Blu-Ray vs HD-DVD

[chickendude]

Re: Blu-Ray vs HD-DVD

I've had to learn about this at Museum of Science (where I work)

I would go with the blu-ray because it offers more space and more room to improve the technology. The new video players will likely provide compatibility for both, so the superior technology will win out.
Does anyone remember the VCD format just before DVDs? That one failed similarly.

[lord_carbo]

Re: Blu-Ray vs HD-DVD

Blu-ray players go for a ****load of money, chicken, whereas DVD players these days go pretty cheap.

[Biff_tech]

Re: Blu-Ray vs HD-DVD

I say DVD's not HD-DVD but plain DVD they roxxorz

[Squeek]

Re: Blu-Ray vs HD-DVD

I also say regular DVDs are going to come out to be the victor here.

Nobody wants to change over to the new format yet. DVDs have been out for just about 6 or 7 years now. Give them more time.

I mean, we had Cathode Ray televisions for like dozens of years before we developed LCD stuff. That's a long time, so people were finally like "screw that old crap we're going LCD."

VHS was out for about twenty years before DVDs came out, and literally NOTHING in-between stood a chance. Then DVDs came out and they took over.

Format shifts require a few things, and none of these formats have it.

1) Size. Gotta go down. Always. Storage has to go up, but the size of the media has to go down.

2) Gap. The gap between the formats has to be considerably large. VHS -> DVD was huge. Cassettes to CDs was huge. CRT to LCD was huge.

3) Time. If it's not a computer part, you really cannot expect people to be willing to change. Computer parts follow Moore's Law and always change at the same time regardless of whether or not people are ready, and the manufacturers always assume people ARE ready for the switch.

4) Cost. The discs are going to be more expensive. The players are expensive. The TV you need is expensive. Replacing your DVD library with the new format will be expensive.

That said, I can easily proclaim that very few will take the leap into HD-DVD or Blu-Ray. Microsoft has a better shot at surviving the backlash because it's just an attachment on the 360, whereas the PS3 is only Blu-Ray and cannot bank on DVDs.

[Litodude]

Re: Blu-Ray vs HD-DVD

i'll side with the Blu-Rays. From what i hear, Blu-Ray's are going to be the type of disk the ps3 is going to be using.

[nforcer06164]

Re: Blu-Ray vs HD-DVD

Way to take a narrow-minded view of things. Blu-ray is way ahead of it's time, and PS3 doesn't need it. What's wrong with using a double-layer disc, or, God forbid, TWO double layer discs? OH GOD WE'RE USING TWO DISCS OH NOOOOO.

My point is, DVDs are already doing fine. Double layer DVDs are doing fine. Why push anything else? People are still settling over the +/- DVD debate. + won over for better reliability and compatibility, even though it wasn't "official." We don't need higher capacity right now. I know we'll have to move on to HD-DVD or Blu-Ray eventually, but not yet.

Oh, and I have an HD Satellite receiver, a plasma TV, and TiVo. Why would I agonize over a choice and drop another $1000 for a too-early-for-its-time disc format when I already have HD? People that choose the camp that loses now will be kicking themselves for having to be on top of the "latest."