Blu ray profiles - what is going on?

J

jackal

Guest
What is happening here with BR profiles? A lot of the AV press is turning against currently available players saying they are obsolete (see last month's HCC).

..but what is the score here? We have an as yet not implemented 1.1 profile with 256Mb persistent storage, then we will have profile 2.0 with 1gb storage and network connection.:confused:

This is going to confuse the heck out of customers and it seems that the CE manufacturers are doing nothing to clarify the situation.

If it were a case of firmware updates then fine, but we are talking hardware updates here.

So my question is why the heck are they bothering with profile 1.1 when the specs of profile 2.0 have been agreed?

It is as though we are being asked to buy two generations of obsolete products before we get to profile 2.0 and true BD Java functionality.

I can really see this mess hurting Blu ray's prospects now.

Is the PS3 going to be compliant or not? - If not so much for keeping the product competitive for 5 years.


A shake up has to happen here IMO. I have invested too much in Blu ray films to be stuck with a PS3 for the long term, but I am not going to buy a product with a life cycle of a few months.

HD DVD FANS _ DO NOT TURN THIS INTO A FORMAT WAR DISCUSSION PLEASE.
 

peterweg

Banned
See my thread on the 20+ BD players in development, they are using a chipset that supports 1Gb memory so should be 2.0 upgradable, at least.
 
J

jackal

Guest
I've seen that thread Peter, but in all honesty it tells me very little.

20 in development is fine, but what about release to market?

For example the two announced Denon BD players were supposed to be profile 1.1 compliant - however no network port means there is no way these players will ever be spec 2.0 compliant.

Do you see what I am saying here?

All of these 20 in development players would require a network connection to be 2.0 compliant, but if Denon cannot have the foresight to fit a network connection, what hope do you hold for the budget cheap Chinese players.

We need more information, and to be honest nobody seems to want to be forthcoming.

Maybe they should abandon profile 2.0?
 

Rasczak

Distinguished Member
I can't help but feel BluRay has got itself in a bit of bother with these profiles. Not only do we have an 'imminent' spec change to Profile 1.1 but, before people have even brought such a player, most are aware there is another change thereafter. It creates confusion, an unwillingness to buy a player and compatibility issues for the studios - indeed we've already seen Paramount leave as a result.

Now none of this would be that significant if BluRay had time. But it doesn't. Dual players are arriving and they are cheaper than expected. This means those single format BluRay players not only have to slash prices to be economically viable but will need to add more and more features whilst doing so. That's a tough situation to be in.

Of course the dual players will equally have 1.1/2.0 compatibility issues - but crucially they will support the full iHD spec of HD DVD. So where there is a dual release a buyer could simply pickup the HD DVD version knowing it will be 'better specced' than the BluRay.
 
J

jackal

Guest
Rasczak, do you agree that they ought to kill profile 2.0 for now?
 

peterweg

Banned
I've seen that thread Peter, but in all honesty it tells me very little.

20 in development is fine, but what about release to market?

For example the two announced Denon BD players were supposed to be profile 1.1 compliant - however no network port means there is no way these players will ever be spec 2.0 compliant.

Do you see what I am saying here?

The sigma designs chipset supports 1.1 or 2.0

So those players will be quite capable to support either profile.

As for time to market, K Jack has quoted q4/q5 as the timescale. With most being q5 (i.e. q1/2008, don't ask me why he uses that nomenclature)

So the whole profiles discussion becomes a bit academic as we have known (for months), these players would be out for q4 based on this SOC design.
 

Avi

Distinguished Member
What is happening here with BR profiles? A lot of the AV press is turning against currently available players saying they are obsolete (see last month's HCC).

..but what is the score here? We have an as yet not implemented 1.1 profile with 256Mb persistent storage, then we will have profile 2.0 with 1gb storage and network connection.:confused:

This is going to confuse the heck out of customers and it seems that the CE manufacturers are doing nothing to clarify the situation.

If it were a case of firmware updates then fine, but we are talking hardware updates here.

So my question is why the heck are they bothering with profile 1.1 when the specs of profile 2.0 have been agreed?

It is as though we are being asked to buy two generations of obsolete products before we get to profile 2.0 and true BD Java functionality.

I can really see this mess hurting Blu ray's prospects now.

Is the PS3 going to be compliant or not? - If not so much for keeping the product competitive for 5 years.


