HD-DVD...

[Freak Out]

Looks to be on it's death bed. I read that Warner had signed up to use Blu-Ray exclusively and I believe they are about the 5th major to do so.
Blockbuster will only carry Blu-ray titles as well. I know Microsquish sells a HD-DVD for it's Xbox but other that that I haven't seen many players out there.

[Scott Campbell]

Looks to be on it's death bed. I read that Warner had signed up to use Blu-Ray exclusively and I believe they are about the 5th major to do so.
Blockbuster will only carry Blu-ray titles as well. I know Microsquish sells a HD-DVD for it's Xbox but other that that I haven't seen many players out there.



I'm letting the format wars play out. In the meantime, upscale.

[Freak Out]

Looks to be on it's death bed. I read that Warner had signed up to use Blu-Ray exclusively and I believe they are about the 5th major to do so.
Blockbuster will only carry Blu-ray titles as well. I know Microsquish sells a HD-DVD for it's Xbox but other that that I haven't seen many players out there.



I'm letting the format wars play out. In the meantime, upscale.

I'm in no hurry. I get my HD content OTA, Cable or on my computer right now.

[Scott Campbell]

Looks to be on it's death bed. I read that Warner had signed up to use Blu-Ray exclusively and I believe they are about the 5th major to do so.
Blockbuster will only carry Blu-ray titles as well. I know Microsquish sells a HD-DVD for it's Xbox but other that that I haven't seen many players out there.



I'm letting the format wars play out. In the meantime, upscale.

I'm in no hurry. I get my HD content OTA, Cable or on my computer right now.


Even my SD DVD's look pretty danged good using TheaterTek and FFDShow.

[]{ilr]3]

Far from dead. With 1 million players sold they have a firm grip. The only reason Blu-Ray has more is because of the PS3 and most of those owners probably dont even now it has one. I hate Sony and all there root kits that install on you PC when you insert there CD's and DVD's so they can spy on you. HD-DVD players are still quite a bit cheaper to purchase. I wish there would hurry up and be a flat out winner though as I would like to upgrade pretty soon. At the very least I hope that one will be able to drive the price down of the other before one goes bye bye.

http://www.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idUSN0636863720080107


LAS VEGAS (Reuters) - Japan's Toshiba Corp (6502.T: Quote, Profile, Research) said on Sunday sales of HD DVD players in North America, including other brands' HD DVD drive sales, totalled 1 million units last year, driven by demand for Internet-delivered content.

Toshiba, reeling from Warner Bros studio's announcement that it would exclusively release high-definition DVDs using the rival Blu-ray format instead of Toshiba's HD DVD technology, sought to stress instead the potential of its recent alliance with Sharp Corp (6753.T: Quote, Profile, Research) on TV panels.

Toshiba executives made the comments at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas.

The high-stakes DVD format battle has made consumers hesitant about buying DVD players and has acted as a damper on an industry now hit by declining sales of traditional DVDs.

[Freak Out]

{ilr]3]Far from dead. With 1 million players sold they have a firm grip. The only reason Blu-Ray has more is because of the PS3 and most of those owners probably dont even now it has one. I hate Sony and all there root kits that install on you PC when you insert there CD's and DVD's so they can spy on you. HD-DVD players are still quite a bit cheaper to purchase. I wish there would hurry up and be a flat out winner though as I would like to upgrade pretty soon. At the very least I hope that one will be able to drive the price down of the other before one goes bye bye.

http://www.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idUSN0636863720080107


LAS VEGAS (Reuters) - Japan's Toshiba Corp (6502.T: Quote, Profile, Research) said on Sunday sales of HD DVD players in North America, including other brands' HD DVD drive sales, totalled 1 million units last year, driven by demand for Internet-delivered content.

Toshiba, reeling from Warner Bros studio's announcement that it would exclusively release high-definition DVDs using the rival Blu-ray format instead of Toshiba's HD DVD technology, sought to stress instead the potential of its recent alliance with Sharp Corp (6753.T: Quote, Profile, Research) on TV panels.

Toshiba executives made the comments at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas.

The high-stakes DVD format battle has made consumers hesitant about buying DVD players and has acted as a damper on an industry now hit by declining sales of traditional DVDs.

I stopped buying Sony music CDs a couple of years ago because of that kind of shit. Someone gave me the latest Kotke/Gordon CD and the only computer I would put it in was my linux box.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I think that the VCD format is going to make a comeback. I'm stocking up.

[Freak Out]

The number of players that Toshiba have sold doesn't mean much if most of the content is going on Blu-Ray.

[Freak Out]

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jan2008/tc2008014_928006.htm?campaign_id=relatedtest_AK

[Scott Campbell]

I think that the VCD format is going to make a comeback. I'm stocking up.


Is that the gay porn format?

[Harlan Huckleby]

actually, VCD probably was primarily a porn format. I don't think it could hold a 2 hour movie. And everybody knows porn gets boring after 30 minutes.

[Zool]

DivX!
The disposable movie platform. I'm surprised that didnt take off.

[SkinBasket]

I hate Sony and all there root kits that install on you PC when you insert there CD's and DVD's so they can spy on you. HD-DVD players are still quite a bit cheaper to purchase.

Hating Sony shouldn't drive your decision. Sony was only one of the Blu Ray conglomerate. The price on players is also the same now. There's more content on Blu-Ray and higher demand for it (see Blockbuster).

It's stupid that the two sides couldn't hash out a unified format before this all started, but not surprising. 1 million people will soon be looking for a dual player so they can watch the handful of HD-DVDs they bought.

[Zool]

Its VHS-Beta all over again. Looks like Sony might actually win this one.

[MJZiggy]

I KNEW there were advantages to being technologically behind...

[LL2]

Blockbuster by me carries both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray. They do carry twice as many Blu-Ray DVD's though. I asked a manager at Blockbuster which one they might carry exclusively and he said he had no idea. I just wish one format will win out so I can get one and stop using an up-convert HD-DVD player.

[]{ilr]3]

HD Movie Downloading is where I would really like to rent movies from. I already have the display, DVR or Xbox 360, I dont need no stinking $400 Blue-Ray player!

Trouble is most downloadable HD content is 720p. If I am going to spend the time and the money to d/l a HD movie over DVD (480p) I would like to get it in 1080p, even at 1/3 higher file size.

[coolman3]

I have a playstation 3 so I don't give fuck.

PS3 is 100 times better than XBOX 360. XBOX 360 is a piece of crap.

[SkinBasket]

{ilr]3]HD Movie Downloading is where I would really like to rent movies from. I already have the display, DVR or Xbox 360, I dont need no stinking $400 Blue-Ray player!

Trouble is most downloadable HD content is 720p. If I am going to spend the time and the money to d/l a HD movie over DVD (480p) I would like to get it in 1080p, even at 1/3 higher file size.

Well join the club. It's a small one. I'm able to stream movies from netflix. Know how many times I've done it? Zero. As have most people with the ability.

[Partial]

{ilr]3]HD Movie Downloading is where I would really like to rent movies from. I already have the display, DVR or Xbox 360, I dont need no stinking $400 Blue-Ray player!

Trouble is most downloadable HD content is 720p. If I am going to spend the time and the money to d/l a HD movie over DVD (480p) I would like to get it in 1080p, even at 1/3 higher file size.

The file size would bigger than one third. Also, unless you have a really big display (50" or bigger) you really cannot tell a huge difference. Now if you're talking about using it as a monitor for editing photos and whatnot, then the difference is quite huge.

http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.html

[Cheesehead Craig]

I KNEW there were advantages to being technologically behind...
Same here. Plus, things just get better and the price comes down.

[]{ilr]3]

:laugh:
I have a playstation 3 so I don't give fuck.

PS3 is 100 times better than XBOX 360. XBOX 360 is a piece of crap.

LOL, :lol: its just lucky for Sony that the PS3 does have a Blue Ray player in it otherwise the PS3 would be in a complete tailspin heading for a flaming crash! PS3 sold a Million consoles over X-mas compared to the 360's 4.5 million. I think Sony only has one game thats exclusive thats worth anything and all games look as good and play as good or better on the 360.

Hardware issues are the 360's main failing, and that doenst appear to be slowing it down any. With the new 3 year warranty I dont think that will bother to many people.

[BallHawk]

I have a playstation 3 so I don't give fuck.

PS3 is 100 times better than XBOX 360. XBOX 360 is a piece of crap.

Tank, you're truly a fool. There's a reason why Xbox 360 and Wii outsell the PS3.

Killer's right. If it wasn't for BluRay the PS3 would of been canned a while back. The PS3 is basically the Xbox 360 with a downgraded online experience and worse games. All of the good games for the PS3 keep on getting delayed. :lol:

Not that it matters to you, I'm sure you could just go out and buy all the consoles with Daddy Warbucks' credit card.

[]{ilr]3]

Looks like more bad news for HD-DVD may be on the horizon...

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ea637496-bd8d-11dc-b7e6-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1


Paramount in HD-DVD blow
By Matthew Garrahan and Mariko Sanchanta in Las Vegas

Published: January 8 2008 02:00 | Last updated: January 8 2008 02:00

Paramount is poised to drop its support of HD-DVD following Warner Brothers' recent backing of Sony's Blu-ray technology, in a move that could sound the death knell of HD-DVD and bring the home entertainment format war to a definitive end.

Paramount and DreamWorks Animation, which makes the Shrek films, came out in support of HD-DVD last summer, joining General Electric's Universal Studios as the main backers of the Toshiba format.

However, Paramount, which is owned by Viacom, is understood to have a clause in its contract with the HD-DVD camp that would allow it to switch sides in the event of Warner backing Blu-ray, according to people familiar with the situation.

[Scott Campbell]

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/boost-for-blu-ray-warner-bros-will-release-high-def-titles-exclusively-in-that-format/

[3irty1]

I don't think either format is going to take over. The truth is that there little to no difference between an $1000 DVD player and a $1000 HD player. The bottleneck for video quality is not the media but the clock circuits that do digital to analog conversions and framerates. A low jitter clock is an expensive circuit with very low tolarance high priced components.

Basically... even if HD players did come down in price... they would be cutting the same corners they do for a cheap DVD player. A cheap clock circuit, cheap power supply, less processing.

If one of them sticks around it will be because of audio not video. You can fit a lot of uncompressed audio on an HDDVD or Bluray and unlike video this does not have to be processed by your player and can be sent digitally to your reciever resulting in less artifacts and distortions.

Until this happens and you have a system where it will matter, stick with DVDs.

[Partial]

There is a pretty big difference in video quality imo. You'd know the circuitry better than I, but imo you're just getting to a point of photo-realism where the eye cannot detect a difference in resolution. 120hz TVs make BR supposedly look quite a bit better.

Why are they ever converting it from digital to analog? They're shot on digital cameras in an uncompressed format. Then they're compressed using H.264 ideally :D and then they're written to an optical disc, where the play pulls off the digital media, sends it over an HDMI 1.3 cable (digital) to a digital display.

[SkinBasket]

I don't think either format is going to take over. The truth is that there little to no difference between an $1000 DVD player and a $1000 HD player. The bottleneck for video quality is not the media but the clock circuits that do digital to analog conversions and framerates. A low jitter clock is an expensive circuit with very low tolarance high priced components.

Basically... even if HD players did come down in price... they would be cutting the same corners they do for a cheap DVD player. A cheap clock circuit, cheap power supply, less processing.

If one of them sticks around it will be because of audio not video. You can fit a lot of uncompressed audio on an HDDVD or Bluray and unlike video this does not have to be processed by your player and can be sent digitally to your reciever resulting in less artifacts and distortions.

Until this happens and you have a system where it will matter, stick with DVDs.

Okay Mr. 1998. You can get back in your time machine now.

[coolman3]

Tank, you're truly a fool. There's a reason why Xbox 360 and Wii outsell the PS3.

Killer's right. If it wasn't for BluRay the PS3 would of been canned a while back. The PS3 is basically the Xbox 360 with a downgraded online experience and worse games. All of the good games for the PS3 keep on getting delayed. :lol:

Not that it matters to you, I'm sure you could just go out and buy all the
consoles with Daddy Warbucks' credit card.

Ballhawk, you ignorant fuck,

XBOX360 is a piece of crap. I had one last year. My first game on that console was Madden 2007. After a day, the crappy console fucked up the game and it became unplayable. So I thought, maybe its the game. So I went and bought another Madden. Same crap happened. I thought, maybe its the console. So I returned it and bought another console AND NCAA 2007. Same unplayable crap. So I threw it out the window!!! Actually, I sold it to game stop for a GREAT lost (300 bucks maybe). Had to wait until the following November to get ahold of a PS3. PS3 is DA BOMB!!!

Microsoft uses inferior technology to make the 360. The 360 is a piece of crap.

[LL2]

I love watching people debate what is technologically better! Isn't it a matter or perspective? I'm with Ziggy in that I'm usually a little behind. In fact one of our TV's is a 20 year old 400 lb dinosaur, and the picture is still good. Not as good as our 56 DLP HDTV, but worth holding onto for a little while longer.

[Zool]

Tank, you're truly a fool. There's a reason why Xbox 360 and Wii outsell the PS3.

Killer's right. If it wasn't for BluRay the PS3 would of been canned a while back. The PS3 is basically the Xbox 360 with a downgraded online experience and worse games. All of the good games for the PS3 keep on getting delayed. :lol:

Not that it matters to you, I'm sure you could just go out and buy all the
consoles with Daddy Warbucks' credit card.

Ballhawk, you ignorant fuck,

XBOX360 is a piece of crap. I had one last year. My first game on that console was Madden 2007. After a day, the crappy console fucked up the game and it became unplayable. So I thought, maybe its the game. So I went and bought another Madden. Same crap happened. I thought, maybe its the console. So I returned it and bought another console AND NCAA 2007. Same unplayable crap. So I threw it out the window!!! Actually, I sold it to game stop for a GREAT lost (300 bucks maybe). Had to wait until the following November to get ahold of a PS3. PS3 is DA BOMB!!!

Microsoft uses inferior technology to make the 360. The 360 is a piece of crap.

This is almost as dumb as your post in the other thread. You need to stop calling people "ignorant fuck" and then post things like "DA BOMB!!!!" and "i sold it to game stop for a GREAT lost"

Hurray for public education!

[coolman3]

Um zool, go learn some popular culture. :)

[MJZiggy]

That's not popular culture. It's just idiocy.

[Zool]

I'm far more versed in anything current than you and your narrow view from daddy's wallet. Try going out in the real world for a while spoiled rich kid.

The 360 was released a full fuckin year before the PoS3. Gee, surprising that Sony has a faster processor and video card with more RAM than the 360. You're just so frustratingly stupid sometimes that it pisses me off.

[coolman3]

I'm far more versed in anything current than you and your narrow view from daddy's wallet. Try going out in the real world for a while spoiled rich kid.

The 360 was released a full fuckin year before the PoS3. Gee, surprising that Sony has a faster processor and video card with more RAM than the 360. You're just so frustratingly stupid sometimes that it pisses me off.

Dude, I bought the fucking crappy 360, not 1 but 2 Madden games (store don't accept return once game is opened), NCAA, as well as a ps3, out of my own packet. I was working the intern gag 2 summers ago, remember?

Yeah, the 360 was released a full year before the PS3. BUT ONLY one full year. One full year is not enough time for a technology revolution. Microsoft knew damn well what Sony had in mind, yet they still went with their inferior technology to create an inferior product.

Don't be a moron. :)

[]{ilr]3]

I'm far more versed in anything current than you and your narrow view from daddy's wallet. Try going out in the real world for a while spoiled rich kid.

The 360 was released a full fuckin year before the PoS3. Gee, surprising that Sony has a faster processor and video card with more RAM than the 360. You're just so frustratingly stupid sometimes that it pisses me off.

Dude, I bought the fucking crappy 360, not 1 but 2 Madden games (store don't accept return once game is opened), NCAA, as well as a ps3, out of my own packet. I was working the intern gag 2 summers ago, remember?

Yeah, the 360 was released a full year before the PS3. BUT ONLY one full year. One full year is not enough time for a technology revolution. Microsoft knew damn well what Sony had in mind, yet they still went with their inferior technology to create an inferior product.

Don't be a moron. :)

The PS3 is far from superior to the 360. The 360 has a much better Graphics processor and more RAM than the PS3. The only thing the PS3 can say is "More Advanced" is the Cell processor they use. Since hardly any developers want to try and write code to take full adavantage of it you could argue it's not superior either.

[Zool]

I thought the PS3 was using a newer nVidia chip than the 360?

[Charles Woodson]

I'm far more versed in anything current than you and your narrow view from daddy's wallet. Try going out in the real world for a while spoiled rich kid.

The 360 was released a full fuckin year before the PoS3. Gee, surprising that Sony has a faster processor and video card with more RAM than the 360. You're just so frustratingly stupid sometimes that it pisses me off.

Dude, I bought the fucking crappy 360, not 1 but 2 Madden games (store don't accept return once game is opened), NCAA, as well as a ps3, out of my own packet. I was working the intern gag 2 summers ago, remember?

Yeah, the 360 was released a full year before the PS3. BUT ONLY one full year. One full year is not enough time for a technology revolution. Microsoft knew damn well what Sony had in mind, yet they still went with their inferior technology to create an inferior product.

Don't be a moron. :)

and thats why the 360 is STILL out selling the ps3

get your panties out of a bunch, 360 is far from crappy

[SkinBasket]

Can we fight about Emo next?

[Partial]

I thought the PS3 was using a newer nVidia chip than the 360?

It is. Yet games typically run better on 360. Funny how that works :D :D

[Freak Out]

More shit.

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=10285

[]{ilr]3]

I thought the PS3 was using a newer nVidia chip than the 360?

It is. Yet games typically run better on 360. Funny how that works :D :D


The PS3 uses a processor similar to the nVidia 7800 GTX series of video cards which was already outdated when the PS3 came out.

The 360 uses an ATI processor called Xenos that at the time used ATI's next generation video card architecture that wasnt even available in PC's yet and is more advanced than the one from nVidia in the PS3.

So you could say they are at the very least they are the same generation, but in reality the 360 has much higher bandwidth capabilities and handles 4x anit-aliasing very well.

Also the 360 has 512MB of memory where as the PS3 only has 256.

Those things combined with the fact the PS3 will never be able to utilize it highly touted Cell processor because of the difficulty in programming for it make the 360 better when the PS3 came out, its better now and it will be better in the future. And by that I mean it will look better and play better and cost less. Yes it will likely still have hardware issues. I have had mine since launch and have had it replaced once under warranty. I was treated really well. I called them up and they sent me out anouther without question and I had it in 3 working days! 8-) I sent them my broken one back in the coffin they sent along with the new unit. I dont think they are giving the same treatment now though. At launch they went the extra mile to try and keep the uprising down.

I like it so much I would by one again if it failed.
If i wanted to get a Blue Ray player today I would likely by a PS3 since it cost the same as any stand alone Blue Ray player :crazy:

[Partial]

360 is easier to program for an thus will have better graphics early. Cell is far more capable. Main system memory is not super important when the only task is the game, which with the bandwidth rates they have content is constantly being loaded in and out.

The Xenos chip is essentially a Radeon 520, aka a x1800. Ps3 puts out more gigaflops/second. It definitely has more potential.

Personallly, I'd get an xbox for the game.

[]{ilr]3]

360 is easier to program for an thus will have better graphics early. Cell is far more capable. Main system memory is not super important when the only task is the game, which with the bandwidth rates they have content is constantly being loaded in and out.

The Xenos chip is essentially a Radeon 520, aka a x1800. Ps3 puts out more gigaflops/second. It definitely has more potential.

Personallly, I'd get an xbox for the game.

Sony is huge on hype and small on delivery.

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/617/617951p2.html
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/617/617951p3.html



Keep in mind that Sony has a track record of over promising and under delivering on technical performance

The Xbox 360 GPU has more processing power than the PS3's. In addition, its innovated features contribute to overall rendering performance.

360 has 278.4 GB/s of memory system bandwidth. The PS3 has less than one-fifth of Xbox 360's (48 GB/s) of total memory system bandwidth

GPU
Even ignoring the bandwidth limitations the PS3's GPU is not as powerful as the Xbox 360's GPU.

Below are the specs from Sony's press release regarding the PS3's GPU.

RSX GPU


550 MHz

Independent vertex/pixel shaders

51 billion dot products per second (total system performance)

300M transistors

136 "shader operations" per clock
The interesting ALU performance numbers are 51 billion dot products per second (total system performance), 300M transistors, and more than twice as powerful as the 6800 Ultra.

The 51 billions dot products per cycle were listed on a summary slide of total graphics system performance and are assumed to include the Cell processor. Sony's calculations seem to assume that the Cell can do a dot product per cycle per DSP, despite not having a dot product instruction.

However, using Sony's claim, 7 dot products per cycle * 3.2 GHz = 22.4 billion dot products per second for the CPU. That leaves 51 - 22.4 = 28.6 billion dot products per second that are left over for the GPU. That leaves 28.6 billion dot products per second / 550 MHz = 52 GPU ALU ops per clock.

It is important to note that if the RSX ALUs are similar to the GeForce 6800 ALUs then they work on vector4s, while the Xbox 360 GPU ALUs work on vector5s. The total programmable GPU floating point performance for the PS3 would be 52 ALU ops * 4 floats per op *2 (madd) * 550 MHz = 228.8 GFLOPS which is less than the Xbox 360's 48 ALU ops * 5 floats per op * 2 (madd) * 500 MHz= 240 GFLOPS.

With the number of transistors being slightly larger on the Xbox 360 GPU (330M) it's not surprising that the total programmable GFLOPs number is very close.