Story<BR><BR>Tech sites around the Web look at Samsung's new BD-P1000 and the Pioneer Blu-ray drive for the PC. The results are less than overwhelming. Is Blu-ray in trouble already?
Blu-ray roundup
- Thread starter Nate Anderson
- Start date
Cool -- now I can't wait to get a PS3 with this first-generation Blu-ray technology! That extra cost will definitely be worth it.<BR><BR>Assuming I can mentally reprogram my brain to have my lids blink at the same rate as the video stutters, all should be good.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
I think i will wait a few years and pick up a 50X Blu-ray burner for $100 thanks!
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Interesting article about the Blu-ray and HD DVD here:<BR><BR>10 Reasons why Hight Definition DVD Formats Have Already Failed
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BradC:<BR>Interesting article about the Blu-ray and HD DVD here:<BR><BR>10 Reasons why Hight Definition DVD Formats Have Already Failed </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>That was a pretty good article. I think one of his central thrusts is pretty much spot on: the driver for new technology has been by and large: convenience. We already had the cassette -> digital optical convenience upgrade when we went from VHS -> DVD.<BR><BR>I think HD-DVD/Blu-ray will be more popular than SACD/DVD-A, but not enough to command the market this decade at least.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
It's really kind of weird.<BR><BR>People for the longest time have been shitting on HD DVD saying LOOK AT BLU RAY! They have more space, more studios! Don't mind HD DVD at all, give Blu Ray your money.<BR><BR>Now that Blu Ray is not the end all be all for high definitin optical disc playback, they have a bit of egg on their faces.<BR><BR>BR is capable of a great picture, just like HD DVD, but when they pull a movie like the Fifth Element from a bad or damaged print, and dont bother with any clean up work, what is the point of getting Blu Ray. Not only do you get to play TWICE as much now, but you may not get a good transfer on your movies. This is not to say that this wont be fixed in the future, but I would be effing steamed if I dropped $1,000 on a player and one of my favorite sci-fi movies looked like the crap that is currently reported with T5E.<BR><BR>All the movies on HD DVD that I have purchased have looked great. I have had no problems with my player either.<BR><BR>Hopefully though a combo unit from LG or Samsung later this year will make the format war moot. But it would have been a smoother launch for BR had it put some effort into a few more things.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BradC:<BR>nteresting article about the Blu-ray and HD DVD here:<BR><BR> 10 Reasons why Hight Definition DVD Formats Have Already Failed </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>I agree, that was a good article. I also liked his point about technology enthusiasts getting tired and smarter. While I'm certainly not an early adopter, I did purchase a DVD player very early at the start of the format's uptick (I think it was 1998 or 1999). It was a Sony (never again for other reasons) 5 DVD carousel player, and a quality player. I spent $500 on the player. In about 2 years time, players started coming out from Asia that would play a boatload of formats including mp3s, and cost around $200. I won't fall for this again! I cannot be fooled twice, and am definitely going to wait for a multi-format, cheap player if they indded end up succeeding in the market place, and I have my doubts.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Lone Shepherd:<BR><BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Once the <u>move</u> starts playing, though, controls generally seemed more responsive than on the <u>TOshiba</u> HD DVD unit. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>TWo TYpos. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>Thanks. Fixed.<BR><BR>Also, very interesting article. I'm not sure I agree with the overall assertion, though, that HD discs aren't going to take off. I mean, look at the number of people buying HDTVs. The picture quality really does make a difference, and people are going to want HD movies as well. Not at $1000, obviously, and not if they're slow and buggy, but eventually. That said, these two formats realy need to get their act together and come up with a compromise (or manufacture combo players).
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
It seems to me the skipping could be firmware as opposed to hardware/format related, which would be nice if easily fixable with a firmware flash update.<BR><BR>That said, leading edge is occasionally called bleeding edge for a reason. I feel bad for anyone who's adopted HD-DVD OR Bluray at this point.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Perhaps it's the display the Blu-Ray DVD drive is connected to.<BR><BR>I recently picked up the LG L203WT display for use with my XBox 360. It showed the exact same problem you are describing with the Blu-Ray drive. I also moved it over to my computer and ran a few games in native resolution and found the issue was less pronounced, but still there. It seems to be an image scaling issue - specific to the monitor. My CRT displays both perfectly smooth.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Wow, sounds like a winner. It's DVD and it's 1995 again, except this time people don't really want what's coming out.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Psion:<BR>That said, leading edge is occasionally called bleeding edge for a reason. I feel bad for anyone who's adopted HD-DVD OR Bluray at this point. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>Alas, I guess somebody has to though, else we'll never have consumer electronics progress.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
I personally don't see either format ever catching on the way DVD did. My best guess is that all-digital distribution will be the real successor to DVD.<BR><BR>I've heard an interesting opinion (maybe it was here?) that MS doesn't expect HD-DVD to succeed. They're releasing the HD-DVD add-on for 360 and bulit-in support for HD-DVD in Vista solely to provide enough resistance to keep <I>either</I> format from catching on. They really don't have any vested interest in seeing HD-DVD or Blu Ray win, but they would like to see Blu-Ray lose obviously.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The consensus seems to be: unless you need it now, you're better off waiting a year. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR><I>Need?</I> I don't understand. How does one <I>need</I> a consumer entertainment device?<BR><BR>Maybe if planetary morale is low enough that one of your outer worlds is threatening to defect to the Arceans, whom they view as culturually superior, again?<BR><BR>Or is this basically saying that everyone should wait a year?
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Need as in "really want, to the exclusion of logical thought to the contrary." I'm usually pretty pedantic but even I knew what he meant -- View image here: http://episteme.meincmagazine.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif --
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jdw:<BR><I>Need?</I> I don't understand. How does one <I>need</I> a consumer entertainment device?<BR><BR>Maybe if planetary morale is low enough that one of your outer worlds is threatening to defect to the Arceans, whom they view as culturually superior, again? </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>GalCiv II FTW!
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
The whole HDMI fiasco soured me on HD-DVD and Blu-ray. The HDMI standard was sent way back in 2002 yet the HDTV I purchase in Dec 2004 didn't have HDMI. Note: I would have waited if I could for prices to come down, but my old Fisher monitor TV died so I purchased a 30' CRT 16x9 HDTV as a stopgap for a very reasonable price. I am happy with the set for OTA HD content, but I am irritated that my up converting DVD player wont output anything but 480P. I was also irritated that HD-DVD and Blu-ray were going to downrez over component on which they have temporarily backtracked.<BR><BR>So here it is 4 years after the original HDMI standard was set and they still don't have their fecal output together. They are still selling smaller HDTV without HDMI. Furrthermore some HDMI plugs won't stay plugged in, which is a real good way to annoy obsessive early adopters paying $60 each for Monster Cables. Where is HDMI 1.3 to allow true 1080P output and didn't it occur them them before now that maybe they need to support it and just what are they waiting for? It looks to me like the Hi Def players aren't the only things that were rushed out.<BR><BR>I am being more discrimating on my hardware purchases to make sure I can enjoy them without relying on electronics companies or entertainment companies to provide critcal componants or media. <BR><BR>To be honest, a quality upconversion DVD player and a display to utilize it are a bigger benefit for me given the number of SD DVD's I own. A number of those will never have a HD release (the Last Seduction or the Pope of Greenwitch Village) or are based on such poor original production processes (Heavy Metal, Re-animator or any TV series prior to 2000) that a HD version will have no improvement in PQ at all. When they are practically giving Hi Def players away (as is the case with SD DVD players now) I may de-sour and sweeten and get one, but it looks like that will be a long time coming, if ever.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by CroP:<BR>Cool -- now I can't wait to get a PS3 with this first-generation Blu-ray technology! That extra cost will definitely be worth it.<BR> </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>You know this is something else I haven't really considered, since I'm really ONLY looking at the ps3 as a game platform - but if it comes out swinging as a Blu-Ray player and ends up sucking ass because of it, lord are there gonna be a LOT of angry PS3 owners. Most of whom will probably go buy a set-top Blu-Ray device (that will have, hopefully, better performance) but still. That's a potential land mine for Sony.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
From what I've read on home theater sites the current big problem that BD is facing is picture quality. It's just not up to the level of the HD-DVDs. It makes sense really because they're cramming the movie+audio+extras into 25GB using the aging mpeg2 encoding. <BR><BR>HD-DVD uses VC-1, which by some accounts is 2 to 3 times more efficient. Combine the use of VC-1 with the fact that HD-DVDs have 30GB to play with and it's almost the equivalent of having 60-90GB of space compared to BD. Allows for a higher bit rate with less compression.<BR><BR>Some have compared the quality of the BD image to that of compressed satellite HD. It's unlikely to improve until the BD camp starts to implement advanced codecs and/or starts to put out dual-layer 50GB disks.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by zoetrope:<BR>I did purchase a DVD player very early at the start of the format's uptick (I think it was 1998 or 1999). It was a Sony (never again for other reasons) 5 DVD carousel player, and a quality player. I spent $500 on the player. In about 2 years time, players started coming out from Asia that would play a boatload of formats including mp3s, and cost around $200. I won't fall for this again! I cannot be fooled twice, and am definitely going to wait for a multi-format, cheap player if they indded end up succeeding in the market place, and I have my doubts. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>I was a early DVD adopter, too, and regretted it just as much as you. And now I know from experience that I can easily wait 5 years before switching to HD.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">d a display to utilize it are a bigger benefit for me given the number of SD DVD's I own. A number of those will never have a HD release (the Last Seduction or the Pope of Greenwitch Village) or are based on such poor original production processes (Heavy Metal, Re-animator or any TV series prior to 2000) that a HD version will have no i </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR><BR>well with a 30" crt hdtv u are better off waiting anyways as you wouldn't see the real benifit. those crts really should be called edtvs to be honest, they just can't resolve anywhere near the full hd 1080i/p resolution.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Though the drive can burn both Blu-ray disks and DVDs, <B>it can neither read nor write standard CDs.</B> </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Are you fking serious?!@ I'm laughing so hard right now...
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
This is scary if you are thinking about being an early adopter of PS3. I wonder if they would consider putting the games on standard DVDs, or would that defeat the purpose of the whole machine? Sony has always had issues with their early machines. It looks like the PS3 may be in for a bumpy ride.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by neffer:<BR><BR>well with a 30" crt hdtv u are better off waiting anyways as you wouldn't see the real benifit. those crts really should be called edtvs to be honest, they just can't resolve anywhere near the full hd 1080i/p resolution. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>Um, CRTs are more than capable of resolving 1080i or p. I think I run my desktop in a higher res than 1080. Unless CRT HDTVs are magically worse than a monitor whose technology has not really changed since 1992, uhhhhh....
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
I like the Blu ray technology better, but my experience with both devices (I work at a retail store that carries them) is that Toshiba and the HD-DVD camp have their marketing and stuff together MUCH better than blu ray. When they released the actual players, we already had some movies in stock, and they have more than quadrupled the amount of movies available within a month's time. They also provided an HD demo DVD for the display unit.<BR><BR>We've had our blu-ray player for a while, and have yet to get an HD blu ray demo for it, and we also don't have any movies in yet for it. Not to mention that the player itself doesn't have cool (but probably useless...) features like ethernet and USB ports like the HD-DVD player, but yet are still more than 2x the price. If things stay the way they are too long, HD-DVD will trample on bluray.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
<blockquote class="ip-ubbcode-quote">
<div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div>
<div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by damaend:<br><blockquote class="ip-ubbcode-quote">
<div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div>
<div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by zoetrope:<br>I did purchase a DVD player very early at the start of the format's uptick (I think it was 1998 or 1999). It was a Sony (never again for other reasons) 5 DVD carousel player, and a quality player. I spent $500 on the player. In about 2 years time, players started coming out from Asia that would play a boatload of formats including mp3s, and cost around $200. I won't fall for this again! I cannot be fooled twice, and am definitely going to wait for a multi-format, cheap player if they indded end up succeeding in the market place, and I have my doubts. </div>
</blockquote>
<br><br>I was a early DVD adopter, too, and regretted it just as much as you. And now I know from experience that I can easily wait 5 years before switching to HD. </div>
</blockquote>
<br><br>I bought several DVDs before I even got my first player which happened to be a Creative 6x DVD-ROM with DXr3 card. How else was I going to be able to buy Tron??? -- View image here: http://episteme.meincmagazine.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif --<br><br>I just hope all this HDMI/BD/HD-DVD BS is long dead and sorted out by the time SED TVs are out and at a semi-reasonable price point. That 30" HDTV CRT (Samsung - 1080i capable but has NEVER shown anything better than 480P. I got it around 02) I have is still great, but a bitch to move around!<br><br>edit:<br>Just in case someone asks my video sources are (regarding never showing better than 480P):<br>analog cable<br>Tivo through S-video<br>Gamecube through Component<br>DVD player that can upscale to 1080i (or p?) but only through DVI. The TV doesn't have DVI, so it's component.<br>laptop with dead battery through Composite<br>PS2 through Composite
<div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div>
<div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by damaend:<br><blockquote class="ip-ubbcode-quote">
<div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div>
<div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by zoetrope:<br>I did purchase a DVD player very early at the start of the format's uptick (I think it was 1998 or 1999). It was a Sony (never again for other reasons) 5 DVD carousel player, and a quality player. I spent $500 on the player. In about 2 years time, players started coming out from Asia that would play a boatload of formats including mp3s, and cost around $200. I won't fall for this again! I cannot be fooled twice, and am definitely going to wait for a multi-format, cheap player if they indded end up succeeding in the market place, and I have my doubts. </div>
</blockquote>
<br><br>I was a early DVD adopter, too, and regretted it just as much as you. And now I know from experience that I can easily wait 5 years before switching to HD. </div>
</blockquote>
<br><br>I bought several DVDs before I even got my first player which happened to be a Creative 6x DVD-ROM with DXr3 card. How else was I going to be able to buy Tron??? -- View image here: http://episteme.meincmagazine.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif --<br><br>I just hope all this HDMI/BD/HD-DVD BS is long dead and sorted out by the time SED TVs are out and at a semi-reasonable price point. That 30" HDTV CRT (Samsung - 1080i capable but has NEVER shown anything better than 480P. I got it around 02) I have is still great, but a bitch to move around!<br><br>edit:<br>Just in case someone asks my video sources are (regarding never showing better than 480P):<br>analog cable<br>Tivo through S-video<br>Gamecube through Component<br>DVD player that can upscale to 1080i (or p?) but only through DVI. The TV doesn't have DVI, so it's component.<br>laptop with dead battery through Composite<br>PS2 through Composite
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
hah dxr3<br><br>i had a dxr2 because it was the cheapest way into the dvd market. that being said its decoder card had some horrific looking output in windows, it looked like garbage compared to even software players, whata waste of money
it did look ok connected to a tv but that was not a great solution.<br><br>and yea i did waste like 350 dollars on a dvd player early on, not quite the 500 mark, i let it drop a year or so. still, now you can get a 30 dollar divx/dvd player from wallyworld does kinda irk me, and thats with dvd being a solid format. imagine if there was a format war and it was a gamble..that would hurt-- View image here: http://episteme.meincmagazine.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif -- esp if u gambled and lost. i'm so staying out of this one untilt hey get their act together and hopefully most consumers do to. hopefully they a re wiser or more cynical from all the past format wars.
it did look ok connected to a tv but that was not a great solution.<br><br>and yea i did waste like 350 dollars on a dvd player early on, not quite the 500 mark, i let it drop a year or so. still, now you can get a 30 dollar divx/dvd player from wallyworld does kinda irk me, and thats with dvd being a solid format. imagine if there was a format war and it was a gamble..that would hurt-- View image here: http://episteme.meincmagazine.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif -- esp if u gambled and lost. i'm so staying out of this one untilt hey get their act together and hopefully most consumers do to. hopefully they a re wiser or more cynical from all the past format wars.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> The results are less than overwhelming. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>...just plain old whelming.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Psion:<BR><BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by neffer:<BR><BR>well with a 30" crt hdtv u are better off waiting anyways as you wouldn't see the real benifit. those crts really should be called edtvs to be honest, they just can't resolve anywhere near the full hd 1080i/p resolution. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>Um, CRTs are more than capable of resolving 1080i or p. I think I run my desktop in a higher res than 1080. Unless CRT HDTVs are magically worse than a monitor whose technology has not really changed since 1992, uhhhhh.... </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>You run your desktop higher then 1920*1080? What monitor are you using?
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Oops, I did my math wrong. I can do 1600x1200 which is 1920000 total pixels, 1080p is 2073600 total pixels. So I'm like ... 153600 pixels short of 1080. NOT A LOT!<BR><BR>I cannot do math apparently!<BR><BR>wait, actually I just looked this up - Viewsonic has monitors that can support a maximum of 1920x1440. Mine apparently does not, but there are CRTs which do.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Psion:<BR>Oops, I did my math wrong. I can do 1600x1200 which is 1920000 total pixels, 1080p is 2073600 total pixels. So I'm like ... 153600 pixels short of 1080. NOT A LOT!<BR><BR>I cannot do math apparently!<BR><BR>wait, actually I just looked this up - Viewsonic has monitors that can support a maximum of 1920x1440. Mine apparently does not, but there are CRTs which do. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>Actually:<BR><BR>ViewSonic G225fB (Black) 21" CRT Monitor : <BR>(21", CRT, Dot Pitch: .2 mm, Max. Resolution: 2048 x 1536, For: PC, Mac Platforms)<BR><BR>Video Card: GIGABYTE GV-3D1-7950-RH Geforce 7950GX2 1GB (512MB x2) 512-bit (256-bit x2) GDDR3 PCI Express x16 Dual GPU Video Card max resolution 2560x1600 (although I am not sure what monitor would support it and I believe you would need 2 DVi cables to feed the monitor)
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
I'm not sure what's all the hub-bub over the Pioneer burner is about... It's already been reviewed a few times over the past 4 months as has been on the market for about 6... I don't think there's anything new to report about it.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Psion:<BR>Oops, I did my math wrong. I can do 1600x1200 which is 1920000 total pixels, 1080p is 2073600 total pixels. So I'm like ... 153600 pixels short of 1080. NOT A LOT!<BR><BR>I cannot do math apparently!<BR><BR>wait, actually I just looked this up - Viewsonic has monitors that can support a maximum of 1920x1440. Mine apparently does not, but there are CRTs which do. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>i'm not saying crts aren't capable of high resolutions, but tv crts are built to different specs than computer monitors. the 30" crts out there have very coarse dot pitch, they are nothing like the super fine dot pitch of computer monitors, and so their image resolution is much much much lower. its not impossible to build one of course, but it would be unviable because it would cost as much as much larger plasmas. unless you have some uber professional 30" costing thousands its not going to resolve 1080p/i. even the super fine pitch sony with lower dot pitch doesn't quite hack it. and the difference between that unit and the rest is rather large. the ones on the market right now are barely higher than dvd resolution really and they are priced as such. try hooking up one of these to a pc using 1920x1440 and you'll get a blurred mess. the estimated resolution of such low end crt 30-34" is about 540p actually. its been posted about on places like avsforum and dansdata has a bit on it.<BR><BR>and yes computer monitors specs are also a bit off. 1920x1440 on a 19"? there aren't quite enough phosphor dots on most to really clearly resolve that. it'll be less than perfectly clear.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
It depended on the manufacturer really. Sony had a unit out at $1000 that is still trucking for some people, granted it was only 480i. The problem with DVD in its infancy was shitty encoding. 1997 was the year when P2 450s were relly starting to hit the mass market so look at the processing power there. No sets realy did 480p, and the encoding on some discs like from Warner looked like absolute crap. But today we have 480p players for less than $40 bucks. HD DVD wont see the same market penetraction, neither will BR even with the PS3 as to get the true benefit requires an HD set. But, those numbers are also increasing.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DeltaOP:<BR>What was the quality of the very 1st DVD players like? </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>My first (or second) generation toshiba lasted about 13 months.<BR><BR>Of course, DVD players had halved in price by then so ya know....<BR><BR>It's a wonderful irony that most average joes have a machine thats perfectly good at playing HD content, but its in their 'computer room' being used for email and the internet. Consumers will spend $1000 to do what could be done with a $200 set top device. For consumers, the computer and the television really need to merge as devices.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MrBigglesworth:<BR>It depended on the manufacturer really. Sony had a unit out at $1000 that is still trucking for some people, granted it was only 480i. The problem with DVD in its infancy was shitty encoding. 1997 was the year when P2 450s were relly starting to hit the mass market so look at the processing power there. No sets realy did 480p, and the encoding on some discs like from Warner looked like absolute crap. But today we have 480p players for less than $40 bucks. HD DVD wont see the same market penetraction, neither will BR even with the PS3 as to get the true benefit requires an HD set. But, those numbers are also increasing. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>yea, the original dvds were pretty sad. single layer with no bonus features. sometimes they seemed to be transfered from ld masters, no animorphic enhancement. pretty poor stuff. you can still find some of these releases around as bargin bin stuff, featureless worthless releases.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by neffer:<BR>[ but it would be unviable because it would cost as much as much larger plasmas. unless you have some uber professional 30" costing thousands its not going to resolve 1080p/i. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>Or you could go out and buy a samsung 30" CRT TV which has a resolution of 1920 x 1080 for around 700.00 bucks, totally unviable.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
<blockquote class="ip-ubbcode-quote">
<div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div>
<div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by neffer:<br><br><br>yea, the original dvds were pretty sad. single layer with no bonus features. sometimes they seemed to be transfered from ld masters, no animorphic enhancement. pretty poor stuff. you can still find some of these releases around as bargin bin stuff, featureless worthless releases. </div>
</blockquote>
<br><br><br>Are use sure the Media Companies just didn't pad the content to get it to dual layer to make it more expensive for people to burn direct copies of movies they rent at Netflix? I checked several of my movies and many came nowhere close to using the full space on a duel layer DVD, but they were just too big to be put on a single layer-- View image here: http://episteme.meincmagazine.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif --<br><br>On the subject of CRT's the reason you don't see huge CRT's is weight and depth. A few years back I saw a 45" Sony 4x3 CRT in a store and if they wanted they could easily make a 42" letterbox crt but it would be near impossible to move it and it would be over 2 feet deep. <br><br>The 540 resolution of CRT HDTVs is technically right but misleading, At 1080I it is only updating 1/2 the scan lines at once. On a static image it would be nearly impossible to tell the difference between 1080I and 1080P. When you throw any movement at it, that is when you lose the resolution similar to ghosting in LCD. <br><br>For 1080i if you actually do a pixal count of 540 (what is updating every cycle) and 1920 you get 1,036,800. which compares favorably to a 720p display at 1366x768 at 1,049,088. <br><br>There is a slight advantage for the LCD in FPS or Hz where the 1080I CRT is updating at 50 fps while the LCD is updating at 60. This is why 720P is considered superior until 1080P is readily available, but due to bandwidth issues 1080p is currently limited to to 30fps.
<div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div>
<div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by neffer:<br><br><br>yea, the original dvds were pretty sad. single layer with no bonus features. sometimes they seemed to be transfered from ld masters, no animorphic enhancement. pretty poor stuff. you can still find some of these releases around as bargin bin stuff, featureless worthless releases. </div>
</blockquote>
<br><br><br>Are use sure the Media Companies just didn't pad the content to get it to dual layer to make it more expensive for people to burn direct copies of movies they rent at Netflix? I checked several of my movies and many came nowhere close to using the full space on a duel layer DVD, but they were just too big to be put on a single layer-- View image here: http://episteme.meincmagazine.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif --<br><br>On the subject of CRT's the reason you don't see huge CRT's is weight and depth. A few years back I saw a 45" Sony 4x3 CRT in a store and if they wanted they could easily make a 42" letterbox crt but it would be near impossible to move it and it would be over 2 feet deep. <br><br>The 540 resolution of CRT HDTVs is technically right but misleading, At 1080I it is only updating 1/2 the scan lines at once. On a static image it would be nearly impossible to tell the difference between 1080I and 1080P. When you throw any movement at it, that is when you lose the resolution similar to ghosting in LCD. <br><br>For 1080i if you actually do a pixal count of 540 (what is updating every cycle) and 1920 you get 1,036,800. which compares favorably to a 720p display at 1366x768 at 1,049,088. <br><br>There is a slight advantage for the LCD in FPS or Hz where the 1080I CRT is updating at 50 fps while the LCD is updating at 60. This is why 720P is considered superior until 1080P is readily available, but due to bandwidth issues 1080p is currently limited to to 30fps.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
- Status