A shake up has to happen here IMO. I have invested too much in Blu ray films to be stuck with a PS3 for the long term, but I am not going to buy a product with a life cycle of a few months.

HD DVD FANS _ DO NOT TURN THIS INTO A FORMAT WAR DISCUSSION PLEASE.


Funny I've been watching Casino Royale and noticed the plug for "next generation interactive features" during the trailers.

I read the HCC article and Sony's response when asked if the lack of 1.1 support on the BDP-S1E was a problem was "No, it's not a problem; it's more a question of what we're able to do for the marketplace at this time"

What's interesting is the comment about the lack content to use the 1.1 features. This appears to be a paradox as the studios appear reluctant to produce content until the players support it. :confused: Maybe the performance issues encountered on the more advance BD-J titles is a futher concern for them.

Personally I think making the profiles optional and staging the introduction of mandatory features that cannot be be retro applied is a bad idea and very frustrating for all. The only explanation for not doing it from day one is it's either too hard, too expensive or both.

AVI
 
J

jackal

Guest
The sigma designs chipset supports 1.1 or 2.0

So those players will be quite capable to support either profile.

As for time to market, K Jack has quoted q4/q5 as the timescale. With most being q5 (i.e. q1/2008, don't ask me why he uses that nomenclature)

Yes, but ONLY if they have the newtwork connection.

As such the Denon players are obsolete before they have even been released. Maybe this is why they are likely to be delayed.

In your heart of hearts Peter you must agree that this is a very messy situation that needs an urgent rethink.

Every time I think I am close to buying a standalone Blu ray player I am put off as I hear there is a new spec on it's way.

The principle of KISS needs to prevail here. i.e. Keep it simple s..........
 

Rasczak

Distinguished Member
Rasczak, do you agree that they ought to kill profile 2.0 for now?
Well it's one option - personally, given the trouble they are having with 1.1, I would be inclined to put that profile on hold. They could then rework 1.1 into 2.0 and come up with a final profile that gives consumers some confidence.
 

Nic Rhodes

Distinguished Member
I suspect studios will give features on discs that use mandatory features, this will mean mandatory profile 1.1 and not the optional profile 2.0. Although many of us want 2.0 I suspect we will just see a few high end players but with little software support for it. There is a huge different between mandatory and optional here and this has always been the Blu rays achilees heel. I don't hold out much hope for 2.0 profile tbh. I think it is dead in the water already, especially as the drive is for cheaper players and this costs money. I wish it would be different.
 

Pecker

Distinguished Member
The sigma designs chipset supports 1.1 or 2.0

So those players will be quite capable to support either profile.

As for time to market, K Jack has quoted q4/q5 as the timescale. With most being q5 (i.e. q1/2008, don't ask me why he uses that nomenclature)

So the whole profiles discussion becomes a bit academic as we have known (for months), these players would be out for q4 based on this SOC design.

IN that case, I think it'd be better to 'skip' 1.1 and go straight to 2.0.

That'd look better than yet another 1.1 delay.

Steve W
 
J

jackal

Guest
IN that case, I think it'd be better to 'skip' 1.1 and go straight to 2.0.

That'd look better than yet another 1.1 delay.

Steve W


Disagree Steve, what we need right now is a finalised spec of some sort. Ditch 2.0 as a diversion. Just bring 1.1 on-line and consolidate behind it.

I am often one of the earliest of early adopters, but I will not buy a 1.1 profile player knowing it would not be 2.0 compliant - if that was still in the game.
 

Pecker

Distinguished Member
Good point.

Here's something that's just struck me.

In January this year the HDDVDPG announced that several companies had HD DVD players 'in development'. The Ventura player has just been announced. That's 7-8 months development for a format that everyone agrees is the more easy of the two formats.

Now we have 20 BD players in development, which are far more complex.

If they follow the same pace, we'll see them in March or April.

Unless anyone has a good argument as to why BD players might be quicker to develop than HD DVD...?

Steve W
 

Rasczak

Distinguished Member
Just bring 1.1 on-line and consolidate behind it.
I think BluRay would find it difficult to consolidate behind 1.1 though - the profile is flexible and could match some of the iHD features we have seen - but things have moved on. HD DVD studios are now starting to offering internet enabled features - checkout Universal in high def - in the near future this will offer YouTube like features and exclusive features. This sort of thing could really catch on - especially from those pickup their Walmart US$199 package of HD DVD player and Heroes HD DVD boxset.

So it's really a catch 22 for BluRay. They need sub-US$250 players now. They need these players to support interactive features now. And they need them to support internet enabled features now. And that is just to keep up with the competition.
 
J

jackal

Guest
Rasczak,

....between a rock and a hard place sums it up I think.........but there is some good manufacturing might there and I am sure they'll come up with the goods, now they know the war is not won for sure.
 
J

jackal

Guest
Do you think we'll see a revised Denon announcement, network port now included and at a lower price?

With recent developments, I cannot help but think that this battle has now been taken to the lower end and that premium products are going to really suffer in the short term?

I mean think about it Pioneer BDP-LX70/80 neither 1.1 compliant, no onboard DTS MA HD decoding - no GREAT advances in terms of PQ - lousy loading times - £800+ - come on.............?
 

Drongo

Distinguished Member
Jackal, I share your frustration regarding the confusion over BD profiles. I’m looking for a BD player that’s relatively future proofed and I realise that’s something of a contradiction. :(

Personally I see little reason for you to replace your PS3 for a long long time yet.

Many months ago in the old ‘war’ thread I said it would be third gen BD players that would be 1.1 compatible. I was probably too optimistic.

I’m sure Nic is right, and 2.0 players will be few and far between. And I think a few years down the road this will be the biggest point of difference between the two formats. I find it strange that the BDA who believe in the merits of higher disc capacity choose to ignore the potentially much greater capacity and flexibility offered by the combination of hard disc storage and the internet.

I think future a/v historians will find the ‘merits’ of an additional 20gb disc capacity something of an anachronism…

The BDA re playing their early adopters for suckers by supplying obsolete hardware. They’ve made a calculated decision that getting hardware out early is more advantageous than upsetting their customers. :mad:

The HCC interview you mention, is that the one where Eric Kingdon is responding for Sony?

If so, Eric is a really nice guy. I bet he had his teeth gritted in that interview.... ;)
 

Rasczak

Distinguished Member
Do you think we'll see a revised Denon announcement, network port now included and at a lower price?
I am a big cynic when Denon is concerned I'm afraid. I have no doubt they see the future as firmly dual format - I'm fairly certain that there are not many buyers of their kit who would wish to be without Universal titles anymore than Fox or Sony ones. However I am also certain they will not rush features into their machines...whilst the likes of Arcam won't release a product until things have settled and a buyer can be sure his player will be good for years, this would not apply to Denon. I am confident we will see this non-Ethernet, non-Denon link, non-2.0, non-dual model from Denon - I am also sure it will subsidise the next gen dual model.

Denon know what they have to achieve in order to get HD DVD certification. They will need a network side - so it's prudent to hold back and release a 1.1 profile BD only player first, and then build a 2.0 player with HD DVD thereafter.

Am I being harsh on Denon? Perhaps - they are only doing what every mass market company does - but then much of their US$1000+ market doesn't fall into that category.


With recent developments, I cannot help but think that this battle has now been taken to the lower end and that premium products are going to really suffer in the short term?
I don't think premium products will suffer. The battle will now be fought at the budget market. The Samsung dual format player coming in at £500 has really set a ceiling on that and all fights will be fought within it. Above it the likes of Pioneer, Denon, Onkyo and others will attempt to demonstrate there is still a market for high end machines. I think this can be successful- look at the Onkyo - a well specced machine that seems to be generating some positive buzz.

I mean think about it Pioneer BDP-LX70/80 neither 1.1 compliant, no onboard DTS MA HD decoding - no GREAT advances in terms of PQ - lousy loading times - £800+ - come on.............?
Indeed - it's low specced and embarrassing. Pioneer need to offer something more to buyers if they wish to command the high price-points.
 

Avi

Distinguished Member
The HCC interview you mention, is that the one where Eric Kingdon is responding for Sony?

If so, Eric is a really nice guy. I bet he had his teeth gritted in that interview.... ;)

Yes it was Eric Kingdon.

AVI
 

The latest video from AVForums

LG CX Best Picture Settings
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Latest News

BAFTA 2021 awards sees Nomadland as big winner
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
What's new on Netflix UK for May 2021
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Samsung rumoured to be buying OLED TV panels from LG Display
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Netflix signs with Sony for first streaming rights in U.S.
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Audio Pro launches C10 MkII speaker
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom