Author Topic: Toshiba drops HD DVD; Blu-ray wins (Read 3911 times)

Cobra951 · « **on:** Saturday, February 16, 2008, 11:41:58 AM »

It's all over but the crying. No surprise, really. A sinking ship is no place for Toshiba to sit quietly.

beo · « **Reply #1 on:** Saturday, February 16, 2008, 11:51:44 AM »

yeah, not much of a surprise, but i honestly thought they'd cling on for a little bit longer.

idolminds · « **Reply #2 on:** Saturday, February 16, 2008, 11:52:30 AM »

Well...crap.

Quemaqua · « **Reply #3 on:** Saturday, February 16, 2008, 12:08:32 PM »

* Quemaqua sighs and caresses his firearm.

Pugnate · « **Reply #4 on:** Saturday, February 16, 2008, 12:45:25 PM »

You mean you caress and then sigh? Also, that's an interesting name for your penis.

edit:

I am glad its over and whatnot, and never really cared for either side, but for some reason the whole thing makes me sad for Toshiba.

iPPi · « **Reply #5 on:** Saturday, February 16, 2008, 01:34:51 PM »

That's too bad. Hopefully HD-DVDs go on a mad sale so I can pick up some movies at a low cost. I'm gonna get a PS3 soon, for the blu-ray player.

scottws · « **Reply #6 on:** Saturday, February 16, 2008, 03:08:51 PM »

That sucks. I didn't know really a lot about either format until recently, and I thought it was pretty clear that HD-DVD was the overall better format. It showed a real care for the audio portion, something Blu-Ray seems to really gloss over.

But hey, the better format doesn't always win. From what I understand, Betamax was a better format than VHS.

In the end consumers win now that the war is over. Well except those consumers that were early adopters of HD-DVD.

gpw11 · « **Reply #7 on:** Saturday, February 16, 2008, 03:49:58 PM »

And the consumers that were early adopters of blu-ray....

Quemaqua · « **Reply #8 on:** Saturday, February 16, 2008, 05:30:17 PM »

Heh, gpw's makes the best point yet.

Pugnate · « **Reply #9 on:** Sunday, February 17, 2008, 12:07:41 AM »

This would be a good time to visit the console forums.

Xessive · « **Reply #10 on:** Sunday, February 17, 2008, 02:00:11 AM »

Well, fudge.

MysterD · « **Reply #11 on:** Sunday, February 17, 2008, 06:59:53 AM »

Well, fiddlesticks!

Since M$ said they'd support the winner...
So, looks like PC games might be going Blu-Ray, in due time.

I wonder if M$ will create a Blu-Ray Add-On for the 360 now.

I bet their next console will support Blu-Ray.

Pugnate · « **Reply #12 on:** Sunday, February 17, 2008, 07:01:45 AM »

Hold your horses Derrick. North American PC gaming shifted to Blu-Ray... what... two days ago? I doubt we'll see a Blu-Ray shift for another five years.

MysterD · « **Reply #13 on:** Sunday, February 17, 2008, 07:07:47 AM »

Quote from: Pugnate on Sunday, February 17, 2008, 07:01:45 AM

Hold your horses Derick. North American PC gaming shifted to Blu-Ray... what... two days ago? I doubt we'll see a Blu-Ray shift for another five years.

True, I mean the DVD-ROM format didn't catch on for PC gaming 'til recently, 'til just about every game would be put on over 3-4 CD's.

That's when the format really shifted...

Cobra951 · « **Reply #14 on:** Sunday, February 17, 2008, 08:38:46 AM »

I think that's what he meant, standard DVD format like two days ago. Otherwise his post doesn't make sense.

Pugnate · « **Reply #15 on:** Sunday, February 17, 2008, 09:38:53 AM »

Yea I meant DVD.... jeebus.

WindAndConfusion · « **Reply #16 on:** Sunday, February 17, 2008, 10:29:22 PM »

Quote from: scottws on Saturday, February 16, 2008, 03:08:51 PM

That sucks. I didn't know really a lot about either format until recently, and I thought it was pretty clear that HD-DVD was the overall better format. It showed a real care for the audio portion, something Blu-Ray seems to really gloss over.

Neither format is technically superior to the other in any meaningful way. BD is inferior for reasons that have nothing to do with audio codecs.

Specifically, Blu-Ray sucks because:

It has region coding.
It has three layers of DRM.
It has compatibility problems.
It has "profiles" and more optional features than HD DVD.
Sony had something to do with it.

Pugnate · « **Reply #17 on:** Monday, February 18, 2008, 01:45:55 AM »

Can't Blu-Ray hold a lot more info?

scottws · « **Reply #18 on:** Monday, February 18, 2008, 06:05:21 AM »

Quote from: Pugnate on Monday, February 18, 2008, 01:45:55 AM

Can't Blu-Ray hold a lot more info?

Yes, but mostly it's just there for higher bitrate video, since most everything else is optional like Wind said. The creators of HD-DVD seemed to have realized that movies aren't an entirely visual experience.

I can't seem to find the article now, but somewhere on here there was a link to an article that compared the two formats side-by-side, showing what features were optional and mandatory per disc.

Edit: Here it is. I find it funny that you asked the exact same question in the other thread too, and that link I just posted was a response then. Capacity isn't everything.

Pugnate · « **Reply #19 on:** Monday, February 18, 2008, 06:43:30 AM »

I wasn't asking a question; it was rhetorical. I was commenting on W&C's comment "Neither format is technically superior to the other in any meaningful way".

After the helpful information provided in the previous threads, I did realize that it is only superior in capacity. This time I wasn't asking, but rather pointing something out.

WindAndConfusion · « **Reply #20 on:** Monday, February 18, 2008, 04:43:31 PM »

There are three layer versions of HD-DVD that hold 51 GB. This is not meaningfully different from BD's current maximum of 50 GB.

You never see 51 GB HD-DVDs because a) you, like 99% of Americans, don't own an HD-DVD player, and b) no movie or TV series needs that much capacity.

Pugnate · « **Reply #21 on:** Monday, February 18, 2008, 05:08:07 PM »

Sure but conversely there is a version of Blu Ray able to hold 100+GB.

Sure movies don't need it, but the extra space will be a godsend when storing crap.

In the end though, region code is what I really hate.

Cobra951 · « **Reply #22 on:** Saturday, February 23, 2008, 10:25:58 PM »

Nail that coffin shut.

gpw11 · « **Reply #23 on:** Sunday, February 24, 2008, 01:07:32 AM »

Quote from: Pugnate on Monday, February 18, 2008, 05:08:07 PM

Sure but conversely there is a version of Blu Ray able to hold 100+GB.

See, here's the thing I've always thought when it comes to this; it doesn't make nearly as much of a difference as it did with CD to DVD or even DVD to Dual Layer DVD. In pretty much both those cases there was a need for bigger space on a single disc for certain consumers. 700 MB is big for word documents and the like, but when it comes to backing up your entire PC, you need something to hold those larger files. All the TV shows, fraps videos, and the like take up quite a bit of space, and a larger disk was necessary as using winrar to split files into two different archives is a bit time-consuming. With Dual Layer DVD, you could straight up copy 'your' dvds without having to take the extra step of re-encoding the video and ripping everything unnecessary out of them. For data storing purposes these things make huge differences, but the difference between 50GB and 100GB is far less pronounced as far as I'm concerned. It just means you have to use two disks instead of two, and with the capacities we're talking about it's not nearly as big of a deal as before.

idolminds · « **Reply #24 on:** Sunday, February 24, 2008, 01:11:51 AM »

How come I cant find dual layer DVDs anywhere? Its really annoying.

Xessive · « **Reply #25 on:** Sunday, February 24, 2008, 04:43:27 AM »

Quote from: idolminds on Sunday, February 24, 2008, 01:11:51 AM

How come I cant find dual layer DVDs anywhere? Its really annoying.

I finally found DVD9's!! But they're like ~$3 each!! Not that expensive individually and a pack of 10 costs about $20. It's a lot considering DVD5 pack of 50 costs about $15.

Honestly I'm just glad we only have to worry about 1 format. In agreement with Pug, the region shit is utter bullshit.

Quemaqua · « **Reply #26 on:** Sunday, February 24, 2008, 10:12:50 AM »

Help the cause. Go burn down a Wal-Mart.

scottws · « **Reply #27 on:** Sunday, February 24, 2008, 10:34:02 AM »

I bet it's a supply and demand issue. I've never really gone out looking for DVD9's. I'm perfectly content with 50 single-layer DVD+R's for $15.

Edit: Found some decent DVD+R DL discs for ~$1 each. A pack of 50 Memorex DVD+R DL for $45. That's not bad at all. Mwave is fairly reputable too, I got my Q6600 from them. Doubt they ship to the UAE though.

Cobra951 · « **Reply #28 on:** Sunday, February 24, 2008, 12:59:20 PM »

Quote from: gpw11 on Sunday, February 24, 2008, 01:07:32 AM

With Dual Layer DVD, you could straight up copy 'your' dvds without having to take the extra step of re-encoding the video and ripping everything unnecessary out of them.

You don't have to reencode. DVD Shrink ups the compression without reencoding by using a technology designed for real-time broadcasts. In techie terms, it reduces the precision of quantization coefficients. (Say that 3 times fast.) It bugs me that this fact escapes so many that rip DVDs to DVD-Rs by reencoding, and invariably muck something up (not that I ever would know firsthand).

My last post had a link in the image, which now I realize is not obvious at all. (I thought it was at the time.) MS has officially discontinued its HD-DVD player for the Xbox 360.

scottws · « **Reply #29 on:** Sunday, February 24, 2008, 01:15:59 PM »

Well, I presume it would the the corporate equivalent of "it would be stupid of them not to."

WindAndConfusion · « **Reply #30 on:** Sunday, February 24, 2008, 07:27:33 PM »

Quote from: Pugnate on Monday, February 18, 2008, 05:08:07 PM

Sure but conversely there is a version of Blu Ray able to hold 100+GB.

And there are versions of HD-DVD that can do the same.

You'll just never see them outside of computer drives, because they introduce even more compatibility problems.

News:

Author Topic: Toshiba drops HD DVD; Blu-ray wins (Read 3911 times)