, announces dates on 29 BD titles

12.146.151.254
Posted on August 20, 2007 at 13:59:44
Jazz Inmate
Audiophile

Posts: 63589
Location: Bay Area, California
Joined: April 5, 2000
 Heck, I'm just glad Ronin is back on the schedule!
------------------

Fox Announces and Dates 29 Blu-ray Titles

August 20, 2007

Fox and MGM have revealed 29 upcoming Blu-ray releases. Included are 19 catalog titles from Fox and MGM, and 10 new release titles to be sold day-and-date with their DVD releases. These titles include 'Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer' and 'Live Free or Die Hard'. The remainder of the day-and-date titles is expected to be announced shortly, as well as specs for each release.

October 2nd
The Day After Tomorrow
Master and Commander

October 9th
28 Days Later
Amittyville Horror
Edward Scissorhands
The Fly
From Hell
Robocop

November 6th
A Bridge Too Far
Battle of Britain

November 13th
I, Robot

November
Die Hard
Die Hard 2: Die Harder
Die Hard With a Vengeance
Red Dawn

December 4th
Cast Away
Independence Day
Mr. and Mrs. Smith
Ronin

Also Announced
Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer
Live Free or Die Hard
Prison Break
-------------

"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)

 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
Its about time, posted on August 20, 2007 at 14:52:21
Jack G
Audiophile

Posts: 9741
Joined: September 24, 1999
 I guess they finally got BD+ working. Hope there aren't any hiccups.
I already have Mr and Mrs Smityh on HD DVD.:-)
What's Fox going to do if BD+ gets cracked?
I'll get Robocop if they do a good job with it-the DVD really sucks.
enjoy,
Jack

 

Nice info, but you left out the most interesting part of the press release:, posted on August 20, 2007 at 14:59:28
Audiophilander
Audiophile

Posts: 30201
Location: Fort Worth (D/FW Metroplex)
Joined: March 31, 2000
 >>> "The move comes after this morning's shocking revelation that Paramount and DreamWorks have switched allegiances exclusively to rival HD DVD" <<<

Better get used to it JI, neither of these formats is going to 'tank' while both are satisfied holding their ground and making incremental gains! :o)

This press release makes VERY clear, and in no uncertain terms, that the high definition format war is going to continue for a very long time, perhaps ad infinitum. As I see it, the actual winners will probably be multi-format player manufacturers. As hardware prices decrease folks will opt for Blu-ray/HD-DVD capable players and exclusivity deals won't matter nearly as much.

Even though ZS KEKL seems determined to make this into a major format war debate (see thread directly below), neither of your carefully spun points should be seen as a subject for either funeral rites or bragging rights. For the time being both formats are hunkered down in their respective trenches looking out over No Fan's Land while trying to develop a workable strategy for getting through the other camp's barbed wire & beyond the bad PR mine field.

So far, for every Fox hole there's been a Paramount parapet. ;0)

AuPh

 

BDs provide more capacity. Period., posted on August 20, 2007 at 15:20:38
Jazz Inmate
Audiophile

Posts: 63589
Location: Bay Area, California
Joined: April 5, 2000
 When you're talking about a/v content, especially 1080p and lossless PCM, capacity is a critical issue.

You just can't get around that.

It's about specs and physical limitation of the respective formats.

Microsoft can dump all the $$$ it wants into prolonging this "format war" but wouldn't it be nicer if it used to money to improve the specs of HD DVD to give consumers a better product? Too bad quality ain't what MS is about.

Maybe this will play out a lot like SACD vs DVD-A. Both formats may make incremental gains (albeit blu-ray's gains are twice HD DVD's) until the industry decides to get behind something else.

Whatever happens is certainly beyond my control. All I can do is stand behind my decision to go with the format I perceive as better for the consumer. Whatever your reasons for adopting HD DVD, auph, you can't say it was to support the higher quality format. I can.
-------------

"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)

 

"It's about specs and physical limitation of the respective formats. ", posted on August 20, 2007 at 16:20:22
Jack G
Audiophile

Posts: 9741
Joined: September 24, 1999
 Thats utter rubbish. movies on both formats with different codecs tend to look the same. Perhaps thats why Paramount went HD DVD exclusive. Sony was doing the AVC coding for their BDs, while the HD DVDs were VC-1. no difference. The BD of The Prestige is 37G, while the import HD DVD is 23G. They look the same.

>>>All I can do is stand behind my decision to go with the format I perceive as better for the consumer<<<
Oh please. BD can't even get its gear up to spec. The suposedly best BD player is a game console. That says it all.
I support both formats, but to say that BD is better for the consumer is sheer fanboy fantasy.
Jack

 

Which B-D movies take advantage of the higher capacity?, posted on August 20, 2007 at 16:30:36
4season
 Just curious.

 

RE: "It's about specs and physical limitation of the respective formats. ", posted on August 20, 2007 at 16:35:59
Jazz Inmate
Audiophile

Posts: 63589
Location: Bay Area, California
Joined: April 5, 2000
 And how are you going to fit 5.1 channels, let alone 7.1, of lossless PCM on that HD DVD? And don't tell me TrueHD or other compressed PCM algorithms sound the same as lossless, because I've heard the difference.

If the BD of Prestige is 37 GB and the HD DVD is 23 GB, there is significant data missing in the HD DVD version. I haven't done a comparison and you have, so I have to go with your assessment that it looks the same. Does it sound the same? Do you really think 14 GB worth of data is inconsequential? Why is the industry even messing around with the lower capacity format?
-------------

"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)

 

Most of the Sony and Disney titles, some Foxes and many Warners, the Sopranos, quite a few NT, posted on August 20, 2007 at 16:41:20
Jazz Inmate
Audiophile

Posts: 63589
Location: Bay Area, California
Joined: April 5, 2000
-------------

"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)

 

RE: "It's about specs and physical limitation of the respective formats. ", posted on August 20, 2007 at 16:49:15
Jack G
Audiophile

Posts: 9741
Joined: September 24, 1999
 >>>And don't tell me TrueHD or other compressed PCM algorithms sound the same as lossless, because I've heard the difference<<<
Yes, I know. a SONY employee compared what SONY uses to its competition, and low and behold, the SONY product came out on top. Big Whoop.
I couldn't care less about 7.1.
Haven't you noticed that more and more Blu-ray discs are coming out with True HD audio? Why do you think that' happening?

>>>Why is the industry even messing around with the lower capacity format?<<<
Maybe because they pay attention to the facts, not the FUD.
Jack

 

I haven't noticed a quality advantage there myself, posted on August 20, 2007 at 17:01:41
4season
 Jeez, I like Blu-Ray just fine, and my B-D player cost more than my HD DVD player, so far I simply haven't noticed a B-D quality advantage.

 

RE: "It's about specs and physical limitation of the respective formats. ", posted on August 20, 2007 at 17:07:35
Jazz Inmate
Audiophile

Posts: 63589
Location: Bay Area, California
Joined: April 5, 2000
 You can't honestly think that it's advantageous or doesn't matter to go with a lower capacity audio/video format over a higher capacity format.

I'm not a Sony employee but I stood there in Dolby Labs and heard for myself. Even with blu-ray, there is not enough room for all content with LPCM and that is why TrueHD is becoming the standard on more titles. Already there are sacrifices being made to fit content on these discs.

We're on a glorified audio website so you can't tell me you don't care about audio, and while you can tell me you don't respect my observations, it isn't really conducive to a conversation about quality, is it?

Again, the Prestige Blu-ray had 14 gigs more data than the HD DVD, by your numbers. What happened to all that data? Is your contention is that it was just wasted, irrelevant content that has no bearing on the product? That's kind of hard to believe.

I do care about 7.1 because I want to be able to hear a movie as the producer and the audio engineers intended. I am going to have to deal with TrueHD for that. Fine. But I don't want to have to keep making compromises like that. The greater the disc capacity, the fewer the compromises.
-------------

"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)

 

Well, my point is about capacity, posted on August 20, 2007 at 17:27:42
Jazz Inmate
Audiophile

Posts: 63589
Location: Bay Area, California
Joined: April 5, 2000
 If you pour some of the same orange juice into a big glass and a small glass, it's going to taste the same. But if you're trying to choose which type of glass to use, knowing that the small glass will quickly fill up, it makes sense to choose the big one.

A/V content by its nature uses a lot of bandwidth and disc space. High res A/V content, even moreso. The greater capacity, the better.

-------------

"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)

 

And sometimes bigger is just...bigger, posted on August 20, 2007 at 20:12:02
4season
 If you can't see or hear any Blu-Ray advantages why worry?

 

there's that and there's sometimes more capacity is more flexibility and content, posted on August 20, 2007 at 21:02:47
Jazz Inmate
Audiophile

Posts: 63589
Location: Bay Area, California
Joined: April 5, 2000
 Jack still hasn't said whether The Prestige HD DVD import has LPCM audio. The blu-ray sure does. If even one blu-ray title gets LPCM that would on HD DVD get TrueHD, that justifies the format right there AFAIC. And I suspect it will impact much more than one title.

bonus content is another consideration (granted, I mainly care about the movie).

The bottom line is that we don't know what content or features are coming from filmmakers. One probability is 7.1 audio. Ok, most people don't care about that, but my point is that we have one format with significantly greater flexibility and capacity to handle more content. Even if you guys don't believe that greater bitrates translate to greater quality (which should seem obvious), you have to admit it provides greater capacity and greater flexibility and therefore is the better format.
-------------

"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)

 

Mostly we keep coming back to the same old argument, posted on August 20, 2007 at 23:03:36
4season
 I'm more interested in what the formats deliver right now, and in the next few months, because who can predict much beyond that?

I'm still struggling in figuring out how I could accomodate a 5.1 channel sound system in a way that both sounds and looks good; 7.1 is probably not going to happen anytime soon. I don't generally like panned front-to-rear sound effects like those in the early Star Wars movies: Too distracting.

 

But wouldn't that same tasting OJ more affordable if you bought a Dixie cup rather than a blue crystal goblet? (nt), posted on August 20, 2007 at 23:21:27
Audiophilander
Audiophile

Posts: 30201
Location: Fort Worth (D/FW Metroplex)
Joined: March 31, 2000
 ;0)

 

But you can hear the advantages of lossless vs lossy audio., posted on August 21, 2007 at 05:12:24
oscar
Audiophile

Posts: 19522
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Joined: October 25, 2000
 And some HD DVDs which deserve to have TrueHD tracks, don't. "King Kong" was supposed to be a reference demo disk but guess what ? No lossless track. Why is that ? Storage capacity limitation ? Bandwidth limitations ? This probably isn't the only example. I think with HD DVD, you will have to make tradeoffs on PQ vs. SQ, particularly with longer movies and/or movies with a tremendous amount of motion.

Another way I see it it, HD DVD may be "good enough" for J6P. I'm not convinced yet it's "good enough" for the HT enthusiast with large investment in audio/video gear. There are a few more examples coming out to evaluate the "higher bit rate/capacity is better" theory. I might even invest to find out directly since HD DVD just got a reprieve.

BTW, I don't think there's anything on HD DVD which matches the PQ on some of the more recent Blu rays (POTC, Apocalypto, etc.).

 

Is HD DVD really more affordable ?, posted on August 21, 2007 at 05:24:59
oscar
Audiophile

Posts: 19522
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Joined: October 25, 2000
 Economies of scale would eventually drive Blu-Ray (and HD DVD) hardware costs to something close to DVD player prices. The software costs are essentially a wash with the exception of the Universal combo discs which are more expensive.

I'd just soon opt for the format with the best potential for PQ/SQ with movies (and STILL the best studio/CE support). That's Blu-Ray until proven conclusively the extra storage/bandwidth makes absolutely no difference.

 

RE: Which B-D movies take advantage of the higher capacity?, posted on August 21, 2007 at 06:33:00
Larry I


 
Both formats have way more than enough capacity so B-D's advantage is largely hypothetical. One other consideration is that B-D discs are easier to damage physically.

Still, this is just another format war based on licensing dollars. I am probably going to sit on the side for a while, at least until a respectable universal player comes to the market.

I can barely stand the thought of putting more dollars into the Sony coffers (owned an SCD-1, have a Qualia RPTV that took three months for Sony to supply a replacement bulb).

 

Features Are Available To Take Advantage Of, posted on August 21, 2007 at 08:14:46
Robertc88


 
Whether the individual takes advantage of it is up to them. Most more than likely will not have all the equipment necessary to take full advantage.

Let's take SD DVD. Some folks just hook it straight to the TV for the sound. For SACD, most discs come with a multichannel track for which most don't take advantage of.

 

I disagree 25G or 30G will be sufficient for ALL movies., posted on August 21, 2007 at 08:19:06
oscar
Audiophile

Posts: 19522
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Joined: October 25, 2000
 I suspect "Night at the Museum" and "KIng Kong" could have been much better given more space to "breath". I've noticed that with movies containing lower bitrate VC1 encodes don't handle fast motions all that well either.

It'll be interesting to see how some of the longer movies will hold up. I'm anxiously waiting to see how LOTR extended versions or other 3 1/2 hour movies with lossless audio tracks turn out (if they turn up).

 

To answer your question..., posted on August 21, 2007 at 08:25:09
Jack G
Audiophile

Posts: 9741
Joined: September 24, 1999
 Sorry, I decided to watch a movie.:-)
No there isn't lossless on there, but with 7 Gigs left there could have been. The *chose* not to have it, not for any technical limitations.
Jack

 

If true, that would be good reason to avoid that particular movie release, posted on August 21, 2007 at 08:31:04
oscar
Audiophile

Posts: 19522
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Joined: October 25, 2000
 And wait for the next "special edition" with the "new and improved" lossless soundtrack.

 

"B-D discs are easier to damage physically"--you've done stress tests?, posted on August 21, 2007 at 09:52:21
Jazz Inmate
Audiophile

Posts: 63589
Location: Bay Area, California
Joined: April 5, 2000
 Based on all the tests I'm aware of, that's not true. I certainly have had no problem with any BD in my collection and I treat them the same as any DVD, CD or SACD.

BDs come with a protective polymer coating whereas HD DVDs do not.

Clearly you are biased against Sony, which is fine since you admit it. What I can't stand is when people who hate Sony bash certain formats without saying why.
-------------

"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)

 

If you're going to use that argument, you should have just stuck with DVD nt, posted on August 21, 2007 at 09:55:24
Jazz Inmate
Audiophile

Posts: 63589
Location: Bay Area, California
Joined: April 5, 2000
-------------

"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)

 

"Is HD DVD really more affordable?" Across the board, the hardware is generally less expensive, and..., posted on August 21, 2007 at 09:59:55
Audiophilander
Audiophile

Posts: 30201
Location: Fort Worth (D/FW Metroplex)
Joined: March 31, 2000
 ... the software prices apparently aren't a wash since HD-DVDs are easier and cheaper to produce. SONY is apparently willing to absorb a percentage of the hardware AND software production costs in order to remain price point competitive with HD-DVD. Who knows how long that will continue.

>>> "Economies of scale would eventually drive Blu-Ray (and HD DVD) hardware costs to something close to DVD player prices." <<<

True, but will a $100 Blu-ray player be more appealing than, say, a $60 HD-DVD player if both appear to deliver the same goods? As far as software capacity is concerned, will Joe Public see any advantage to taking a steamer trunk on a 2 hour trip when an overnight bag will suffice? ;0)

Now that Paramount has formally jumped ship on Blu-ray I wouldn't expect this format war to end for years. I'm pretty sure that retailers aren't happy about carrying dual inventories or studios making exclusivity deals favoring just one format, but that's what's happening.

The bottom line is that both HD formats are headed for 'niche city' unless the hardware manufacturers can get player costs down sufficiently enough to make multi-format players appealing to Joe Public. Exclusivity raises the ante, because then it's not just an issue of capacity or software cost, but rather the consumer's tastes in movies. It's a hardball tactic that could backfire, as a frustrated consumer being pressured to choose between favorite films released only in one or the other format will likely tell both formats to take a hike in lieu of having a reasonably priced multi-format player or mandated dual inventory solution.

AuPh

 

HD-DVD has 'juice' that DVD doesn't, although upscaling improves PQ. The question for BR cheerleaders is this:, posted on August 21, 2007 at 10:36:10
Audiophilander
Audiophile

Posts: 30201
Location: Fort Worth (D/FW Metroplex)
Joined: March 31, 2000
 Do Blu-ray's claims of having more 'juice' concentrate available make it a better value for thirsty consumers or are folks just being sold a Smoothie? ;0)

AuPh

 

TrueHD support is mandatory for HD DVD players, posted on August 21, 2007 at 10:51:08
4season
 Per the Wikipedia article, far more HD DVD movies have it because TrueHD hardware support is mandatory in HD DVD, but optional in Blu-Ray. So are you sure you want to make blanket statements about one format's superiority over the other ;-)

But I'm not in a position to judge all the goodness of TrueHD audio yet because I haven't figured out what I'm going to do for the cinema sound system. Normally I'd be building something like a 5 channel EL84 single ended amp, but in this instance, BTU output is a concern: Small room, no A/C, hot Colorado summer. ICEpower amps maybe!?

I don't doubt that Pirates of the Carribean looks & sounds terrific in Blu-Ray, but I don't want to sit through that movie again to verify this! Ditto with Spiderman and most superhero movies except for Hellboy. Hellboy rocked. If I'm paying $15-30 per movie, it had better be a really GOOD movie, and I'm not just talking audio/video quality. For me, superb recordings of crummy movies is videophile hell.

 

heehee, well this teaches me to avoid analogies when Auph is in the house, posted on August 21, 2007 at 10:59:00
Jazz Inmate
Audiophile

Posts: 63589
Location: Bay Area, California
Joined: April 5, 2000
 Blu-ray has more capacity. What does that mean? Consider these comments from Disney's home video president, Chapek:

"The strides that we've made with this format are just the tip of the iceberg and we are confident that consumers will be astounded by the level of entertainment that can only be achieved by using the maximum capacity of the Blu-ray Disc format."

Think about that. If a format is to survive, it must have the flexibility to accomodate content and plans that may not be currently implemented, but could become a key part of the home video experience. Why would you purposefully CHOOSE to limit yourself with the format providing LESS capacity? It just doesn't make sense.
-------------

"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)

 

"Why would you purposefully CHOOSE to limit yourself with the format providing LESS capacity?" - Why, ..., posted on August 21, 2007 at 11:26:36
Audiophilander
Audiophile

Posts: 30201
Location: Fort Worth (D/FW Metroplex)
Joined: March 31, 2000
 ...would anyone assume that future technological advances with HD storage capacity would make HD-DVD any less efficient in handling expanded content?

Food for thought (with an Orange Julius on the side -grin).

AuPh

 

Why do you think TrueHD was developed?, posted on August 21, 2007 at 11:41:04
Jazz Inmate
Audiophile

Posts: 63589
Location: Bay Area, California
Joined: April 5, 2000
 The challenges to fit high-resolution audio and video technology on a disc aren't future, they're current.

And as for the future, those were Disney's comments, and I'd think they're referring to BD-J developments that should prove interesting.
-------------

"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)

 

RE: Is HD DVD really more affordable ?, posted on August 21, 2007 at 11:42:09
usafwso
 The best choice is to avoid both formats until the situation is settled once and for all. Over the past few months, I have been looking at the shelves at retail stores to see what titles are available on both formats. Thus far, not much of interest to me. Standard DVD will just have to suffice for the next few years.

 

Hard to avoid when you've gotten used to HD broadcasts., posted on August 21, 2007 at 11:50:17
oscar
Audiophile

Posts: 19522
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Joined: October 25, 2000
 Maybe getting an HD tuner for Dishnetwork broadcasts a big mistake. DVDs didn't look quite as good after watching broadcast HD movies on the big screen. I decided to pay an early adopter price because I was no longer interested in DVDs but still wanted day&date releases of new movies on HD.

But you are right the Paramount decision will simply prolong the format war and delay mass adoption of HD media content for exactly the reasons you stated.

 

It simply means I won't buy a player without TrueHD decoding cability., posted on August 21, 2007 at 12:00:51
oscar
Audiophile

Posts: 19522
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Joined: October 25, 2000
 The specs may not mandate codec support but consumer demand will make sure most players have it (well, maybe not the cheap Chinese ones...). Similarly with movies; If the movie doesn't have a lossless audio track, I'll wait for the special edition version which does have it.

As for "classic" movies, I suspect Universal et al have done a mediocre job with some of the video transfers. The early Blu-Ray movies had PQ issues as well. I'm going to attempt to take a more disciplined approach to purchasing HD movies...must.... resist.... In general, the Studios need to do a better job of maximimizing the PQ/SQ available for HD. They also need to do a better job of releasing movies period; I'm getting a little tired of the Superhero/comicbook stuff good for little more than single viewings/demo material.

 

You think today's HD DVD players will handle triple or quadruple layer HD DVDs ?, posted on August 21, 2007 at 12:06:02
oscar
Audiophile

Posts: 19522
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Joined: October 25, 2000
 I doubt it. They'd probably have to do a spec rewrite and hardware redesign. I don't think it's in the cards. They didn't plan for anything more than 30G for the movie application.

Blu-Ray can play the same game (e.g. 200G Blu-Rays anyone ?)

HD DVD also has a tighter restriction on audio/video bitrate which I strongly suspect has already compromised PQ/SQ on certain HD DVD movies.

 

But oscar, neither of us know what design parameters are achievable., posted on August 21, 2007 at 12:53:42
Audiophilander
Audiophile

Posts: 30201
Location: Fort Worth (D/FW Metroplex)
Joined: March 31, 2000
 >>> "I doubt it. They'd probably have to do a spec rewrite and hardware redesign. I don't think it's in the cards. They didn't plan for anything more than 30G for the movie application." <<<

HD-DVD applications are constantly evolving; system upgrades are pretty much downloadable as well.

>>> "HD DVD also has a tighter restriction on audio/video bitrate which I strongly suspect has already compromised PQ/SQ on certain HD DVD movies." <<<

'Suspect', okay, suspicion is a reasonable response, but so far I've seen no evidence of compromised source material on my 1080P Sammy, much less heard it from any reliable non-biased industry source. Have you made any A/B comparisons of Blu-ray/HD-DVD performance, oscar?

As you know, I have no dog in this hunt save for my desire to own high resolution copies of my favorite films. The HD format which delivers my favorite films will remain my 'drug' of choice until a reasonably priced multi-format player enters the market and expands my options further.

Respectfully,
AuPh

 

RE: "B-D discs are easier to damage physically"--you've done stress tests?, posted on August 21, 2007 at 13:07:47
Larry I


 
The relative sensitivity to damage is what magazines, like Widescreen Review, reported among the pluses and minuses of each format. Personally, I don't abuse my discs, so it is not a big deal to me either way. I don't care at all which standard survives, but, it seems important for the market for one to succeed. As I stated above, I would be willing to get a universal machine if both formats are going to be around for a while, provided such machine is high quality and supports all functions (current machines don't meet either criteria).

I am not happy with Sony because of its half-assed support of certain new formats/product lines it has produced in recent times. This is particularly frustrating because the company, until recently, set high standards for product support, quality, etc.

 

"Quality", posted on August 21, 2007 at 13:55:09
4season
 Most non-CGI movies shot on 35mm film are not going to "pop" off the screen the way one that is heavily (or entirely) computer-generated can. But all the same, I think movies like "12 Monkeys" and "Lost In Translation" are totally worth the HD treatment. Mostly I care about getting the best available recordings of really good movies, and I don't want to sweat the small details.

 

RE: Fox renews Blu-ray exclusivity commitment, announces dates on 29 BD titles, posted on August 21, 2007 at 14:03:03
GoingCoastal
Audiophile

Posts: 19
Joined: May 31, 2007
 Look a lot like Fox's release list from CES back in January that Fox released little to none of.

 

That pretty much sums it up. (nt), posted on August 21, 2007 at 15:23:23
Jack G
Audiophile

Posts: 9741
Joined: September 24, 1999
 .

 

RE: "Quality", posted on August 22, 2007 at 04:57:11
Jack G
Audiophile

Posts: 9741
Joined: September 24, 1999
 I agree. I really love my HD DVD copy of Forbidden Planet, its way better than the DVD version.
Jack

 

Of course not, but don't you think there will be issues, posted on August 22, 2007 at 05:39:10
Jack G
Audiophile

Posts: 9741
Joined: September 24, 1999
 when the video 1.1 encoded discs get played on 1.0 machines? Hell, there have already been some issues, and the new spec discs aren't even out yet. I expect alot of hiccups with BD playback down the road. Hopefully, FW updates will do the trick. We'll see.
Personally, I don't think triple layer HD DVDs will happen, nor do I care.
Jack

 

I might have issues with the latest Blu-Ray discs because of the spec changes..., posted on August 22, 2007 at 06:39:19
oscar
Audiophile

Posts: 19522
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Joined: October 25, 2000
 but that's the price I knew I might pay for being an early adopter. Still, I'll be surprised if my current player will not be able to play any "next-generation" Blu-Ray or HD DVD discs.

I fully expect to eventually replace/relegate to another room my current player with a more full-featured player(s) down the road. Hopefully, AFTER the format war is resolved, but that possibility just took a big hit.

It'll be interesting to see how well LOTR extended versions w/ lossless audio fits on a 30G disc....

 

You won't need an "expensive" Multiformat player if a single format prevails in this war., posted on August 22, 2007 at 07:07:32
oscar
Audiophile

Posts: 19522
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Joined: October 25, 2000
 And that's just one of the problems with having a raging format war. A lot of people just aren't ready yet to commit money to a "potential Betamax".

I still half-expect the retailers to play a role. If it's clear one format is losing the sales battle, the Best Buys of this world just might stop carrying the losing format's product or at least stop maintaining dual inventories of the same HD movie. After all, they can always sell the DVD version.

 

Me too, posted on August 22, 2007 at 07:08:13
Jack G
Audiophile

Posts: 9741
Joined: September 24, 1999
 I expect a few glitches with my player too. Hell, I already have a few glitches. :-( Hopefully it won't be alot of discs, and hopefully, Samsung will upgrade the FW.
I expect LOTR to be the studio versions.
Jack

 

Firmware changes will be a fact of life for a while. I'm waiting for disc to arrive., posted on August 22, 2007 at 07:11:28
oscar
Audiophile

Posts: 19522
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Joined: October 25, 2000
 so I can hopefully resolve an audio dropout problem I've occasionally had. Hopefully the transition from 1.0 to 1.1 will ONLY require a firmware upgrade (if that).

 

I hear ya, posted on August 22, 2007 at 08:53:32
Jack G
Audiophile

Posts: 9741
Joined: September 24, 1999
 I'm hoping for a FW upgrade so my player will be more reliable. I'm *hoping* I don't have issues with 1.1 discs.
Jack

 

Nothing will be sufficient for ALL movies, posted on August 22, 2007 at 10:12:46
Jack G
Audiophile

Posts: 9741
Joined: September 24, 1999
 I'ld love to get an HD version of the Mahabharata. I'll take Peter Brook's version which is about 5 1/2 hours, and by far the shortest version available. Can I get it on 1 BD disc with Lossless audio in multiple languages (Hindi, English, French, Spanish) plus extras? Will the world end if they put it on 2 discs? Can anyone sit through the whole thing without having to go to the bathroom?
When will someone besides Sony be able to replicate BD-50s?
How long can I continue to write these questions? Who knows? :-)
enjoy,
Jack

 

Multi-format players will come down in price as well, and trust me, this war isn't ending anytime soon., posted on August 22, 2007 at 11:21:28
Audiophilander
Audiophile

Posts: 30201
Location: Fort Worth (D/FW Metroplex)
Joined: March 31, 2000

[Image from Erich Von Stroheim's silent classic GREED]

>>> "And that's just one of the problems with having a raging format war. A lot of people just aren't ready yet to commit money to a "potential Betamax"." <<<

But Oscar, you're trying to compare apples and oranges, or rather Apple & an an Orangutan! The VHS/Beta war had no compromise solution; to my knowledge there were never any videotape machines manufactured or marketed to consumers capable of playing both formats. Returning to my analogy, that's the monkey wrench, my friend: this is an 800lb gorilla, and it ain't goin' away anytime soon, at least not without making a grab for all the bananas!

This isn't just about software capacity or consumer hunger for a high definition delivery system for movies. From my ringside seat it looks like another heavy-weight grudge match between Bill Gates and Steve Jobs! In one corner you have Microsoft, with it's formidable clout and industry dominance, backing HD-DVD, and in the other you have SONY, partnered with Disney which owns PIXAR with Steve Jobs it's largest shareholder.

Here's another analogy (Oh, nooooOOOOO! -grin); this time boxing (Don King would be envious):

The strategies include rope-a-dope (heavy promotion to lure sideline gamblers, or rather, early adopters), fading (dropping prices), one-two punches (up to 5 'free' movies with either boxer's p-o-p label), below the belt jabs (exclusivity deals), hitting side-lined consumers with sucker punches (ring side seats for those willing to invest in early round players offered at rock bottom prices) and finally, the most devious strategy of all, hanging back for later rounds (holding back key titles)

If I were you, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for either Bill Gates or Steve Jobs to blink, oscar. I suspect that this format war (Boxer rebellion? -grin) is going to be with us much longer than any of the others. Might as well settle in and opt for a decent multi-format player with the right features when the prices come down. Keep in mind that Microsoft is still an undefeated heavyweight, and Apple, all the hype aside, is still the hungry contender trying to figure an angle to knock the champ out for the count with a well placed haymaker; depending upon who is officiating, the best one can hope for is that this bout will end in a draw. ;0)

Cheers,
AuPh

 

We'll need 2-3 Terabyte discs for the Uncompressed video movie releases. :0), posted on August 22, 2007 at 18:50:10
oscar
Audiophile

Posts: 19522
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Joined: October 25, 2000
 Not that I expect the Studios to support movie releases to the public on such a format, even when it becames technically feasible.

 

Page processed in 0.070 seconds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]