Blu-ray vs HD DVD comparison at Via Arena

Latest News Headlines
#1

I just posted the article Blu-ray vs HD DVD comparison at Via Arena.

 Next  generation optical  technologies have once again created a competition between two rival  formats, in the same way as VHS vs Betamax, or DVD +R vs DVD -R. The new rival  formats are...

Read the full article here:  [http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/12162-Blu-ray-vs-HD-DVD-comparison-at-Via-Arena.html](http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/12162-Blu-ray-vs-HD-DVD-comparison-at-Via-Arena.html)

Feel free to add your comments below. 

Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.
#2

I doubt there won’t be a winner, At least for the next 2 years.

#3

I wish a winner would happen a little sooner this would impulse some not all buyers to invest then.

#4

What’s the history behind DVD and CD formats? Why were they so universaly accepted and thus successful? Why didn’t they suffer a dual format war?

#5

What are you, a complete idiot? CD’s came out in the 80’s, DVD’s didn’t come out until 10 years later. I’ll say what every one else is thinking- engage your brain before you open your pie-hole, loser.

#6

As far as i know - codecs are optional - the disc formats both harness MPEG2 and MPEG4 [AVC or H263] to my knowledge with VC1 as well - so it’s not a matter of which disc is LIMITED to which encoding - it’s just what they’re using now - MPEG2 has been said to be sharper than MPEG4 [by some people - and some eyes] and it’s an older more proven technology that needs less CPU - the other codecs need a lot more processing.

#7

Too bad !!! Apart from the disc format war and the consumer hurting DRM options (to profit from the advantages we have to get HDMI/HDCP and throw away capable DVI screens, just to protect the greedy guys/studios interests), it seems a new encoding fight is showing up … Is Redmond’s Mr. Gates “startup company” trying to make a living??? Obviously that would be to “our advantage” only !!!

#8

Hey Tiki, I think you need to open your pie hole. DVD’s did not come out to the public until the late '90’s, far from “10 years later” (than CD) you state. Yes, on paper DVD’s were created in the early '90’s but it was not actually brought to the marketplace until the late '90’s. The question is still valid, why no format war with CD’s and why no format war with DVD’s? Afterall, when CD’s were introduced, the Beta vs. VHS format war was already well underway. I have my own idea in regard to why no format war with CD’s (completely new technology, why would anyone try to release a competing format when they did not know if CD’s would succeed), however, I can’t figure out why there was no competing format for DVD.

#9

And where is the “comparison” in here? better check this out for a REAL one :X http://www.highdefdigest.com/feature_blurayvshddvd_firstcomparison.html BD camp has to move on H264/AVC compression as soon as possible.

#10

Immature articles, sorry to say.

#11

The reason behind the higher processing is because they are more efficient codecs. You can get higher quality video with less actual bits. The transform filters are more complex and require more complicated math so a faster processor is required to crunch the numbers. MPEG4 will look sharper at any similar bitrate to MPEG2 because of the efficiency of the codec, but some current MPEG2 devices will use softening filters to blur out compression artifacts from highly compressed video, making it look “smoother” - the sharpness will make the artifacts more apparent if you don’t apply a post-processing filter, but because of the extra work that MPEG4 requires, some devices don’t do post-processing since all of the CPU is tied up just decoding the video. Also, if you meant to say that H.263 is the same as AVC, it’s not. H.264 is what you meant. H.263 is a low-bitrate format of MPEG that’s used for embedded devices such as video phones. It’s fairly efficient at low bitrates, but not at higher bitrates, so it’s mainly used for video that’s CIF resolution or smaller.

#12

There technically was a “war” with both CD and DVD, you just can’t remember them or haven’t read enough. When CD’s came out, there was a semi-competing format called “LaserDisc”. But it wasn’t really a war as such, because LaserDisc was used for video and CD was conceived for audio (wasn’t until late 80’s did data purposes arise). It had no other competition to cause a “format war” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_disc DVD-R was supposed to be standardised by the “DVD Forum” composed of the most prevalent media and technology companies (with the goal of preventing a Beta vs VHS incident and standardising a format) This failed, and the DVD Alliance made the DVD+R (which is a different format, hence why different drives don’t always support both)

#13

Ive, When I said something to the effect of no format war with DVD’s, I was talking about the pre-recorded. I am aware of the recordable DVD format war, thankfully, due to the introduction of dual format writers, there is no clear winner or loser, in fact the dual format writers have probably prolonged the “war” and turned it more toward a quality/price war than a format war. I guess I should have been more specific, though and not assumed that people would have known that I was only referring to the pre-recorded thing. It seems that both CD and DVD had no format war for the pre-recorded titles, but did have a format war for the recordables. While there was no CD +/-R battle like for DVD recordables, there was the DAT/DCC/MD format war, in that case all lost out when CD-R’s became available and popular. As far as laser disc being a competition for CD’s, I never really heard of that one. I don’t know what company would seriously have tried that as CD’s were not only touted as having “clearer” music (no skipping, no tape hiss), but also touted as being more compact than a record, which a laser disc is approx. the size of a record.

#14

I guess the main reason for no pre-recorded CD and DVD war was cooperation. CD’s did not have any directly equivalent competitor initially, and Philips+Sony cooperation meant a relatively easy path for the CD’s to become the dominant media (only cometition was cassettes then pretty much) The cooperation of the DVD Forum meant that DVD’s had no war. It was 5 years or so after DVD movies began being sold before writable DVD media became available, which was when DVD Alliance split off (different ideas) A similar thing was tried again here, but attempts to combine the Blu Ray and HD DVD standards failed http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/06/21/bd_hd-dvd_merger_talks_off/ The problem is, the division is much stronger than that experienced by previous media cooperative groups

#15

Technically: DVD uses a technology that was widely accepted as “valid”, a thin red laser. When blue ray lasers come out someone choose to redo everything from the beginning (dumping the whole CD/DVD know-how to get the best from the support) and someone other choose to stick to CD/DVD specifications and change what’s needed to do a “new” format. HD-DVD is really similar to DVD while BD-DVD is quite different (and the near-border layers are a huge difference). Business-wise: Someone choose a format, someone choose another format, everyone’s fighting for loyalties. My idea: I don’t really care about the whole mess, I just want a good product, and BD-DVD is better than HD-DVD (specs says so). BD-DVD will be pricy, but this will change as soon as it become a standard. Single layer BD-DVD give me 25 Gb and multi layer BD-DVD burners/media are coming. HD-DVD give me only 15 Gb and the maximum no. of layers is still unknown (someone says that HD-DVD R will be only one layer). You know where I’ll put my money.
[edited by ConteZero on 04.08.2006 08:18]