Is the PS3 really the best Blu-Ray player on the market? That's... kinda sad if true KG.

KBG29 said:  Maybe I am crazy. Maybe people don't like longgevity. It just sounds stupied to me to keep getting the same product just better every few years.

Was your DVD player too old?

Kasz216 said: Is the PS3 really the best Blu-Ray player on the market? That's... kinda sad if true KG.

How is that sad? The ps3 is a kickass Blu-Ray player, that is continually improved via firmware updates. At first, it was around the level of the Sony BDP-S100 (the first Sony standalone palyer) in terms of PQ, but couldn't upscale DVDs or output 1080p/24. Now it can do both those things, and still keeps up with the latest players in terms of PQ. It's not a sad thing for the other players on the market, but a testament to the strength of the ps3.

And things are only going to improve from here.  From gamesindustry.biz:

Your statement shows that people really don't understand the capabilites of the ps3, and this is why it sells so pitifully.

whatever said: Even if you have a 1080p TV, it doesn't matter for movies at all. 1080i and 1080p input to a 1080p TV for movies will look identical. This is due to the fact that movies are filmed at 24fps and the 1080p displays accept 1080i/1080p at 60fps. I had a quote somewhere. Found it. Below is Evan Powell's (Projector Central) appraisal of the 1080i vs 1080p controversy. "The truth is this: The Toshiba HD-DVD player outputs 1080i, and the Samsung Blu-ray player outputs both 1080i and 1080p. What they fail to mention is that it makes absolutely no difference which transmission format you use—feeding 1080i or 1080p into your projector or HDTV will give you the exact same picture. Why? Both disc formats encode film material in progressive scan 1080p at 24 frames per second. It does not matter whether you output this data in 1080i or 1080p since all 1080 lines of information on the disc are fed into your video display either way. The only difference is the order in which they are transmitted. If they are fed in progressive order (1080p), the video display will process them in that order. If they are fed in interlaced format (1080i), the video display simply reassembles them into their original progressive scan order. Either way all 1080 lines per frame that are on the disc make it into the projector or TV. The fact is, if you happen to have the Samsung Blu-ray player and a video display that takes both 1080i and 1080p, you can switch the player back and forth between 1080i and 1080p output and see absolutely no difference in the picture. So this notion that the Blu-ray player is worth more money due to 1080p output is nonsense."

sorry, that is not correct for displays. progressive scan means the tv refreshes the image one line after the other, progressively, every 60th of a second. interlaced means the tv refreshes 540 lines in a 60th of a second , then the other 540 lines in another 60th of a second, the entire process taking one 30th of a second. that means it takes twice as long for the entire screen to be refreshed. you should just go to wiki to understand the undeniable physics behind the different technology. there may not be a huge difference but it's still there. a 1080i display is simply UNABLE to "reassemble them into their original progressive scan order." it is not possible. @makingmusic, i don't think you'll see LotR anytime soon, Jackson's being an ass in some legal dispute with new line... hell we'll probably see star wars first.

Nah, the LotR movies have been in the works for quite some time now. Warner hinted at them at CES back in January, and they have already appeared on Direct TV in a 1080i encode. However, they haven't been "officially" announced, and the LotR website said they probably won't be near completion until '08 (though that was over a year ago, and it has since been removed form the site).

I'm expecting the movies to be announced at CES '08, with a release date of either May or Holiday '08. Usually they wouldn't announce a movie for the holidays that early, but for a film of the caliber of LotR, I'm sure they'll give people ample warning.

The dispute between New Line and PJ was over royalties from the LotR films that were never given to PJ. The case was settled a few weeks ago, with PJ getting what he was owed. However, the movies are now completely in the hands of New Line, for them to do with what they wish.

The only thing that saddens me is that the chances of PJ returning for the Hobbit are slim to none. New line said they'd love to have him back, but I know he ain't returning. It just won't be the same with a different director. :(

God, I had forgotten about The Hobbit being slated as a future movie until you mentioned it. That in and of itself sorta shows where that project is going. It was talked about some time ago, and nothing has been done about it. If there was going to be anything about it, it'd be well under way by now. Jackson or no, I don't ecpect to see The Hobbit anytime soon.

vizunary said: whatever said: Even if you have a 1080p TV, it doesn't matter for movies at all. 1080i and 1080p input to a 1080p TV for movies will look identical. This is due to the fact that movies are filmed at 24fps and the 1080p displays accept 1080i/1080p at 60fps. I had a quote somewhere. Found it. Below is Evan Powell's (Projector Central) appraisal of the 1080i vs 1080p controversy. "The truth is this: The Toshiba HD-DVD player outputs 1080i, and the Samsung Blu-ray player outputs both 1080i and 1080p. What they fail to mention is that it makes absolutely no difference which transmission format you use—feeding 1080i or 1080p into your projector or HDTV will give you the exact same picture. Why? Both disc formats encode film material in progressive scan 1080p at 24 frames per second. It does not matter whether you output this data in 1080i or 1080p since all 1080 lines of information on the disc are fed into your video display either way. The only difference is the order in which they are transmitted. If they are fed in progressive order (1080p), the video display will process them in that order. If they are fed in interlaced format (1080i), the video display simply reassembles them into their original progressive scan order. Either way all 1080 lines per frame that are on the disc make it into the projector or TV. The fact is, if you happen to have the Samsung Blu-ray player and a video display that takes both 1080i and 1080p, you can switch the player back and forth between 1080i and 1080p output and see absolutely no difference in the picture. So this notion that the Blu-ray player is worth more money due to 1080p output is nonsense."   sorry, that is not correct for displays. progressive scan means the tv refreshes the image one line after the other, progressively, every 60th of a second. interlaced means the tv refreshes 540 lines in a 60th of a second , then the other 540 lines in another 60th of a second, the entire process taking one 30th of a second. that means it takes twice as long for the entire screen to be refreshed. you should just go to wiki to understand the undeniable physics behind the different technology. there may not be a huge difference but it's still there. a 1080i display is simply UNABLE to "reassemble them into their original progressive scan order." it is not possible. @makingmusic, i don't think you'll see LotR anytime soon, Jackson's being an ass in some legal dispute with new line... hell we'll probably see star wars first.

nothing wrong with what you said, but it's the 24 frames per second that makes 1080p and 1080i indistinguishable.  if movies are 60 frames per second then yes, 1080p and 1080i will be different exactly the way you described it.  when they are 24 frames per second, as it turns out, the information content in that case is EXACTLY identical whether it's displayed to a 1080p or 1080i TV.

so for 60 fps games there would be a difference on interlaced or progressive, and i think that's the calling point of the ps3.

I'm gettin it, HD-DVD here I come.

I would say that is the Toshiba 1080i HD-DVD player. Considering 1080i uses 'half' the data of 1080p, I would say that it's a decent price. But the 400$ PS3 is equally decent price. However it supports future updates.

However as someone mentioned earlier in this thread. If you buy shit at wal-mart, you are either too low-class to understand quality, too stupid, or too poor to give a damn, and only buying 'HD' because it says 'HD' and it's what the rich bitches like me are getting, and dont know the diffrence from Plasma, to DLP, and cant tell the quality diffrence from a Samsung LCD, to a Vizam.

Oh wait, at wal-mart all the HD-TVs are hooked up through Coax running SHITTY SD video feed. For some reason, the Vizams look better than the samsungs as well. Yet every review of the Samsung says how great it looks, and the Vizam talk about how BAD they look, but how CHEAP they are.

How come at wal-mart they look the same? wtf?

Trashy store, trashy people, trashy products. Overall I think this is gonna help HD-DVD a whole lot. The question is, why isnt it anywhere else on the internet? (not saying your lying, it's just not a corperate wide thing obviously) And if it's not corperate wide... it's not gonna make a big diffrence.

Good move HD-DVD. Price a shit product for the 25% of people who think their getting a deal, because their too stupid, and incompetent to know the diffrence. Good Job HD-DVD, for takeing advantage of america's lower class, dumber people. Congrats.

Little touchy. The website isn't loading right so i'll forgo the quoting.

It's not sad because the PS3 is a crappy Blu-Ray player. It's sad because a majority of the world is still of the mindset of where they would be embarresed having their friends over for movie not and popping in their new HD movie in a videogame system... because I majority of people don't play videogames. Even those with kids i think would mostly find it embarrising and will want a standalone as well. (well those that bother to adopt.)

Therefore it's sad that they will buy a standalone that will be of lesser quality than their kid's game machine.