Really??!?!! I thought they only throttled you if you downloaded in 'peak' times??!!
Warner go Blu-Ray exclusive
- Thread starter thecremeegg
- Start date
Really??!?!! I thought they only throttled you if you downloaded in 'peak' times??!!
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 4,171
- Location
- Norwich
Not likely - seeing as each film could be 50gb this gen and its not anywhere near being lossless. Storage and bandwidth is years and years off being able to provide HD viably.
For a month or two before the systems where assimilated - not quite the same as the millions of players (on both sides) completely wasted - at least with only one format, less than 50% of the people have to replace players (and with the way this war is going, its less than 33%)
One player thats barely on the market and pretty expensive
Still usually paying more for the combo discs - the majority of people still only play dvd's in one location
Associate
- Joined
- 21 Jan 2003
- Posts
- 2,499
- Location
- Farnborough, Hants
Typical - guess who bought a Toshiba HD-DVD player for £189.00 just last week :doh:
Warner are still producing HD-DVD's for the next four - five months (even if it sounds like they will be delayed in comparison to BR's), and there are some films already out that are still worth getting imo that could well take a while to be released on BR, not to mention all the Universal/Paramount releases
More like a year or more before dual format players became the answer.
http://www.cdfreaks.com/reviews/The-DVD-format-war---Should-you-go-plus-or-minus
Was the sort of article about at the time, and that was with DVD-R have a five year headstart.
The majority don't have either HD or Blu-Ray, but reasonably priced combo discs could change that if they superceded dvd's on major releases...
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 4,766
- Location
- London
Finally I'll be able to get Batman Begins on Blu Ray! 
And you think the quality of downloads is close?
1. You dont get the lossless audio or PCM quality at high bit rate
2. Picture quality although good isnt as good as disc
3. $-£ ratios make discs quite affordable.
4. Many rental clubs online can offer better value to DRM limited period downloaded content
As for this news on Warner, ive been in the same camp as a few others in stating that Blu Ray looked to take the mantle, mainly because of its support/titles and PS3.
Their wasnt a chance blu ray would fail once PS3's began to reach widespread sales. HD-DVD should have been sold as all discs dual format containing DVD-HD transfers from da start.
Bee interesting to hear what the news is at the ucpmoning industry shows and Mr Bates speech.
Last edited:
Well to be honest downloads could be better, with Blu-ray and HD-DVD you are restircted by the size of the disc, a download could be 200GB, as long as you have a fat enough pipe then anything is possible!
If it's a direct RIP of the disk it's "exactly" the same, bit for bit!
HEADRAT
HD-DVD or BDs are 20-40ish gig in most cases. These are actual intact disc rips. Forget 200GB, thats bull.
Most people/downloaders like our friend Jihad (who foolish goes around telling people he does such things) wont bother with these as they will download a 5-12 GB MKV version of the same movie with 70-80% of the video quality but with a much reduced audio bitrate.
Last edited:
Sorry you missed my point, digital distrubution could actually offer higher bit rates than either HD-DVD or Blu-Ray as they aren't limit by a physical media.
Obviously video that is further compressed via "lossy" compression such as MKV won't look as good as VC-1 encoded video.
HEADRAT
Obviously video that is further compressed via "lossy" compression such as MKV won't look as good as VC-1 encoded video.
HEADRAT
You miss my point then, its not going to happen.
Digital distrubution will always use compression for more content on servers, wider slection and faster downloads/multiple streams.
YOU WILL NOT BE GETTING BETTER QUALITY IN DOWNLOADS FROM LEGITIMATE SERVICES THAT BETTERS DISC TRANSFERS!!!
If anything such services like Live,Sky HD or the internet will more than likely use Hi Def Disc transfers as their source material and then have these compressed for faster downloads and storage purposes. WMV-HD/ Mp4 / Mkv etc
Bandwidth/storage costs them lots of money...
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
unless you can reliable stream 36mbit/sec down a pipeline, we wont be getting better quality downloads.
Rot. I somehow doubt itunes or other on line movie sellers will offer 30GB+ movies that are identical to HD/BR bitrates. Most likely 720p/1080i in WMV, with high amount of compression.
Much like itunes 128-192kps DRM versus flac availability. In fact considering the massive difference in size, I would take a guess the compression on "HD" downloadable movies will be so high, a original DVD-Video will look better.
Highly compressed video looks crap, regardless of resolution. I'd rather have a low compression 720x576 TV show, then highly compressed blocky 1920x1080p TV show.
What utter tripe. It isn't 4gb a day at all.
They traffic manage you between 4:00pm and 9:00pm. Does that sound like all day to you?
Also it's 3gb by the way, just so you know as you clearly don't know much else.
Virgin Media said: