f13.net

With the recent purchase of the Big Screen, watching DVD's doesn't give me the picture I desire.

The whole Blue Ray vs HD-DVD question is up in the air it seems like.

Then again, initially it looks like HD-DVD might be the way to go. (Via the $200 X-box add on with modified drivers to work under windows XP.) Has anyone tried this.

Or would this be a bad move?

My friend who has a 42" HDTV and a 360 bought the HD-DVD add-on drive and loves it. That's all I got.

Used both the PS3 BR stuff and the HDDVD player w/ the 360.

I like the Blu-Rays image more. Whatever though, Blu-Ray simply has better movies out (for hi-def types - action, horror, etc).

I have a hunch that Blue Ray will flop hard since it's Sony vs. THE WORLD Part Deux: Revenge of the Betamax.  Still, I wouldn't want to jump into this little media war until things get shaken out.  By all means be the guinea pig for me, though.  I definitely don't want to discourage that.

Spend $100 and get a high upscaling DVD player and 4' HDMI cable.  Continue to watch/buy dvds like you normally would.

When it's 2008 and those players have dropped, it might be worth it.

Does the HD-DVD for XBOX360 do 1080i upscaling?

I wouldn't buy any movies until The Great Format Wars are over.  Until then I would just go with the cheapest solution as they both probably deliver the same quality and rent the high def movies.  So I would probably buy the 360 HD-DVD unless you are sure you will wind up buying a PS3 at somepoint, then just buy that (once you can find one).

I use my computer's DVD with either PowerDVD or Mplayer classic and upscale to 1080i currently. It is connected via a HDMI cable. My understanding is all you are doing with progressive scanning is going from 480i to 480p. So it isn't going to look that great either way. It could be that my scalers all stink. But my suspicion is I'm spoiled from watching stuff in 1080.

Based on Schild liking Blue Ray, I'm pretty sure HD-DVD will win the war. Plus it seems to be the format that's less ass-rapatastic to the consumer.

Looks like the only way to watch on the computer is to get some japanese version of PowerDVD and use it. I don't know that I am that hardcore.

I just really like the thought of using an x-box 360 drive instead of a $600 one. Either way I'm not sure the software is ready yet.

There's also the problem that neither HD-DVD or Blue Ray are currently cracked.  What, you expect me to rent movies and just return them without ripping myself a backup copy for my ever-growing collection?  I don't think so.

Furiously, just take a look at the movies available in both formats. That's what's going to win it. Price drops for both players will happen in time. When Joe Sixpack buys movies, he buys stupid shit. Wifey ain't gonna be the one worrying about some new video tech. If women ruled the tech world, we'd still be using VHS for home video.

/sexism

Edit: Also, you can already back up HDTV with a proper HD capture card and the Xbox 360 HD DVD player.

Except that there are no HD-DVD burners yet, and the price of one when they do come out (and the media to go with 'em) will be prohibitively expensive for at least 5 more years.

ETA:  Oh, and quality has nothing to do with which format will win.  Betamax was higher quality than VHS, but it sure as hell didn't win because, again, it was Sony vs. the World.  Sony has never been successful with a proprietary format, and I doubt it ever will.

Still a close tie. If this site (http://www.eproductwars.com/dvd/) is any indication (sorry if someone already linked that).

Either way though, there aren't very many products being shipped as of yet anyways (122 BR discs shipping, and 133 HDDVD, for example).

I've said it before and I'll say it again:  The general public has come to know and love the terms "HD" and "DVD." There's no way something called "Blu-Ray" can ever hope to compete with a product that combines the two.

Which one is the porn industry backing? My guess is that will be the winning format.

Except that it's not Sony vs the world again -- it's Sony, Panasonic, Samsung, et al, against the world. I.e. Blu-Ray is not a proprietary format like UMD, Memory Stick (yes technically SanDisk shares (some of) the rights to MS with Sony) or MiniDisc.

HD: http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=28821

What kind of fool buys porn anyways?

Our fathers.

Dude. HD. DVD. COMBINED.  Case closed.  I don't see how anyone can disagree with my position on this matter.  Those two acronyms are powerfully embedded into the consciousness of everyone everywhere.  There's no way they can lose, that's all there is to it.

Dual-format players.

http://www.engadget.com/2005/09/06/samsung-planning-dual-format-hd-dvd-blu-ray-disc-player/
http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/News/Details.aspx?NewsId=16562
http://www.cio.com/blog_view.html?CID=25694
http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=190300953

Etc.

Most of the next gen players are garbage. I refuse to wait 30 seconds to a minute for it to read and figure out how to play a disc.

Sony didn't win any friends with it's first generation player having issues.

hd dvd will win, it's pretty much the clear winner, but so far not a lot of people are switching/upgrading.

I'm hoping neither of them win because everyone is waiting to see which will fail, causing both of them to fail and forcing them to agree on a single unified format.

Failing that I think blu-ray will win because of the PS3 and pretty good movie studios support, including the ones Sony owns which will obviously not be going HD-DVD.  Give away all three Spider Man movies with a blu-ray player and consumers will eat it up.

I stopped buying DVDs a while ago, waiting for the formats to shake out. I'm pretty confident we'll just have convergence devices after another year or two (thus my links). I wish they'd hurry up and stop this format war nonsense that has no winners, only losers.

I finally jumped in and got an HDTV this week. Is it at all worth it to pick up an up-converting DVD player while I'm waiting for the "war" to end? I mean, how much better can my movies look if it's the same source material, right?

I don't know anyone with an HD or BR player. There's no harm at all in waiting. DVD's still look great on a HDTV.

If you don't already have a good sound system, then that's probably a better investment than visuals right now.

According to this article (http://xyhd.tv/2006/12/03/why-xbox-live-video-marketplace-competes-well-with-visually-with-hddvd.aspx) you don't even need an HD player - you can just download videos on your Xbox to get the same quality.

Maybe I'm missing something here, but HD movies are BIG.

The 360 hard disk size is 20GB.

144 minutes on a single layer Blu-Ray or HD-DVD disc is something like 25GB (give or a take a few, depending on the disc type).

Basically, the average movie would take up half of the 360's hard disk space. That's not a good option for people who want to own movies.

True. You'd have to back them up to your PC or something. Or maybe you can use the USB port for an external drive?

The HD movies are a different animal on XBox Live. They're mastered/encoded at 720p instead of 1080p. So for some, this is a better purchase. But your download goes super fast, fills up about 6-7 gigs of your hard drive, and only lasts 24 hours from your first viewing. The hi-def TV content (which is MONEY btw) and the lo-def TV content takes 100-300mb and lasts forever.

Also, they have MTV's The State for a princely sum of about $10 for 1 season. TV SHOW GET!

$10? What's the average price of a TV show season?

Usually more than $10, for better shows.

Apparantly from industry observers the HD-DVD is expected to win the format war due to the lower price and initial higher sales (sources are The Economist and Reuters but I'm to lazy to go looking for links).

To turn the tide for BR a lot will depend on the success of the PS3, but so far it hasn't made much of an impression. If the PS3 fails, BR is probably dead too and vice versa.

If Blu-Ray fails, the PS3 isn't dead, I don't understand your vice versa comment.

"Dead" is putting it a bit too strong probably, but BR is the big competitive advantage of the PS3 that has to make up for the higher price tag.

360+HD-DVD = 399 + 199 = 598.

PS3 with Blu-Ray = 599.

You think a dollar is going to skew the outcome?

That's if you want to pony up for the HD-DVD drive.  Ie, it's a choice, unlike the PS3 where you're saddled with the Blu-Ray drive whether you like it or not.  Furthermore, if we're talking stand-alone players the HD-DVD retails for around $500 while the Blu-Ray retails for around $800.  Where I come from $300 is real money.

The price difference is only $100 (Samsung's is $595).

Looking at Best Buy, their cheapest Blu-Ray (Samsung) is $799.99.  Cheapest HD-DVD (Toshiba) is $499.99.

Amazon has it for Trippy's price.  However, most of the big box stores are selling it for between $800-1000 with Target being the exception at $700.   Amazon also has an HD-DVD for $440 so you're still looking at $160 difference in the best case.  Most people, not buying from Amazon, are going to get sticker shock from the higher prices.

And the fact that PS3 games will take advantage of BR and 360 games won't take advantage of HD-DVD.

I dont understand how you cant be happy with the HD picture you already have. Mine looks so good with just a normal DVD, I dont know that I need HD-DVD or Blu-Ray yet. You might want to check your current setup if you are that unhappy with your picture.

Just get an HTPC. You can then add the 200 buck 360 HD player to your PC if you want.

My DLP is 720p and if I download both the 480p and the 720p version of am HD trailer from apple I can't tell the difference, it's just bigger files.

Huh?  What, you mean with the extra storage?  BFD.  I'd think that Sony should probably be focused on getting some games worth playing rather than the "my hardware is better than yours" game.  Shit, Nintendo just opted out of the race altogether and they're crushing Sony.

I don't know if it's the BR, or just the "new style", but a lot of the games I am seeing on the PS3 are, how should I say it...overly-shiny? Overly-sharp?

The graphics just look terribly overwrought to me. Especially that damn dragon game (not Eragon) demo I keep having to see.

The funny thing is that they look good from about 30 feet away. Once you get within actual playing distance, they look like crap.

Just sayin. It's relevant when you argue the fact that it's possible to opt out of having a HD-DVD for the 360. Sony did the decision that you can't have a PS3 without BR because that would mean that no sane game developer would utilize it. I guess you could argue that the extra storage isn't needed for games, just as the last generation could've done fine with CD, and the generation before that with cartridges.

It's not nearly as big as a jump as CDs from carts, or even DVDs from CDs. It's not devs were running out of room on DVDs - how many games are more than 1 DVD?

The jump isn't quite as big in magnitude (5x vs 7xish compared to DVDs to CDs) but it's huge in absolute terms (25 GB vs 4.7GB). And the problem is is that HD video takes up a fricking lot of space -- that's why blue lasers were developed. Sure if you don't care if your games can't show their prerendered videos at full HD resolution then it doesn't matter so much that you are stuck with DVD as the storage media. If you do care you are boned unless you want to make your customers swap discs like the good old days.

Try 8.5 GB, which is the capacity for dual layer DVD's.  4.7 is the capacity of single layer DVD-R's you buy in 100 disc spindles.

Again, though, it's irrelevant because very, very few games are even coming close to filling 8.5 GB.  By the time they do we'll be at the end of this gen's lifespan anyway.

I was obviously comparing single layer to single layer.  If you want to compare dual layers then it's 50 GB for Blu-Ray so it's the same magnitude difference but even larger absolute difference.

Irrelevant.  We're comparing what actually is rather than what's technically feasible.  The simple fact is that Blu-Ray isn't a necessity in gaming right now, and likely won't be for a long, long, long time to come.  It's an unnecessary feature, and it was incredibly stupid to bundle it to the PS3 without a choice.  You can trace Sony's piss poor positioning to their decision to bundle it with the PS3 in the name of "synergy".

Then why try to correct me in the first place? I was responding to Strazos -- I wasn't even talking to you.

Let me try and state my position clearly since I've only been injecting comments so far in this thread.

On the Blu-Ray vs HD-DVD movie side of things I believe HD-DVD's current price advantage is a short term thing and once the kinks are worked out of the Blu-Ray laser production process the prices will equalize. Both formats have pluses and minuses even just on the technical side of things (i.e. ignoring pricing) so even if you felt that the best technology should win it's not clear which side that would be though obviously Blu-Ray has an edge right now on the capacity side, though like everything else technology related that may change in the future. Like most competitions of this nature the market will decide who will be the winner which may or may not have anything to do with which technology is "better" or "worse".

For consoles I believe that choice is bad, which may seem paradoxically but giving customers configuration choices leads down the nightmare path that is the PC and so is a development headache and is a distribution headache and a retailing headache -- i.e. it's a headache for everybody including the consumer as I'll get to later on. Sure going from one to two configurations may not seem so bad but now you've literally doubled the amount of work in certain area like parts of the QA process.

Microsoft was actually smart to say clearly upfront that their HD-DVD player would never be for games even though that let's Sony keep the storage edge for games (though of course they may change their minds later on if Sony starts spanking on this issue). That way developers only have to worry about sizing their content for one media format and retailers don't have to stock extra SKUs for all those games that could've shipped on both like what's happening now on the PC (some games, especially from EA, have CD and DVD versions) which must drive retailers crazy.

In the same way I believe Sony made the right choice in making the PS3 Blu-Ray only. They may have jumped the gun and adopted a new technology too quickly but as above they aren't making their developers worry about two different formats. And they did Microsoft one better by including a hard drive on both configurations so you don't have the stupid Xbox 360 split (hard drive or no hard drive).

As for the size issue, everytime I hear somebody say that 650 MB or 4.7 GB or 8.5 GB or whatever the current storage standard is is plenty of space I think back to the comment attributed to Bill Gates about 640K of memory being enough for everybody. Yes it may be true that virtually all games don't exceed 8.5 GBs now. But that's because that's the current limit (ignoring the PS3). I'm sure there are developers out there (I'm looking at your SquareEnix) that feel constrained by that limit and are going to go crazy on the PS3 with its Blu-Ray storage capacity.

But let's ignore gameplay and use a more trivial example. Let's say somebody wanted to put 30 minutes of a game "making of" video on the Xbox 360 in HD format. Well that's not going to fit on a single DVD, even a dual layer one, with the rest of the game content so they'll do what they do now -- put it in another DVD. Which is all well and good but wouldn't it be better to have it all on one disc so you can access everything without fricking swapping discs all the time? I hate having to constantly swap movie DVDs just so I can watch the movie and the special features and I have two DVD drives in my PC so my swapping is cut down by a lot compared to some other people. Is it worth $200 extra bucks not to have to swap discs? Well that's a good question. Probably not by itself but if I was also getting some gameplay benefits like more or longer prerendered game cutscenes or more high resolution textures it might be worth it.

And even if I think I might like to be able to make that choice for myself I really don't. Because the game developer is either going to have to spend the extra bucks to support multiple configurations which means other game-related things don't get that money (i.e. things get cut or scaled backed) or they just cater to the lowest common denominator always in which case I'm not getting any benefit from one of the choices.

Subsistance - 10GB
Grandia 3 - 8GB
Rule of Rose - 8GB
Xenosaga 2 - 7GB
Onimusha Dawn of Dreams - 7GB
.Hack - 7GB - 2 single layer DVDs
Tiger Woods 07 - 7GB


Countless other games broke the 4.3 GB barrier. Any single one of these games with the graphic assets for 1080i/720p output would have blown past the dual layer mark.  Granted, some companies optimize better than others - hell - Gears of War and Dead Rising clock in at right about 7GB. But we're talking about Capcom and Epic here. Resistance was nearly 2 dual layer discs iirc. Genji clocked in just over 10GB as well. Blue Dragon is roughly 2.5 dual layer discs. Point being, the need for more storage and better compression is real and now. It's not some nebulous end of lifecycle thing.

I'm more concerned about How developers fill the space up.

There is such a thing as too many, or too long, cutscenes.

I'm very happy with my HD picture - What I get from a DVD is not HD.

 Download some of the windows high definition media player files. I'd suggest this one: http://download.microsoft.com/download/4/1/b/41b10a4f-f4f4-4692-aa44-a458d0047e91/Robotica_1080.exe (http://download.microsoft.com/download/4/1/b/41b10a4f-f4f4-4692-aa44-a458d0047e91/Robotica_1080.exe)

I don't get the whole "DVD is fine, I don't need HD". Why game in 1024x768 when you can game in 640x480, right?

Because in a game I can see the difference. When watching 480p and 720p film clips full screen I haven't seen any difference between the two.

And that link above is to a 1080p. Most PCs will bog down on those. My new HTPC plays 1080p fine, but again since I can't tell the difference why download the much larger files?

And I hope the OP's new HDTV does 1080 or none of this matters anyway.

Yes - I have a 1080p set. Some of this also might be due to size. If you are running a 720 36" set there might not be a bit noticable difference. On a 60" set, I definately see the difference. If you cannot see the difference, I'd suggest getting a bigger set.

My original point was that I am having a hard time justifying buying any new DVD's knowing that I can buy a "cheap" $200 x-box addon, and have a working HD-DVD HTPC. I was looking for a good reason not to do so and instead buy a blu-ray drive for 3 times as much.

I've stopped buying movies until the whole HD-DVD versus Bluray thing gets sorted out.  The movie and electronics industries are doing this to try and boost lagging sales of their movies/hardware and ironically it is only going to make things worse as everyone sits on the sidelines waiting for them to stop screwing around.

720p 61 inch Samsung DLP and they look the same to me. Maybe the difference is noticable on yours. I think some people expect a difference so they think they see a difference.

It's the HDTV version of this...

http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/11/21/21pogues-posts-2/ (http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/11/21/21pogues-posts-2/)

I can think of two, and there are probably more that I don't have.  Grandia III and Shadowhearts Covenant, both PS2 games.

By the way, I have watched a BluRay movie, that dumb Talladega Nights.  It looks freakin' awesome, even that stupid movie.  I want some real BluRay movies now.  Some Alien and LotR on BRD would cause me to change my pants, and I have watched the DVD versions a few times.  I don't know about versus HDDVD, but it kicks the shit out of a 480p DVD.

Yep, that must be it!  :roll:

Ok, you think there's a big visual difference.

Do you think expensive audio cables sound better than cheap audio cables?

Expensive audio cables are a ripoff. I say that as both a sound designer and a person who blasts guitar amps all day.

Hell, the human ear can't even hear all the things that cheap audio cables are delivering to them.  :wink:

No.

But I can see when there was a shitty transfer on a film on an HD channel, let alone the difference between HD content and upscaled DVDs (using a variety of scalers, I have three). Even my non-tech girlfriend can see the difference, because she loves nature and travel shows in HD.

What Sky said. Try looking at Return of the King on DVD and it on HBO:HD. I notice a difference.

Sure, it's the same price. But the perception is that the 360 is cheaper. Perception drives more purchases than reality.

It's still apples and orange. At least you're comparing the same film, but it's from different sources. You don't know that the HBO:HD version looks the same as the HD DVD or Blu Ray versions of the film.

If someone says the HD DVD of Film X looks better on my HDTV than the DVD version then great, I'm happy for them. But don't compare nature and travel shows in HD to some random DVD.

You're building quite the argument there. Have a cookie.

Uhmmm I think that was my whole premise.. They look better because they are in 1080i vs 480p? Which is why HD-DVD or Blu-ray would be better then a DVD.

Perhaps you might want to visit an optometrist, I'm thinking your position might be revised with the correct perscription.

Computers will never need more than 640k of memory.

It's all just program bloat.

I bought about 10 Blu-Ray movies when Tower Records was going out of business. They cost about $2 more on average than DVDs. I've started dumping DVDs I know will be released on blu-ray (Paramount, Columbia and Sony Classics action & comedy). I'm running a 720p native 37" LCD that scales down using the faroudja deinterlacer. Gotta tell ya, difference is night and day - especially on stuff with old school special effects. Species was great for the titties, but the clarity hurt the effects. I might stick to post 1998 actiony/horror movies on Blu-Ray. Gotta tell ya though, holy shit does Silent Hill look amazing. I would even go as far to say as it's a reference disc. I have Fifth Element on Blu-Ray also - Silent Hill thrashes it in every way imaginable. Fog and ash shouldn't look that good. If it were on a CRT (and could thusly hit nearly true black) instead of an LCD, Silent Hill would probably be the best image ever to hit my house.

Awesome, looks like I'm going to have to buy Silent Hill on BRD.  I thought it was a great movie.

Now that I just learned that Netflix is offering HD DVDs ( and soon BluRay ) I decided to take a peek at the available HD players out there.

So as far as I can tell I have two options:

1) get the HD drive for the XBox 360 which is only $200 (which is great, but I have it in the office and don't really want to move my xbox into the tv room and get a wireless connector for it)
2) a Toshiba HD-A1 or XA1 or A2 (they are all $500 it seems, which isn't too bad)

Anyone have a Toshiba or other HD player?

Also, since I currently have a Dream system from Sony (DVD player + amp in one) I'll need to get an amp, so if anyone knows of a short a/v amp let me know!

I had a Toshiba DVD player, and I think they are not very heat-tolerant since it died 13 months after I bought it.  I think I am not a Toshiba fan; they also made my TV.

Looks like PowerDVD 6.5 + Xbox 360 HD-DVD = 1080p output.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=748426&page=18&pp=30 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=748426&page=18&pp=30)

I'm trying to convince myself why I shouldn't do this now....

I convinced myself, NETFLIX for the win! (http://www.netflix.com/Genre?sgid=2442&lnkctr=LhcGenre2442&nfse=Y).

That's pretty hot.

Superman Returns

Not the biggest fan of this movie, but the title credits alone look dope. Great visuals (especially at the end). Great audio.

[EDIT]

There's a slight bloomed/soft effect to it though. But that's just Singer's style. I'd like something a little more realistic and sharp, not cg heavy, not too heavy stylized, lots of motion, but still filmed with recent equipment...

Kingdom of Heaven maybe?

Well - I watched Batman Begins last night and it was pretty impressive. The Matrix looks like it might be very good. King Kong has some problems, the picture in picture keeps coming up. It's not a totally mature process yet.

