thirtynine. Posted April 2, 2007 Posted April 2, 2007 The one that allows porn to be put on it will win, just like VHS. THat would be HD-DVD.
DiemetriX Posted April 2, 2007 Posted April 2, 2007 emmm.. Last time I "checked" there was no plans of bring pron to Blue ray.
Marshmellow Posted April 2, 2007 Posted April 2, 2007 HD porn?! never thought of that... Well I'm just hoping HD-DVD wins... But out of every DVd commercial I see 3 out of 4 is made for Blu-Ray.
Jack Posted April 3, 2007 Posted April 3, 2007 You can get Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas on HD-DVD, so I know which format I'm backing.
Jasper Posted April 3, 2007 Posted April 3, 2007 You can get Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas on HD-DVD, so I know which format I'm backing. I don't even know those movies... Blu-Ray has the most backing from movie-companies, though - that's true.
Jasper Posted April 3, 2007 Posted April 3, 2007 UMD Movie > Blue Ray + HD DVD Give me numbers, since - of what I notice - UMDs don't sell unless they're even cheaper than normal or if Sony hands them away to you. Prove it with facts, please?
thirtynine. Posted April 3, 2007 Posted April 3, 2007 Thereason blu ray have so much support is because its backed by sony. Who own everything. blu ray allow porn on there format HOWEVER they refuse to help them, so HD DVD do help there for most pr0n production componies are going with HD DVD. There are some good articles about but i cant find any atm.
Daft Posted April 3, 2007 Posted April 3, 2007 Porn in the format war: http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/05/02/pornhd/index.php?lsrc=mwrss I think BluRay is better, but its made by Sony and I am a bitter zealot monkey! HD-DVD for the win!
Jasper Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 Porn in the format war:http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/05/02/pornhd/index.php?lsrc=mwrss I think BluRay is better, but its made by Sony and I am a bitter zealot monkey! HD-DVD for the win! I only have one problem with the comment: What the hell is 'better'? How can you say wich is 'better'? They both utilise the same technologies - the only difference lays in the coding of the content. And yes, HD-DVD has slightly lesser capacity but will that ever be a difference? Just like with DVD, they just drop a second bonus-HD-DVD for all the extra content, if it doesn't fit one full HD-DVD. It's all so stupid. They should have made a unified format.
Daft Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 I only have one problem with the comment: What the hell is 'better'? How can you say wich is 'better'? They both utilise the same technologies - the only difference lays in the coding of the content. And yes, HD-DVD has slightly lesser capacity but will that ever be a difference? Just like with DVD, they just drop a second bonus-HD-DVD for all the extra content, if it doesn't fit one full HD-DVD. It's all so stupid. They should have made a unified format. From what I have heard BluRay has better sound...although don't quote me on that. I just thought BluRay was a more complete format (god know what that means!)...ok I don't really have much of an idea about what I am talking about... They did try and make a unified format a couple months ago but it was too little, too late! http://today.reuters.com/news/articlebusiness.aspx?type=tnBusinessNews&storyID=nT197333&from=business
Jasper Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 From what I have heard BluRay has better sound...although don't quote me on that. I just thought BluRay was a more complete format (god know what that means!)...ok I don't really have much of an idea about what I am talking about... They did try and make a unified format a couple months ago but it was too little, too late! http://today.reuters.com/news/articlebusiness.aspx?type=tnBusinessNews&storyID=nT197333&from=business Believe me, Blu-Ray and HD-DVD are equal except on size, wich varies 8 Gb. Not really something to complain about, that. Graphics and sound are almost equal - it only depends on what movie-publishers do with that power. And I know about the unified format. I've got a mac, so I probably won't have a choice but go for Blu-Ray later on (becausse Apple backs Blu-Ray) - so I feel pretty much... screwed. This format waar is useless - it would make far more profit for all if they had a unified format, meaning they didn't have to spend all that money on fighting each other. And it would make publishing movies much easier...
Domstercool Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 All 24 fans would have to get a blu-ray drive if they want to watch 24 in high def, since Fox support blu-ray over HD-DVD. That is if the TV series ever come out on other formats bar DVD. O_o I wonder how TV shows will work on high def discs, how many eps per disc, etc etc.
Colin Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 I'm truly expecting both formats to not actually replace DVD's really. With the DVD format secured games wise for a gen with 360/Wii/PC then nothing is going to replace that space unless the move to purely download content happens...........which is also the way I see the film biz going. Well I'm hoping anyway that it does go all download only, and that neither format becomes a necessity.
Guest Jordan Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 Porn in the format war:http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/05/02/pornhd/index.php?lsrc=mwrss I think BluRay is better, but its made by Sony and I am a bitter zealot monkey! HD-DVD for the win! Well since Apple support Bluray, and you know... MacWorld are an Apple fansite they're bound to also support Bluray. And yeah, thats true Dom. But i don't think 24 is even broadcasted in narative 1080p in the US, i think its only 1080i.
