Print

[GuntherMP5]

I got one, I am totally hooked on HD video, even streaming WMVHD. Yeah I want Blue Ray but from the people I know that have a PS3 they like their 360 better for games. I have seen blue ray and it did look better but only slightly and it was a demo disk so it showed the best. I have watched a few HD DVD's and I am impressed for $200 ($160 for the people that used the $40 CC coupon) you can't beat it. I have an upscaling OPPO and over 750 DVD's but there really is no comparison to true HD DVD. I only have two issues 1)  360 doesn't currently have an HDMI ( and I know this is discussed, but I really don't see how they can ,since its an analog signal- I use VGA ) and 2) Blue Ray has a lot better selection in titles,all movies look better in HD but Sci-Fi looks awesome! Also we will never get Resident Evil on HD DVD , not saying it was a good movie but it's still Mila and Zombies!

This should not be flagged or Banned since there really is not a current solution. But you can hook up the 360 to a Windows PC eventually you will be able to decrypt and encode to a WMVHD and it should end up around 4 to 5 GB for Movie Only.( Maybe Less- I didn't really do the math) disk or stream. You could probably do Blue Ray as well but burners are currently over $1K and cheapest media is still $15.

I want a PS3 but really only for the Blue Ray Player. For $200 as a hold me over I recommend that if you have a 1080 TV ( p preferred ) grab one and add HDDVD to your Netflix, It's worth it!

[Foe-hammer]

QUOTE(cryptblood1986 @ Nov 24 2006, 07:31 AM)

http://cgi.ebay.ca/N...bayphotohosting
New Toshiba HDA1 HD DVD Player Dolby Digital Plus 1080i even better for $214.50 US

That HD-DVD player on ebay you posted to (stupid that you even posted an auction item) went for $360 US and doesn't even support 1080p.  The 360's cost $200 and supports 1080p.  So that was a most ridiculous comparison.

QUOTE(Zaxx @ Nov 25 2006, 05:20 AM)

How can you ask a question that's already been answered? And not by some guys oppinion, but by FACTS. Blue Ray is already the CLEAR winner of the two formats. Who wants a HD-DVD that can't output 1080p signal? No.. I don't bother the HD-DVD format... it will be gone before the Blue Ray takes the throne

HD-DVD does support 1080p, and the 360's HD-DVD does too.  Some people are still very uninformed, and lack any logic in their discussion.

[trance4jim]

Right now I can stream wmvhd files from my laptop without mediacenter installed.
I don't need it but it has a great price.Also, the movies are like $19.99 at amazon.
I plan to buy it in the spring when more movies are released.
Everyone with an hdtv must stream wmvhd movies.
When you see Island Fever 3 in hd WoW!
They sell Imax movies in that format right now too.

[Bizquick]

just cause Blue ray can hold me doesnt mean its better. I think the fact that both can do compression in all the 3 levels is very important fact. what do you think the movie producers are going to upgrade first. the lasers and buring tech on mass duplaction or the Computers doing the encoding faster and smaller files? I'm betting on the 2nd. And if they do improve it first like I expect we will just see this format war going on for a while. for the guys that have the money to have the Nice 1080P setups with HDMI I think they are just going to have both players while this war is going on. what I mean this war is going to be a going on for a good 2 years I would expect.

[jagermike]

want to get one really bad

[Zoopster]

QUOTE(Jish @ Dec 10 2006, 12:02 AM)

I don't know why it is such a big controversy?!?  Blu-Ray is, hands down, the better format.  It holds more space and it has much faster loading.  Sure give it time and things will speed up, but hopefully by that time so will blu-ray, etc.

Faster loading?? What do you base this on? The Toshiba HD DVD player is a slow turd; takes over a minute to power up and play a disc. Incidentally, so does the Samsung Blu-Ray player. That's not because of the format, it's because of the player in both cases. Incidentally, the X360 HD DVD player starts a movie in roughly 10 seconds, or about the same amount of time required to play a standard DVD. The PS3's startup speed is comparable. So that opinion bites the dust.

QUOTE(Jish @ Dec 10 2006, 12:02 AM)

I would never buy the 360 Hd-DVd add-on, unless I could get it for ridiculously cheap............just so I could hack it and use it as a stand-alone.  What was MS thinking when they neglected the HDMI cable for the 360, damn proprietary component cables!

Considering the cheapest BD player is the PS3 at $600 (or $800+ on eBay), and the cheapest HD DVD player is $499, I would say $200 for the X360 one is already bordering on the "ridiculously cheap" by comparison. And there is already a way to hook it up to a PC and play HD DVD movies with it. I agree that there should be an HDMI cable for the 360, but I can get 1080p already from the component cables. The Image Constraint Token that reduces HD picture quality on analog connections will not be in use on discs for quite some time to come, and by then the XBox720 will probably be out.

QUOTE(Jish @ Dec 10 2006, 12:02 AM)

Given the fact that one of the biggest pushes for DVD was because the PS2 offered DVD playback, the PS3 should push Blu-Ray quite well.

Face it, PS2 was a really crappy DVD player. There were already very good, affordable DVD players available in 1999 when the PS2 launched, which didn't have the compatibility problems that the PS2 had. IGN used to maintain a list of DVD movies that had problems on PS2 hardware, as well as tracking the various DVD driver updates Sony released to fix the numerous problems (I recall at least 5 offhand). If PS2 had been my primary DVD player back then, it would have made me very chilly to the format until I bought a 'real' DVD player.

QUOTE(Jish @ Dec 10 2006, 12:02 AM)

Sony has a fairly good track record for media:

BetaMax - failed
CD - major success
minidisc - moderately successful in US, very successful in Japan and europe
UMD - probably will fail
ProDuo - success

Also, I'm pretty sure they had a lot to do with DVD development too.

Beta didn't just fail, it failed BIG. A significant portion of the tape-buying public went with Beta because the picture quality was better, and ended up getting burned when it croaked. Although Sony shouldn't bear a lot of the blame for how things turned out, they weren't blameless. The real blame should go to Sony now that they make the choice to proceed with a format war again today, when they should remember how the last one turned out. (I was around back then)

Audio CD was a cooperative venture between Sony and Philips. They share technology, and each company holds several crucial patents. It wasn't an all-Sony thing.

MD disc never caught on in the US. Nobody bought them. They were popular in Japan, less so in Europe. The fact they were recordable was the only positive thing they had going, and that was nullified with the advent of recordable CD. Overall, it was stupid for Sony to introduce a product that competed more or less directly with another of their platforms; but then, that's typical of Sony. They wanted a format that they alone could control, and not share with other companies the way CD is done.

Sony and Toshiba are co-developers of the DVD standard, along with Philips. They share technology for it, and each company controls important patents related to it.

UMD will fail for at least a couple of simple reasons: price, and exclusivity. Who the hell would buy a UMD of a movie for $25-30, which ONLY plays on a PSP, when they can get a DVD version for $15 that plays pretty much everywhere? The DVD will also usually have tons of extras that won't fit on a UMD. Once again, Sony introduces a format intended to compete with one of their own properties (DVD). Very, very stupid; but again, typical Sony. They again are trying to establish a standard that they don't have to share with other companies, and once again it will fail.

So if Sony is indeed responsible for several "successful" formats, it's through no fault of their own.

[xboxuser5]

no (other reason's)

A. no HD tv to begin with lol
B. I can see my 60" hitachi just fine without HD
C. sony reciever and 10 speaker's rock's the house if needed
D. way to expensive.
E. too soon to tell who will come out on top either blue ray or hd dvd
F. soon they will make a burner for the same price for the pc and then these will be obsolete becuase of their over the top price.
G. more then likely they will have a HD tv/HD dvd player combo tv's like the regular dvd one's already out.

I remeber when the pioneer dvd burner cam out it was $660.00 in the store I got mine for $340.00 and it was a deal 3-4 month's later it was $80.00 or less and obsolete I am sure these will be the same after a few month's I just don't see the extra few thousand dollar clearity here between the player disk and tv like I said I can see and hear my movies fine and still saved alot from staying away from HD stuff I mean yeah it look's great but for a grand or so more it ain't all that better of a picture now lol

[ISOmaniac29]

i got it but i think its pointless that i got it since i now have a
SONY Blu-ray DVD Burner i got it from newegg for 600bucks and if you ask me blu-ray looks way better
to me then my HD-movies do....i even found blu-ray disks at newegg too got a few of them
but all this blu-ray and hd crap is too expensive if you ask me...


and dvd is fine the way it is i should have probbly stuck with all of that because now im broke

 

[Bayshido]

I dont realy care about HD or BLUE , wat i do say is that hd is way beter on cost and vedeo are the same !!!.
HD spec 30G FULL HD 8 hours Wat the hell do you want to look ad a film of 8 hours :S
blue even more i think ,, so HD is beter becuase of the cost !!!! or you love to spend more moeny for nothing :S
 even so hd blue , we dont need it ,, get a dvd use a divx or xvid it wil fit ,, and use a high motion dedection when encoding for those that complane about macrobloks.

i just like HD just to burn my anime , for noting more

[fullgrown]

My HD-DVD add-on rocks, can't deal with mpeg-2 period for blue-ray. First of all mpeg-2 been out for the longest its old school technology. HD-DVD is just better overall to me and more reliable. Just my opinion.

[phatboy922]

I really don't see either format ever winning this battle... I voted No with intentions to buy one eventually, but I seriously believe we will have 2 new standards for a loooong time.  With different production houses supporting different formats, things will get really messy for consumers.  I can't wait to see how many movies people will attempt to return after they opened them because they bought a Blu-Ray DVD for their HD-DVD player... haha.


Tom

[Jish]

QUOTE(Zoopster @ Dec 12 2006, 10:10 AM)

Faster loading?? What do you base this on? The Toshiba HD DVD player is a slow turd; takes over a minute to power up and play a disc. Incidentally, so does the Samsung Blu-Ray player. That's not because of the format, it's because of the player in both cases. Incidentally, the X360 HD DVD player starts a movie in roughly 10 seconds, or about the same amount of time required to play a standard DVD. The PS3's startup speed is comparable. So that opinion bites the dust.
Considering the cheapest BD player is the PS3 at $600 (or $800+ on eBay), and the cheapest HD DVD player is $499, I would say $200 for the X360 one is already bordering on the "ridiculously cheap" by comparison. And there is already a way to hook it up to a PC and play HD DVD movies with it. I agree that there should be an HDMI cable for the 360, but I can get 1080p already from the component cables. The Image Constraint Token that reduces HD picture quality on analog connections will not be in use on discs for quite some time to come, and by then the XBox720 will probably be out.
Face it, PS2 was a really crappy DVD player. There were already very good, affordable DVD players available in 1999 when the PS2 launched, which didn't have the compatibility problems that the PS2 had. IGN used to maintain a list of DVD movies that had problems on PS2 hardware, as well as tracking the various DVD driver updates Sony released to fix the numerous problems (I recall at least 5 offhand). If PS2 had been my primary DVD player back then, it would have made me very chilly to the format until I bought a 'real' DVD player.
Beta didn't just fail, it failed BIG. A significant portion of the tape-buying public went with Beta because the picture quality was better, and ended up getting burned when it croaked. Although Sony shouldn't bear a lot of the blame for how things turned out, they weren't blameless. The real blame should go to Sony now that they make the choice to proceed with a format war again today, when they should remember how the last one turned out. (I was around back then)

Audio CD was a cooperative venture between Sony and Philips. They share technology, and each company holds several crucial patents. It wasn't an all-Sony thing.

MD disc never caught on in the US. Nobody bought them. They were popular in Japan, less so in Europe. The fact they were recordable was the only positive thing they had going, and that was nullified with the advent of recordable CD. Overall, it was stupid for Sony to introduce a product that competed more or less directly with another of their platforms; but then, that's typical of Sony. They wanted a format that they alone could control, and not share with other companies the way CD is done.

Sony and Toshiba are co-developers of the DVD standard, along with Philips. They share technology for it, and each company controls important patents related to it.

UMD will fail for at least a couple of simple reasons: price, and exclusivity. Who the hell would buy a UMD of a movie for $25-30, which ONLY plays on a PSP, when they can get a DVD version for $15 that plays pretty much everywhere? The DVD will also usually have tons of extras that won't fit on a UMD. Once again, Sony introduces a format intended to compete with one of their own properties (DVD). Very, very stupid; but again, typical Sony. They again are trying to establish a standard that they don't have to share with other companies, and once again it will fail.

So if Sony is indeed responsible for several "successful" formats, it's through no fault of their own.

Well Zoopster, you may have a point with the "plans" with High-definition viewing.  But, you have to recognize that there is a REAL difference between an analog signal and digital.  Component cables only give a compressed feed, while HDMI gives an uncompressed video feed.

I'm not some little Sony fanboy kid, I'm not just basing my opinion on some current fad.  I have worked for 2 VERY top end audio/video cable companies (and I'm not talking about that Monster cable shit people love for some reason).  I have seen first hand the capabilities of both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray, on many different players, I can also say I honestly think Blu-Ray is the better format.  Whether or not Sony markets it well is another story, I was around during the Beta/VHS war also.  Out of the 8 or 9 players I actually witnessed, Blu-Ray, at the time, was generally faster loading and better looking.

I've always said that UMD will fail for those same reasons...I honestly think the only way that it will be able to revive itself is if they offer standalone UMD drives/burner and if they lower the damn prices, but it still might be too late for that.

I also think that you are giving much less credit to the mini-disc then it deserves.  The mini-disc was not just popular in Japan, it was wildly popular.  It would've been stupid to not try and market the mini-disc worldwide.  In fact, if it weren't for MP3 players probably would have been popular everywhere.  Anyhow, that is neither here or there.

By the way, if you want a tip from someone who ought to know, don't buy high-end HDMI cables, there is virtually no quality difference than a regular cheap brand HDMI.  But, if you want hi-fi Audio or Composite/Component cable, make sure it is good quality (Kimber Kable is probably more expensive than what most people would pay....but there are a lot more very expensive cables, and Kimber is pretty fairly priced for good audio).

[prplehz]

Not to mention many hd-dvds will work in a standard dvd player. It wont play hd in standard player but atleast you can watch it in 480p. I am willing to bet you can't do this with blu-ray.  So you could by hd dvds even though you dont have an hddvd player. Then when you get one some day you dont have to start all over with new dvds.

[Jish]

QUOTE(prplehz @ Dec 23 2006, 08:22 PM)

Not to mention many hd-dvds will work in a standard dvd player. It wont play hd in standard player but atleast you can watch it in 480p. I am willing to bet you can't do this with blu-ray.  So you could by hd dvds even though you dont have an hddvd player. Then when you get one some day you dont have to start all over with new dvds.

The biggest problem with both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray is that they cost twice the amount of a regular DVD.  They will go down once they go mainstream, but who cares to buy an HD-DVD now, just because you are eventually going to get one.

Also, I'm not sure you can do that, but if you can do it with HD-DVD's then there is pretty good chance, since they use a very similar laser/wave.  My guess is that they will end up making a hybrid device that can play both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD.....much like the DVD+R and DVD-R.

[codegamer]

i am probably the only person who will never get anything HD, there is very little picture quality incease (most of the clearness comes from the lcd/plasme, not the HD)  waste of money.

i'm fine with my 36" boob tube