If you have a computer with at HDTV compatible card and a DVI/HDMI cable and a decent enough processer to handle everything, it's pretty impressive.

Plus now I can play BF2 with no issues on my TV.

Does this make sense for most people. No. You can buy a HD-DVD or Blu-Ray player a lot cheaper then the cost of building a computer. On the other hand. If you already have a HTPC, $200 isn't that big of a risk that you pick the losing format. (Especially combined with Netflix offering HD-DVD's).

Overall I'm impressed with Microsoft allowing the HD-DVD to be compatible with Windows. And I'm very happy watching movies in 1080.

Edited to add: Also - the Nvidia driver is soooo much better for setting up with a HTPC. It just works. It has a built-in resizing tool so you don't have to manually set your over/under scanning. It really is nice.

Warner says they will be putting out discs that play both Blu-ray and HD-DVD. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070105/tc_nm/timewarner_dvd_dc)  I'm not sure how they would do that but if the two formats are so similar that they can both be put on the same disc they should really just settle on one and share the licensing fees.  Or maybe warner is burning an HD image onto one side of the disc and Blu-ray onto the other?  I don't know, sounds expensive though, they would have to pay both consortiums' licensing fees...

Yummy. I'm hoping to get stupid next month with a 8800.

Stray, Superman Returns and Kingdom of Heaven are both shitty movies.

Shitty movies that don't look as good as Silent Hill. :)

As an aside, I gotta admit, I can't wait for Resident Evil 1 and 2 to come out on Blu-Ray - which they are in a couple months.

There is NO EXCUSE as to why Sony Classics isn't pumping out movie after movie after fucking movie.

God damn them.

schild - knowing your prediliction for compulsive hardware purchases, do you have the HDDVD 360 add-on and if so have you bought Serenity in HD? Just curious - I thought King Kong was an amazing visual HDDVD title but Serenity alone was almost worth the $199 for me.

I disagree about Kingdom (don't read too much into that though), but damn, Superman puts me to sleep.

Still pretty though.


Word is that Seabisquit is a good disc. I've never seen the movie, but I'm curious.

* Just as a reminder: I'm looking for a film that's realistic, down to earth, not cg heavy, but has a good deal of action and motion in it.

[EDIT] Crap, that's not even on Blu-Ray. Nevermind.

Btw, I'm sure Silent Hill is cool looking and all, but it's the exact opposite of what I'm looking for in this case. It's all still and slow camera movements, transitioning between a lot of greys and a lot of dark red and browns.

Plus, I only like the last scene really. ;)

Aeon Flux? Ultraviolet?

Sure, some CGI, but not in every scene like Silent Hill.

Some interesting news about Samsung's BD player

Samsung Wages Blu-ray Price War on Sony PS3 (http://www.gizmocafe.com/blogs/gizmo_cafe_blog/archive/2007/01/03/101757.aspx)

Why? The first one was bearable and mildly entertaining if forgettable, the second was a trainwreck in slo-mo. Even the beauty of Milla and that other chick couldn't make that thing watchable.

Could be cool news. (http://kotaku.com/gaming/blu+ray-shocker/sony-to-include-portable-movie-files-on-bluray-dvds-227862.php) Maybe.

This from the company that thought it was a good idea to use a root kit to try and enforce their DRM on CDs.  I wouldn't get to close to those portable files if you want your recordable media to keep working.

What would a non-portable file be like?

AMEN

From CES:
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/82/362731638_ea12c6e4c4_o.jpg)
War over. Movie studios declared fucking retards for not agreeing on a standard.

I think they were close to agreeing on HD-DVD until Blu-Ray came out and offered better features.

Doesn't matter at this point anyways. Not exactly a lot of HDDVD holdouts.


Anyways, I wonder how much that drive costs..? Their stand alone player will supposedly be $1199. Bah. To top it off, it's fugly as hell.

That's January and February for Blu-Ray.


That's HD-DVD.

March forward isn't much better for HD-DVD. Games decide the systems? Movies might actually decide the format for once.

There'll be a plain black model from Lite-On in another year or two at about $100, mark them words. In three years hybrid drives will be $30.

Maybe. That'd be good.

Then again, Sony or Toshiba (or any company on either the Blu-Ray or HDDVD boards) could swallow up LG in one bite. Korean companies are too competitive for them.