That Guy Posted April 4, 2007 Posted April 4, 2007 All 24 fans would have to get a blu-ray drive if they want to watch 24 in high def, since Fox support blu-ray over HD-DVD. That is if the TV series ever come out on other formats bar DVD. O_o I wonder how TV shows will work on high def discs, how many eps per disc, etc etc. I've got HD DVD and will probably eventually pick up a PS3 so I'll own both. I'm just waiting for a drive that plays both. This is just screwing everyone over, because people will pick one and then have to go out and buy everything again once one of them wins. Gets on my nerves.
McPhee Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 I cant really see the Apple thing being an issue, they seem as bothered about next-gen DVD as Microsoft and they stand to make little to no money from it. AppleTV is where they will go and if Blu Ray starts to get in the way they'll be straight off that band-waggon TBH if Microsoft wanted HD-DVD to win badly enough they could make it simply by limiting Blu Ray support in Windows. If people couldnt use the disks in their comps then they'd soon abandon them
Jasper Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 I cant really see the Apple thing being an issue, they seem as bothered about next-gen DVD as Microsoft and they stand to make little to no money from it. AppleTV is where they will go and if Blu Ray starts to get in the way they'll be straight off that band-waggon TBH if Microsoft wanted HD-DVD to win badly enough they could make it simply by limiting Blu Ray support in Windows. If people couldnt use the disks in their comps then they'd soon abandon them a) Apple is concerned, since it manufactures hardware as well as software - wiçch means, eventually, they'll have to choose or go hybrid - wich costs heaps of licensing. b) Limiting support for a format doesn't matter, since barely anyone uses Windows Media Player to play DVD's - if you have the right tools and programs you can make anything work. You just need a driver with your Blu-Ray drive. Microsoft itself has barely anything to do with support for these kind of things. c) AppleTV has nothing to do with this discussion. At all. There is neither a CD, DVD nor Blu-Ray drive in the thing - so there's no optical medium in it anyway. So it has barely anything to do.
McPhee Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 c) AppleTV has nothing to do with this discussion. At all. There is neither a CD, DVD nor Blu-Ray drive in the thing - so there's no optical medium in it anyway. So it has barely anything to do. By you're reasoning then VHS vs Beta-Max is nothing to do with this discussion either? Same sort of case but neither were optical. HD-DVD vs Blu-Ray is a discussion about the future of media and how we view it and therefore AppleTV, 4OD, BT and Virgin Media are all relevant. All these services effect the possible lifespan of HD-DVD and Blu-Ray, because ultimately it is these services that the winner of the next-gen DVD fight will have to battle against for consumers money. At the moment it appears that these services may actually be surpassing the next-gen DVD formats, after-all there are FAR more people in this country signed up to Virgin Media than own Blu Ray and HD-DVD devices (combined).
Jasper Posted April 5, 2007 Posted April 5, 2007 By you're reasoning then VHS vs Beta-Max is nothing to do with this discussion either? Same sort of case but neither were optical. HD-DVD vs Blu-Ray is a discussion about the future of media and how we view it and therefore AppleTV, 4OD, BT and Virgin Media are all relevant. All these services effect the possible lifespan of HD-DVD and Blu-Ray, because ultimately it is these services that the winner of the next-gen DVD fight will have to battle against for consumers money. At the moment it appears that these services may actually be surpassing the next-gen DVD formats, after-all there are FAR more people in this country signed up to Virgin Media than own Blu Ray and HD-DVD devices (combined). First of all: Are you a moron? Betamax and VHS has barely anything to do with what I'm saying. I was talking just about the fact it didn't have a modern-day medium (of wich, incidnetally, almost every is optical) - it would be downright ankward if Apple had VHS or Betamax built in, no? If you wanted to bring the most mornic evidence of me 'being wrong' - youv' just hit jackpot. Services, again, are not as good as media and are in an entirely different league. Yes, entirely different. Whereas Blu-Ray and HD-DVD are meant for your home-movies ass well as data-storage, the online service are there for streaming - and sometimes, but barely - downloading the service.Yes, the digital sector is winning terrain but it strikes a few limits making it practically a very far choice at the moment: first of all you''ve got the transfer speed, wich is at it's maximum. Second, the size of the files is gigantic to carry over the web - certainly if you want the quality you got with a HD-DVD or Blu-Ray. Just don't be morronic and look at them in different leagues. You're not supposed to see if oranges have the same structure as apples, now do they? Keep this difference in mind: target content. Only service is for limited, official content, the optical discs are for any content. And they could be cheaper to manufacture and more profitable in the lond run. You'de be surprised what the profit marging on a DVD is... And with a movie download of two dollars, you can't have a steep, nine-dollar profit gain, now can you?
McPhee Posted April 6, 2007 Posted April 6, 2007 First of all: Are you a moron? Betamax and VHS has barely anything to do with what I'm saying. I was talking just about the fact it didn't have a modern-day medium (of wich, incidnetally, almost every is optical) - it would be downright ankward if Apple had VHS or Betamax built in, no? If you wanted to bring the most mornic evidence of me 'being wrong' - youv' just hit jackpot. I realised after posting that mentioning either of those was a bit dumb, but theres no need to get personal about it You're not supposed to see if oranges have the same structure as apples, now do they? No, you're right there. But they are both fruit. Some people like Oranges and some like Apples. The structure of the fruit is irrelevant. Services, again, are not as good as media and are in an entirely different league. Yes, entirely different. Whereas Blu-Ray and HD-DVD are meant for your home-movies ass well as data-storage, the online service are there for streaming - and sometimes, but barely - downloading the service.Yes, the digital sector is winning terrain but it strikes a few limits making it practically a very far choice at the moment: first of all you''ve got the transfer speed, wich is at it's maximum. Second, the size of the files is gigantic to carry over the web - certainly if you want the quality you got with a HD-DVD or Blu-Ray. Just don't be morronic and look at them in different leagues. You're not supposed to see if oranges have the same structure as apples, now do they? Keep this difference in mind: target content. Only service is for limited, official content, the optical discs are for any content. And they could be cheaper to manufacture and more profitable in the lond run. You'de be surprised what the profit marging on a DVD is... And with a movie download of two dollars, you can't have a steep, nine-dollar profit gain, now can you? Im tired so i'll put this point across as quickly as possible. It worked for the music market. Read up on SA-CD, DVD-A, why both formats failed and the rise of iTunes. Bear in mind that when the iTunes service first launched only 85% of internet users had speeds below 128kb/s (i.e. they were mostly on dialup) Im not saying HD-DVD and Blu-Ray will die as easily as SA-CD and DVD-A, they're far more viable formats with much more hype surrounding them. Even so, 5 years down the line i can't see them being anything more than a niche What can i say, i have my own view of where technology is going and optical disks arent in it. Im not alone either, theres a lot of stuff on the net comparing HD-DVD to Blu-Ray and looking at how sustainable services over the net are. Most of them are better reasoned that you're "Im right so you are a moron" temper tantrums though. By any chance did you just spend £400 on a Blu Ray or HD-DVD player?
Marshmellow Posted April 6, 2007 Posted April 6, 2007 Geez I just realized it would be about the same price to buy a PS3 and an HD-DVD player for the 360 compared to buying a HD-DVD only player or a Blu-Ray only player. I can't believe I'm saying this but I'm almost tempted to buy a PS3 now... or at least when I get some money...
AshMat Posted April 6, 2007 Posted April 6, 2007 At the moment i couldn't care. I don't have an HDTV or any of that. By the time i do, one of the formats will be a clear leader, so i'll know which to choose (or combi)
Jasper Posted April 6, 2007 Posted April 6, 2007 I realised after posting that mentioning either of those was a bit dumb, but theres no need to get personal about it No, you're right there. But they are both fruit. Some people like Oranges and some like Apples. The structure of the fruit is irrelevant. Im tired so i'll put this point across as quickly as possible. It worked for the music market. Read up on SA-CD, DVD-A, why both formats failed and the rise of iTunes. Bear in mind that when the iTunes service first launched only 85% of internet users had speeds below 128kb/s (i.e. they were mostly on dialup) Im not saying HD-DVD and Blu-Ray will die as easily as SA-CD and DVD-A, they're far more viable formats with much more hype surrounding them. Even so, 5 years down the line i can't see them being anything more than a niche What can i say, i have my own view of where technology is going and optical disks arent in it. Im not alone either, theres a lot of stuff on the net comparing HD-DVD to Blu-Ray and looking at how sustainable services over the net are. Most of them are better reasoned that you're "Im right so you are a moron" temper tantrums though. By any chance did you just spend £400 on a Blu Ray or HD-DVD player? But then again, there were so many formats supposed to be dead by now but that are still rendered in use. We still use VHS to get our television shows recorded. We are still using CD's - no matter how much internet sales are. And yes, even the old Long Play Records are still in use this very day. Some things just don't age, and neither will the physical medium. But there's on catch: DVD had a long run (it's nearly ten years now, isn't it?) - but Blu-Ray and HD-DVD is intended to be replaced by the HVD (Holographic Versatile Disc) very soon. In less then five years. It's capable of storing two-hundred times the data amounts that Blu-Ray can store now, on one simple layer. The problem will be there - thee lifespan - more than the competition with download markets. Some people just prefer something physical in return for their money. I'm one of those, and I'm guessing half the civiliisation thinks that way. While the other half thinks like you. But I don't have an HD-television. High Defenition, sorry enough, is just a buzz-word. Read this and I, once again, fully understand why Nitnendo opted for a lack of it on Wii: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=24033 . Enjoy!
Recommended Posts