Do we really want Blu-ray to win?

[ack_bak]

25GB may be enough for a quality VC-1/AVC encode with PCM or some other HD audio format... 30GB may be enough as well. Yet, at some point, as all movies start being released in HD and editing goes HD and the focus is more on HD, and not DVD, then there will be a great deal more in the way of HD extras and content that spills well beyond the 25GB... and the 30GB mark. For HD DVD this forces a second disc into the box, for Blu-ray is just goes to BD50 discs.

What about double dipping? This is a choice of studios and each one decides on their own what they want to do. For studios it doesn't make a ton of sense to overly invest in releasing everything right now. Showing all their cards, when they will sell... what? 50K copies of the HD movie? 100K if they are lucky? Really, this falls onto studios, and the current level of consumer interest, not on Blu-ray directly.

As Blu-ray builds in its user base, movies will hit the streets far more full-featured. But, for me at least, I will only be watching the film and ignoring the extras - just as I've done with DVD for years.

You make some good points. I really do not think the 50GB advantage is that big today, but it could be huge in the near future. All of those extra features you mention being filmed and presented in HD are going to take up space, all the IME stuff is going to take up extra space, and it will be nice to have the extra space for certain movies (LOTR, etc).

Obviously more space gives you additional flexibility for adding PCM tracks and the better bandwith allows for potentially superior transfers.

Like you, all I really care about is getting the best PQ and AQ possible from a movie.

[Aodh]

OMG ...talking about spin or the lack of comprehensive of the English lanuguage.

Here are all the full definions of beyond, not just the cherry-picked one:

1. on, at, or to the farther side of: Beyond those trees you'll find his house.
2. farther on than; more distant than: beyond the horizon; beyond the sea.
3. outside the understanding, limits, or reach of; past: beyond comprehension; beyond endurance; beyond help.
4. superior to; surpassing; above: wise beyond all others.
5. more than; in excess of; over and above: to stay beyond one's welcome.

In this case, "beyond" was not meant to be taken literally. Its a quality beyond high definition as in the experience of cinema at homes and all the emotion that which entails. The cinema experience is different for everyone. It's ambiguous and its beyond high definition.

Perfect in this case is absolute:
The Look and Sound of Perfect.

perfect: excellent or complete beyond practical or theoretical improvement

Definition 1 and 2 are in relation to a location comparison or where something is placed. 3, 4 and 5 can all be used in terms of exceeding or a comparative without meaning a location. So 3, is Blu-ray outside or beyond the limits, understanding or reach of High Definition? No, it IS High Definition, within the High Definition specifications of 1080P. I've outlined for 4, and 5 is the same as the last two. Blu-ray is not over and above high definition, it is high definition.

And my "Cherry-picked" definition of Perfect happens to be the same as yours. And it is, HD DVD is the look and sound of the best specs which can be provided within practical or theoretical improvements.

[rmslives]

25GB may be enough for a quality VC-1/AVC encode with PCM or some other HD audio format... 30GB may be enough as well. Yet, at some point, as all movies start being released in HD and editing goes HD and the focus is more on HD, and not DVD, then there will be a great deal more in the way of HD extras and content that spills well beyond the 25GB... and the 30GB mark. For HD DVD this forces a second disc into the box, for Blu-ray is just goes to BD50 discs.

What about double dipping? This is a choice of studios and each one decides on their own what they want to do. For studios it doesn't make a ton of sense to overly invest in releasing everything right now. Showing all their cards, when they will sell... what? 50K copies of the HD movie? 100K if they are lucky? Really, this falls onto studios, and the current level of consumer interest, not on Blu-ray directly.

As Blu-ray builds in its user base, movies will hit the streets far more full-featured. But, for me at least, I will only be watching the film and ignoring the extras - just as I've done with DVD for years.

I agree that when it comes to extras, I could usually care less. Having said that, for a format that is trying to win people over to it, it does make sense to want to give people a sense that the extra money they spent is worth it.

DVDs have been around long enough that we EXPECT extras, even if we do not necessarily need them. I would not pay $25 for an SDVD that had just the film on it; I would expect to pay much less. Don't you think new consumers, who are considering entering this "war," would look at a $30 BD movie at Walmart and see next to nothing in extras, and be disappointed? Especially when a $20 HD title next to it boasts U Control or something like that?

I'm not saying play all your cards at once - but give the average consumer some reason to hop in. The enhanced PQ and SQ alone may not be enough to justify the cost, especially when they can get Eragon LOADED with features on SDVD for less!

[Balian]

Definition 1 and 2 are in relation to a location comparison or where something is placed. 3, 4 and 5 can all be used in terms of exceeding or a comparative without meaning a location. So 3, is Blu-ray outside or beyond the limits, understanding or reach of High Definition? No, it IS High Definition, within the High Definition specifications of 1080P. I've outlined for 4, and 5 is the same as the last two. Blu-ray is not over and above high definition, it is high definition.

And my "Cherry-picked" definition of Perfect happens to be the same as yours. And it is, HD DVD is the look and sound of the best specs which can be provided within practical or theoretical improvements.

Come on ...who are you fooling? Sony knows they are selling high definition product. The consumers know that Sony is selling high definition product. Therefore, "Beyond High Definition" is a "touchy-feely" marketing slogan that is meant to be ambiguous. There is no literal meaning to it. Do you seriously don't understand this?

Perfect on the other hand means perfect ...flawless and can't be improve upon. I don't know how much more absolute you can get.

[rmslives]

Come on ...who are you fooling? Sony knows they are selling high definition product. The consumers know that Sony is selling high definition product. Therefore, "Beyond High Definition" is a "touchy-feely" marketing slogan that is meant to be ambiguous. There is no literal meaning to it. Do you seriously don't understand this?

Perfect on the other hand means perfect ...flawless and can't be improve upon. I don't know how much more absolute you can get.

This little sub-discussion you two are having is totally irrelevant and silly. BOTH companies are touting thier products with CONFIDENCE. Give me a break - both companies are equally arrogant (or again, confident, if you don't want to imply a negative connotation).

[ack_bak]

Come on ...who are you fooling? Sony knows they are selling high definition product. The consumers know that Sony is selling high definition product. Therefore, "Beyond High Definition" is a "touchy-feely" marketing slogan that is meant to be ambiguous. There is no literal meaning to it. Do you seriously don't understand this?

Perfect on the other hand means perfect ...flawless and can't be improve upon. I don't know how much more absolute you can get.

I can't believe you and Aodh are actually arguing over this..

[VT JJR]

I agree that there is competition within the Bd camp. However, I'm getting sick of the "inferior specs" part. I noticed how no one responded to my earlier post: what good is the extra sapce if you're not going to use it? And right now, if BD is using 25 gig discs because that is all they need for the audio and video, how are they surperior? HD is using 30 gigs.

Again, 25 gigs seems to be more than enough for great PQ and uncompressed PCM. Why do you need the extra 25 gigs? For extras? But wait, didn't someone just say most people don't care about extras?

I don't even like a lot of extras, but I would like to see the BD camp at least make an effort to give their discs extras - the Eragon disc was clearly inferior to the two discs SDVD when it came to extras, which is ridiculous. To me, it seems like they are saying "Well, if it's Blu-Ray, they'll buy it. Why make an extra effort?" That is an insult to the BDA customers, IMO.

You're kidding, right?

I've been following several forums ever since I bought my PS3 but have never posted anything, just absorbing information.

After seeing this post, I couldn't resist to post a link to the Unofficial Blu-ray Audio and Video Specifications (I can't post url's yet b/c this is my first post wwwDOTavsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=760714) and the Unofficial HD DVD Audio and Video Specifications (wwwDOTavsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=822245) compiled by "benes" at AVS Forum. These charts show the Title, Codec, Length, Movie Size, Disc Size, Total Bitrate, Calculated Video Bitrate, Main Audio Track, IME (yes/no) and any Secondary Audio Tracks for a lot of the movies that have been released on both formats.

I just want to point out the fact that a lot of the HD DVD's are getting very close to maxxing out on their 30 GB disk. This is a very good reason why the studios are not including multiple audio tracks or for that matter lossless tracks.

In certain things in this world, bigger is not always better .... but .... in regards to the Next Gen battle, bigger does mean better. Blu-ray gives the studios much more flexiblity with the content they can ultimately provide ME, the consumer.

[ack_bak]

This little sub-discussion you two are having is totally irrelevant and silly. BOTH companies are touting thier products with CONFIDENCE. Give me a break - both companies are equally arrogant (or again, confident, if you don't want to imply a negative connotation).

Man.. Sometimes I think we must be brothers from different mothers.. You took the words right out of my mouth... You really need to get a Blu-Ray player so you can get the full HD experience..

[kali]

Beyond: 4. superior to; surpassing

Perfect: 2. excellent or complete beyond practical or theoretical improvement

So Sony is blatantly lying because they are High Definition, not beyond it. Toshiba is saying it's offering the best that can be delivered. And before you audiophiles jump in with PCM, it does support it as well as decoding lossless codecs, it's the studio's choice to include it or not.

It is arguable that what sony says is arguably not a lie.

HDTV according to the ATSC broadcast standard defines the following:

Video Modes

640x480 (4:3 Standard Definition; square pixel aspect ratio)
interlaced: 29.97 (59.94 fields/s) 30 (60 fields/s)
progressive: 23.976 24 29.97 30 59.94 60

704x480 (4:3 or 16:9 Standard Definition; non-square pixel aspect ratio)
interlaced: 29.97 (59.94 fields/s) 30 (60 fields/s)
progressive: 23.976 24 29.97 30 59.94 60

1280x720 (16:9 High Definition; square pixel aspect ratio)
progressive: 23.976 24 29.97 30 59.94 60

1920x1080 (16:9 High Definition; square pixel aspect ratio)
interlaced: 29.97 (59.94 fields/s) 30 (60 fields/s)
progressive: 23.976 24 29.97 30


Codecs

For transport, ATSC uses the MPEG-2 Systems specification, known as Transport stream, to encapsulate data, subject to certain constraints. ATSC uses 188-byte MPEG transport stream packets to carry data. Before decoding of audio and video takes place, the receiver must demodulate and apply error correction to the signal. Then, the transport stream may be demultiplexed into its constituent streams.
MPEG-2 video is used as the video codec, also with certain constraints.
Dolby Digital AC-3 is used as the audio codec, though it was officially standardized as A/52 by the ATSC. It allows the transport of up to five channels of sound with a sixth channel for low-frequency effects (the so-called "5.1" configuration). In contrast, Japanese ISDB HDTV broadcasts use MPEG's Advanced Audio Coding (AAC) as the audio codec, which also allows 5.1 audio output. DVB allows both.

Modulation and transmission

Main articles: 8VSB, 256QAM
ATSC signals are designed to use the same 6 MHz bandwidth as NTSC television channels. Once the video and audio signals have been compressed and mutiplexed, the transport stream can be modulated in different ways depending on the method of transmission.
Terrestrial (local) broadcasters use 8-VSB modulation that can transfer at a maximum rate of 19.39 Mbit/s, sufficient to carry several video and audio programs and metadata.
Cable television plants generally operate at a higher signal-to-noise ratio and can use 16-VSB or 256-QAM to achieve a throughput of 38.78 Mbit/s, using the same 6 MHz channel.
In recent years, cable operators have become accustomed to compressing standard-resolution video for digital cable systems, making it harder to find duplicate 6 MHz channels for local broadcasters on uncompressed "basic" cable.

So what we commonly call HDTV is limited to 1080i@60 Hz/1080p@24 30 Hz.

So the question is does Blu-ray allow for 1080p@60 Hz. I did a net search and couldn't find a definitive answer on this. Does anyone know?

