HD-DVD vs Blu-ray - 3 films, 1 winner (so far..)

VC-1 is clearly the better codec, Blu-Ray need to switch over FAST otherwise it could lose it for them :(

That and the high equipment costs.
 
Until people other than early adopters start buying players, then we're going to have no idea as to who is winning the war. Spring 2007 might provide the first indications.

Personally I'm waiting to see who releases the first PC drive. I want to watch HD movies on my TV like I do with DVDs through my PC..
 
If the cheapest Blu-Ray player atm is $1000, do you really think that the player in the PS3 will be any good? It will be reasonable i'm sure, but I think a $500 HD-DVD player will blow a $500 PS3 Blu-Ray player out of the water
 
If anything Blu-Ray is the Betamax of the two, although it's not that clear cut this time. In technical terms the only thing Blu-Ray has over HD-DVD is capacity, but considering a dual layer HD-DVD is 30Gb (compared to 50Gb of Blu-Ray), I think very few films will need that much space, even at a higher bitrate. Only a 3hour+ film will fill a 30Gb HD-DVD, and that will include a hefty video and audio bitrate.

HD-DVD is the format that's cheaper to produce and will be easier for studios to start using. I think people need to look past the pure technical specs. As seen at the start of this thread, despite Blu-ray being technically better, we've seen HD-DVDs win out over Blu-Ray in real world terms. Although admittedly that's more the fault of the codec more than anything. But who says that all films will be in VC-1 in future? VC-1 is a Microsoft codec, and they're firmly in the HD-DVD camp, so i'm sure Sony would prefer to stick with MPEG2 for as long as possible!

I can't put my finger on it, but HD-DVD just seems like the well-rounded format at the moment. Blu-ray seems overpriced and difficult to implement. And going from the past the format that's easiest to mass-produce for market will probably win out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom