HD-DVD takes the lead

[LordTheNightKnight]

ookaze said:

It's true people say a lot of nonsense, but that's because the HD world is so full of nonsense.

Nonsense like saying that there is less difference between HD discs and DVD, than between DVD and VHS ...

The mind boggles.

Of course there is more of a difference, it can't even be compared, even if you take only 720p.

But can you blame people, when most HD-DVD and BD players can't even output 1080p24 ? And most displays sold can't even display 1080p24 anyway ?

Are there TV content at 1080i30 on HD discs already ?

 

But sure enough, people love to diss BD, which is nonsense. They don't sell enough anyway, even if better than HD-DVD. People don't care about the quality anyway, but I doubt any company will try putting their content on HD discs only. It's too early, they'd be committing suicide IMHO, even if that's Spiderman 3 that goes only to HD discs, and not to DVD.

 

A lot of people don't even have a good enough set (and well configured enough) to take advantage of the 5.1 sound.

People just don't buy DVD for the quality, that's just an added bonus. And all HD discs bring is quality :

- uncompressed 7.1 sound : but most people struggle to configure a 5.1 system (Pioneer has amplifiers with some automated config by microphone though, and you couldn't do as well unless you're a professional), let alone the amplifier to take advantage of 7.1 sound, or the speaker

- 1080p display, mostly from 1080p24 source for movies, and 1080i30 for TV content : most people don't even understand how to set their TV ratio correctly.

HD for quality is a niche right now, as it has too many disadvantages : it brings even worse protection with DRM, it is very expensive to have even a good setup. It's for a niche really.

It's pretty obvious quality is not the goal of most people, when even on this forum, you read people talking about $99 DVD players upsampling to 1080p !!! These players output crap, and some people even dare compare them to HD discs ! I'm sure they use HDMI to plug these into their display too, thus destroying any quality it may have brought.

If they can't see a difference, that's because they have a crappy setup, and would have been better off without HD at all. I have no HD set, but I've seen what a good setup can do : it will blow you away, even with SD content. Only a 800$+ DVD player using professional circuitry (like the Denon 2930) can scale and deinterlace SD content to HD correctly.

Yes, al this HD thing is really expensive.

That's why I find this race between HD-DVD and BD funny. It's for a niche currently, so I see Sony succeeding in making BD win with its PS3. It's more likely to sneak lots of BD into people's homes by gaming door, so I don't see how they could lose that one.

 First of all, the VHS is to DVD comparison is NOT ONLY VISUALLY. We also mean convenience and ease of use. Can you honestly say that using menus in film is a big a leap as having menus at all? And loading a particular scene or feature on an HD discs is about the same speed as on DVD, while with VHS, we had to spend minutes rewinding or fastforwarding to a particular scene. Not the least of the changes was not having the most vulnerable part exposed just to play it.

 As for the rest, I agree, save for blu-ray being guatanteed by the PS3. Just because you don't see how it can't help it win, doesn't mean there isn't a way.