Discussion in 'Projectors, Screens & Video Processors' started by sime, Sep 28, 2005.
Is the article implying that Intel and MSFT is switching to HD-DVD?
Good news for that camp, but now its definitely 2 technologies that won't merge for a long time.
You could just as well say:
Xbox360 (after they fit the new drive - early next year?)
I'm sure either of these two machines will be the means to get the most players into the most homes in the shortest possible time.
I bought a universal DVD player for SACD and DVD A a few years ago, I doubt if I have more than 10 titles of either format, I won't be at the bleeding edge next time..
Whatever one has the most software. (see vhs vs betamax)
I bought Betamax cos it was the better format
In my opinion, what killed Betamax was Sony's greed.
I recall way back then (when Sony were even more snobs than they are now)
Some rental shops I went into to try and rent a Video (as they were like £500+ back then) said Sony would not allow them to rent out Betamax so they could only offer VHS for Rental.
I think that's what made a LOT of difference.
If you wanted to rent back then, you had no choice but to go VHS
Personally I'd choose bluray. Only because it has more capacity, costs may be a little higher but worth it IMO. I'd choose the next format with the longest life every time!
Did you have a Betamax Video recoder too?
With it's better image quality, and far superior tape handling capabilities?
My Sony C9 was a superb machine (The top of the range) Even had a multi loader so you could stack 6 or so tapes in it and it would take tapes out and put blanks in whilst you were on holiday to record even more footage.
And here's a review of it:
It's tape speeds, in forward and reverse were better than even todays machines....
Have a look at my kit list - I win!
Oh and it was the C7 with the Betastack - first VCR with infra red remote, picture search (also colour picture search) logic control
I had a C7 then upgraded to the C9 when that came out.
There was/is a betastacker for the C9 (as you can see in that link above) though I never had one.
A shame the best technology does not often mean something will win
Bluray doesn't have more capacity, it is only 25GB compared to 30GB on HDDVD.
They claim that Bluray "will" be able to hold 50GB but they've yet to show that is possible outside of a lab and it most certainly isn't going to support that density for a considerable time.
Now come on Martin, I seem to remember having this debate on another thread about our oldest video recordings about 6 months ago. We all know you've got the biggest collection of Beta kit of everyone!
My C9 has just packed up. Sob. After 24 years.
Oh and to the contributor above who said you could only rent VHS you could also rent V2000, only you were barking if you did.
Back on topic, there's a quote from the boss of Samsung over on HCC equipment news. Samsung have undertaken to produce a deck that plays both HD - DVD and Blue Ray. Says Choi Gee San 'It won't be easy but you'll see our solution in the coming year'
Only sensible thing to do I would have thought and I imagine that we could see manufacturers like Pioneer, Denon, Arcam all doing the same.
What are the delays around this lot. Blue ray was on sale in Japan about 2 years ago. Why is it taking so long to become mainstream. PS3 is supposed to be out in a few months in Japan so if they can cram all that technology into a games machine why can't they release dedicated blue ray players now with a bunch of movies.
No No, that was ages later.
I remember Video 2000 coming out (Philips and Grundig I seem to recall) where you could turn the tape over (like a giant casette tape)
This was a long time after Betamax and VHS first came out and the time when you could not rent Betamax from the normal high street stores.
V2000 came out in about 1980 if I remember correctly. Beta and VHS came out well before that but they hadn't relly become mass market by then. Probably because they were so expensive - about £700 fot a vcr and £10 for a tape, that was a lot of money then. A 4 hour tape for v2000 was £20! Seems even more expensive when you can get a decent dvd recorder for £200 and a blank disc for less than 20p these days.
I've got a copy of the second ever What Video which reviewed V2000. The headline said it was a great big lead balloon. Spot on, but I still rented one!
First time I've seen one of those
RIP for the C9 - get it repaired!
Working Sony SLHF950, Sanyo VTC-M40, Sony SL-F1UB.
Needs a service Sony SL-HF100P
Faulty Sanyo VTC-NX100
Spares a knacked F1
I sold a Sanyo 6500 a few years ago
Totally off topic:
But whilst we're travelling down memory lane, how about this ULTIMATE Gaming machine
I did have betamax. Anyways, this isn't the same, in the digital world were simply talking capacity here, not video quality. Could someone here explain why they think HD-DVD is better? with less capacity surely it means we'll all be having this conversation next time all the sooner?
Or am I being naive?
LOL thats funny!
Cheaper production costs = cheaper films (cheaper and better don't necessarily go hand in hand, of course, but they do if picture quality is equal)
Choosing one format over the other seems to be a rather pointless activity at the moment. No one has seen either in action yet let alone been able to compare sound and vision quality. Equaly we don't know what the software support will be like for either. Are the film and TV companies going to put out films/programmes on both formats? That doesn't seem to happen with DVD audio or SACD. If they don't then choosing either format will limit what you can watch which must be absolutely key for the success of either of them.
Dual format players sound the best bet to me (if they work well) and let any manufacturer making machines that can only play one of the formats and thus only some films go rot.
A bit of misdirection from Microsoft as BD-ROM does suport more than a single layer (I believe in the lab they have had as many as 4 layers: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/05/19/tdk_four-layer_bd/ ). They compare the capacity of a DUAL layer HD-DVD (30GB) to that of a SINGLE layer BD-ROM (25GB).
So lets REALLY compare like with like:
Dual layer HD-DVD: 30GB
Dual layer BD-ROM: 50GB
More info here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/09/30/dell_hp_vs_ms_intel/
I'd also just discovered this information.
I suppose the real question is whether either format has genuinely produced a (reliable) production dual layer disc and is ready for mass production in the near future. Lots of things from "the lab" never reach the real world.
I remember all the hype form C3d(?) about their clear discs that would have 10 layers of data and enormous capacities but I recently heard that they couldn't achieve it in a production environment and apparently went bust. (It was heresay, so correct me if I'm wrong).
Yes, Saying something is working in the Lab (in reality) means nothing.
I've lost track of the number of articles I've read over the past years about things in the lab that will be out next year or very soon and we almost never see them.
To be honest, who cares what the format is.
We just want hi-def movies, if they could etch the data into the side of a carrot and it could be read back in a carrot player then that would do!
REALLY (unless I'm missing the point) the delivery medium is irellevant here, if we get HiDef movies we can enjoy then which disk we get them on is not really worth worrying about as long as it's cheap and there are lots of them so we can all enjoy the Hi-Def we have all waited so many years for.
Well said tempest but do we want 720p or 1080p? I know what I would rather have even if it is a bit more expensive i.e 2 or 3 pound more per film
Just dont like the idea of having to connect the BR player up to my phone line just to watch a movie....kinda suxx realy
Separate names with a comma.