Blu-ray Loses; HD-DVD Doesn't Win

I look for independent articles that tell the "Truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth." I have both formats, so I do find all of this interesting.

S~
 
Interesting article. Perhaps th etide is turninga bit.
 
I do believe that if the bluray laser diodes can not be produced in a more economical ratio then they will loose it is as simple as that. (The ones Sony's Subsidiaries provides) Toshiba will continue to undercut the cost of HD DVD players and still manage a profit and two things will happen. They will price Sony out of the market leaving them with a burning whole in their pants or they will price HD DVD right into everyones living rooms.

People can talk all they want but it is the average Joe Six-pack consumer that will win the war and Joe needs money for beer.
 
Last edited:
This guy is on M$ payroll. What else would you think he would write about -- the demise of HD-DVD? There are misstatements (most BD movies are now on 50gb) BD-rom for storage is at 200GB (TDK is one manufacturer of such product) and BD movie discs numbers are still higher then HD-DVD even with Paramount and Dreamworks not making BD product (what was the last Dreamworks product for BD anyway?). Nah, this guy is just trying to stir the dust up -- next article!
 
This guy is on M$ payroll. What else would you think he would write about -- the demise of HD-DVD? There are misstatements (most BD movies are now on 50gb) BD-rom for storage is at 200GB (TDK is one manufacturer of such product) and BD movie discs numbers are still higher then HD-DVD even with Paramount and Dreamworks not making BD product (what was the last Dreamworks product for BD anyway?). Nah, this guy is just trying to stir the dust up -- next article!

Are you really so naive to think that anyone that doesn't agree with you is on M$ payroll? If not; then politeness won't allow us to go there.

Here's what the author said:
Blu-ray's biggest advantage is storage capacity; however, storage has grown so fast that you can get a 750 GB Seagate external drive for less than US$250.

To back that up on a 25 GB Blu-ray recorder would take 30 Blu-ray disks and more time than I think anyone in their right mind would accept. Neither HD-DVD nor Blu-ray are likely to become backup platforms, and most of the data we move still fits easily on a standard dual-layer DVD.


  1. Fact: there are no 50GB (dual layer) recorders available to consumers at this time.
  2. Fact: The 50GB media is prohibitively expensive and is 2-3x the equivalent space in disk drives. Dual layer media is @ 34.xx / disc. It takes 10 discs to equal one 500GB spindle at a cost of $120 vs $340. 750GB? $510 vs $200. There have been lab demonstrations beyond 2 layers; but it is not available for purchase.
  3. Fact: It is dramatically faster to back up disk to disk than it is disc to Blu-ray media. Max sustained speed from Blu-ray is 2x (it'll get faster). That's ~13 MB/second. Drive to drive copying is between 30-50 MB/second (it'll get faster too). 60+MB/second if you get the fastest spindles.

Tell me; do the presentations of these facts put me on MS' payroll?

I can dispute you point for point; but after this do you really want me to?
 
Last edited:
Just for you John:

Panasonic Develops 4x Blu-Ray Burner

It is not out today but by the end of September -- that's soon enough.

And while I will admit that a 750gb drive is relatively inexpensive to purchase right now my response was in comparing a 25gb disc when within 30 days you will be able to buy a drive that will burn a 50GB disc at 4x. That's shortsheeting the facts.

As for backup speed, as you can see this drive is stated to acheive 4x speed. There are some companies claiming 10x speed on BD backup. As you know, speed goes up as time goes by. Another shortsheeting of the facts.

As for price, all prices go down after time -- except for land -- my understanding is that they aren't making anymore of that stuff unless you count moving it into the sea. I expect prices to be high intially and then come down to reasonability within 2 to 3 years.

This whole HD-DVD vs BD thing is about distorted facts. What one can and the other can't. How cheap one is compared to how expensive the other is. How one has features the other can't do. There is only one thing BD has that HD-DVD doesn't -- that's 25gb per layer compared to 15gb for HD-DVD. And there is nothing HD-DVD has that BD can not do. Given time (my guess is 6 months to a year) there will be no differance between the two formats except for who is supporting whom. Nothing that iHD can do will not be able to be done under Java-Live and vice-versa. The only real differance is what codec is being used and the bit rate. BD will always be able to use any compression codec the studio wants to use (they already do) and the bit rate can and should always be higher.

PQ and Audio Quality will be relatively the same and the cost will be too. At that point the consumer will either vote (by their wallets) one format out or both will go on to live for a few years and never replace DVD. That is pretty much the whole can of beans -- as they say.
 
Last edited:
This guy is on M$ payroll. What else would you think he would write about -- the demise of HD-DVD? There are misstatements (most BD movies are now on 50gb) anyway?).

Let's continue with this "Fact" that John started. I'll take the movie title angle as John covered the storage angle. The released specs show that Warner is still using mostly 25GB discs on their upcoming releases. Fox is said to be going to still use 25GB on their upcoming cancelled at the last minute titles. SOny hasn't released specs of their upcoming titles, but since they own one of the two 50GB replication facilites in the world, I would hope they would use 50. SOmeone said that SM1 and SM2 were going to be on 25, though. I'll have to find that link when I get a chence. Most of the Discovery Channel type titles are also on 25GB disks.

If you have ever read this guys articles or even the first paragraph he is well connected and was clearly on the side of BD even in on the talks for HDDVD exclusive Warner (in the beginning) to go neutral.

S~
 
Did not dispute the pricing differance between the hard drive and BD discs. As for what Fox is going to do-- nobody knows that right now -- and talk is speculation. 'Someone said' is exactly what I refer to as distortion as facts. Give us a link to something concrete -- 'Someone' could be your dog (not your's -- this is a referance).

As for the writer of the article he is famous (or infamous -- depends on who you listen to or read) about his support for PCs (over Apple for one) Microsoft and developements and ideology directly relating. His article could of easily been written by the CEO of M$. BD loses but HD-DVD doesn't win with neither replacing DVD and downloadable HD content eventually being the winner. (This is a short paraphase of the article). My stating he is on M$ payroll is not true (I should not of stated this) but he is definately resides on the block where their ideolgy is currently residing.

I prefer to read the weekly sales totals for both formats. Increased BD standalone sales and steady defintion between the two formats in discs sales pretty much does not show that BD is for one -- slowing down nor are they looking like they are the losers right now. They look like the leader in the first leg of the race. This dog and poney show is not going to be over that quickly. There are more twists and turns to come.
 
Just for you John:

Panasonic Develops 4x Blu-Ray Burner

It is not out today but by the end of September -- that's soon enough.

And while I will admit that a 750gb drive is relatively inexpensive to purchase right now my response was in comparing a 25gb disc when within 30 days you will be able to buy a drive that will burn a 50GB disc at 4x. That's shortsheeting the facts.

No, it isn't. It's what I can buy today; not weeks from now assuming it actually ships on time.

It still won't keep up with external disc; and you haven't solved the cost equation either.

The burner is going to be more expensive than a 750GB drive; and the media is going to cost you the equivalent of 2-3 more 760GB drives.

Let me put it to you this way:
For a smaller out of pocket expense I can put up 2.25 TB of usable and protected storage.


As for backup speed, as you can see this drive is stated to acheive 4x speed. There are some companies claiming 10x speed on BD backup. As you know, speed goes up as time goes by. Another shortsheeting of the facts.

Yes, and they do for hard drives too. Since both will increase in speed over time how is this shortsheeting the facts; other than it's not me praising Blu-ray as the savior of the world.

Anyone that needs archival backup won't use blu-ray.

As for price, all prices go down after time -- except for land -- my understanding is that they aren't making anymore of that stuff unless you count moving it into the sea. I expect prices to be high intially and then come down to reasonability within 2 to 3 years.

In 2-3 years; the drive capacity will be measured in multiple terabytes. How will you keep up with the dramatic storage capability increase?

For perspective; it will take ten non-existent 200GB discs at an unknown cost and an unknown availability date for a hard drive I will be able to buy next year.

Neither side is standing still.



This whole HD-DVD vs BD thing is about distorted facts.

Some of us provide facts; others don't.

What one can and the other can't.

Until sometime in 2008 (unknown yet) the feature set of Blu-ray will lag behind HD-DVD. Until the 2.0 spec players ship HD-DVD still has a greater scope of features.

This will be > 2 years after launch before Blu-ray can catch up to where HD-DVD was at on day one. And you talk about HD-DVD getting a product out before it's ready?

How cheap one is compared to how expensive the other is. How one has features the other can't do. There is only one thing BD has that HD-DVD doesn't -- that's 25gb per layer compared to 15gb for HD-DVD. And there is nothing HD-DVD has that BD can not do.

Get back to me in 2008 when you can upgrade your player's firmware across the internet; share with your friends and download new content for Blu-ray. You can't as these are 2.0 spec and nobody meets that spec.

While you're at it; show me PiP on Blu-ray. Oh wait that isn't shipping yet either. So 18 months + before we get that on Blu-ray.

It remains to be seen whether HD-DVD will deliver on the 51GB disc they mentioned at CES. I remain somewhat skeptical of its arrival.


Given time (my guess is 6 months to a year) there will be no differance between the two formats except for who is supporting whom.


Nothing that iHD can do will not be able to be done under Java-Live and vice-versa.

No one has argued this point. What has been pointed out to you time and time again is that the cost to deliver the interactivity on Blu-ray will remain higher. Apparently you don't consider the studio's costs for production to be important and it most certainly is.


The only real differance is what codec is being used and the bit rate.

Since they're identical the choice to use which codec is an authoring decision; not format based.

Can you really see a difference between MPEG-4/AVC/H.264 between a 12-13 Mb/second VC-1 vs. an 18 Mb/second VC-1? What about for H.264?

If the answer is no; then it's wasted bits.

BD will always be able to use any compression codec the studio wants to use (they already do) and the bit rate can and should always be higher.

Is the picture really better? I haven't seen conclusive evidence that this is the case. I've seen some cases where one codec has flaws and the other has different flaws. Pick your poison there.

PQ and Audio Quality will be relatively the same and the cost will be too. At that point the consumer will either vote (by their wallets) one format out or both will go on to live for a few years and never replace DVD. That is pretty much the whole can of beans -- as they say.

That's fine by me.
 
Did not dispute the pricing differance between the hard drive and BD discs. As for what Fox is going to do-- nobody knows that right now -- and talk is speculation. 'Someone said' is exactly what I refer to as distortion as facts. Give us a link to something concrete -- 'Someone' could be your dog (not your's -- this is a referance).

It's quite humorous that you pedantically have to point out your's when you can't correctly spell the words "difference" (differance (sic)) and reference (referance (sic)). I would suggest you not give spelling tips.

As for the writer of the article he is famous (or infamous -- depends on who you listen to or read) about his support for PCs (over Apple for one) Microsoft and developements and ideology directly relating.

MS is the dominant player in the PC industry. Like it or not that fact is not disputable. I suppose that someone might prefer a PC over Apple makes them silly right?

You do realize that for many of us; computers are tools right? And that for some of us that the tool that best supports the job is a PC running a variant of Windows.

His article could of easily been written by the CEO of M$. BD loses but HD-DVD doesn't win with neither replacing DVD and downloadable HD content eventually being the winner. (This is a short paraphase of the article). My stating he is on M$ payroll is not true (I should not of stated this) but he is definately resides on the block where their ideolgy is currently residing.

He agrees with MS' point of view in some areas. Guess what, so do I.

I prefer to read the weekly sales totals for both formats. Increased BD standalone sales and steady defintion between the two formats in discs sales pretty much does not show that BD is for one -- slowing down nor are they looking like they are the losers right now.

If you're really reading the weekly sales; then you would see that the sales are leveling off and equalizing between 3:2 and 2:1.

Given all these Blu-ray players that were going to bury the HD-DVD side it should be a much steeper victory; but it isn't.

They look like the leader in the first leg of the race. This dog and poney show is not going to be over that quickly. There are more twists and turns to come.

What the hell is a poney (sic) show? I know what a pony is (an infant horse) but I have no clue what a poney is.

You really shouldn't pick on others' spelling when yours is decidedly not a model of correctness.
 
Last edited:

Straight from the horse's mouth

BD or HD-DVD do you really care?

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)