Why would we care? Well stuff like IMAX which is 48 fps pontentially can be rendered more faithfully on Blu-ray if it can do 1080p/60

But even if we assume not, Blu-ray supports higher bitrates and more advanced codecs than the broadcast standard so its quality is clearly beyond HD.

The amusing thing here is that HD DVD can similarly be argued that it is beyond HD.

I have more trouble with the "Look and Sound of Perfect" because clearly on my system HD DVD doesn't look perfect, neither does Blu-ray but Blu-ray never claimed to be perfect.

[Balian]

This little sub-discussion you two are having is totally irrelevant and silly. BOTH companies are touting thier products with CONFIDENCE. Give me a break - both companies are equally arrogant (or again, confident, if you don't want to imply a negative connotation).

The two slogans are different. I am merely pointing out the difference between the two. Skip over the posts if you don't think its worthwhile.

[divian]

Yeah rootkits... Whatever....

Lets just remember that Sony is considered to be the most trusted name in consumer electronics...

This is also a marketing campaing.

A lot of people all over the world can not afford to buy Sony products and for them Sony does not even exist.

It's always nice when a compony proclaims ( marketing campaign ) that they are number #1.
I can assure you that at least in the gaming console industry they are about to lose the supremacy. They are going to have to share the big seat with M$ and Nintendo.

[rmslives]

You're kidding, right?

I've been following several forums ever since I bought my PS3 but have never posted anything, just absorbing information.

After seeing this post, I couldn't resist to post a link to the Unofficial Blu-ray Audio and Video Specifications (I can't post url's yet b/c this is my first post wwwDOTavsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=760714) and the Unofficial HD DVD Audio and Video Specifications (wwwDOTavsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=822245) compiled by "benes" at AVS Forum. These charts show the Title, Codec, Length, Movie Size, Disc Size, Total Bitrate, Calculated Video Bitrate, Main Audio Track, IME (yes/no) and any Secondary Audio Tracks for a lot of the movies that have been released on both formats.

I just want to point out the fact that a lot of the HD DVD's are getting very close to maxxing out on their 30 GB disk. This is a very good reason why the studios are not including multiple audio tracks or for that matter lossless tracks.

In certain things in this world, bigger is not always better .... but .... in regards to the Next Gen battle, bigger does mean better. Blu-ray gives the studios much more flexiblity with the content they can ultimately provide ME, the consumer.

Sorry, but maybe you missed my point:

My initial point was that BD is NOT using their space advantage to provide much in the way of extras. I find this to be a bit insulting, when standard DVDs contain more extras than high def ones.

Someone then responded that most movie buyers don't want extras. My response to this was, if you don't want any extras - if ALL you want is the mpicture and audio - then you don't need the extra space.

So here's my point: if I wanted extras, I would be disappointed with some of the BD studios' unwillingness to provide the goods.

If I don't want extras, then I cannot really care whether or not BD has extra storage space, because without extras that storage space is over kill.

Now, I'm not saying the extra space CANNOT be used - of course it can! But right now it is not, and that disappoints me. I personally do not care about a ton of extras, so if I were making movies a 25 or 30 gig disc would be more than enough.

But for those fans who DO expect extras, in some instances they are actually BETTER off buying SDVD, which is ridiculous.

[rmslives]

Man.. Sometimes I think we must be brothers from different mothers.. You took the words right out of my mouth... You really need to get a Blu-Ray player so you can get the full HD experience..

I am going to show this to my wife, so she can stop giving me death stares when I say "the next DVD player we buy will be. . ."!

[rmslives]

The two slogans are different. I am merely pointing out the difference between the two. Skip over the posts if you don't think its worthwhile.

How can I determine whether they are relevant or not until I read them?

Unless you want me to assume all of your posts are off-topic and silly, which hopefully is not the case.

If you two want to continue an off-topic back and forth, PM each other so we don't have to read it.

[Blu-heaven]

SOny is the best company - Most of there product are off the hook -- Like my xbr series(no clouds problem)Toshiba dreams to be like sony- Blu-ray will be the clear winner in this war