LG's BH100 hybrid Blu-ray / HD DVD player unable to be sold sans HDi?

Just when every patient, fence-sitting individual finally rejoiced that a single unit was being introduced to solve the HD DVD vs. Blu-ray dilemma, we had a hunch things wouldn't be perfectly peachy. Sure enough, the BH100's dirty little secret could keep the machine a secret altogether, as it reportedly won't be able to claim HD DVD-compliance (and consequently, hit shelves at all) without support for HDi. Playing a bit of favorites, the player provides the goods to show off those BD-J extras just fine, but users hoping to experience the lovely bonuses requiring HDi would be sorely disappointed. According to BetaNews, the player cannot receive the necessary thumbs-up from the DVD Forum with such a void in its makeup, and even suggested a very dark, unwanted result could end up happening, you know, like the BH100 getting the axe. Nevertheless, we certainly hope LG gets on the ball and throws in the (scarcely used thus far) HDi support, or else we could be facing yet another reversed decision in the combo player arena.

[Shogmaster @ Jan 14th 2007 6:45AM]

I don't know why this stupid thing garnered all the attention before CES. It's $1200 MSRP! You could get 2nd gen HD-DVD player (Tosh low end $400) and a Blu-ray player (Sammy $800) for that money!

[Mark G @ Jan 14th 2007 8:25AM]

This was a disaster waiting to happen, the cost of the unit is about the same price as buying a Blu-Ray PS3 AND a HD-DVD, who in their right mind would buy the LG combo? It's not a very good HD-DVD player, and the PS3 is all likelyhood will be a better Blu-Ray player (as there is little to match the PS3 in Blu-Ray playback currently, aside from very top end players).

It's all moot, as HD-DVD seems to be dying a very quick death, with Blu-Ray media taking the lead in Amazon SalesRank, and dwindling HD-DVd support, in particular Universal's lack of any new titles in 2007...

[ph @ Jan 14th 2007 8:29AM]

HD dvd has better picture, better price, MORE titles, and has completely outsold bluray. Please do not post BS like HD DVD is dying, when bluray is on the verge of extinction.

[Peter @ Jan 14th 2007 9:38AM]

Ummm you are using old data.

The picture differences were months ago in the first few disks and that is it. Anyone still making claims about this, clearly doesn't have a clue. They are identical now and have been for quite some time.

The rate of movies sales has jumped up on Blu-Ray till they are now about equal.

There are way more studios exclusively supporting Blu-Ray, and if you check movie catalogs for each now, there are more titles available for Blu Ray.

The best you can argue now is that they are equal, but Blu Ray has the edge in studio support.

[Leonard Nimrod @ Jan 14th 2007 10:52AM]

Check Wikipedia or Netflix for Blu-ray/HD-DVD titles available. They are about equal.

As for quality, they both use the same codec and since Blu-ray can hold a great deal more information, it's safe to say that Blu-ray can have a much better picture than HD-DVD ever will.

Are you talking about players or player/burners? Many people bought PS3s for teh Blu-ray capabilities, that adds over 100k Blu-ray players right there (don't even think of counting the XBox as the HD-DVD player is an option only). Now take into consideration that Blu-ray was selling consumer burners and burnable media long before HD-DVD had this capability in he lab.

HD-DVD may be cheaper, but the companies with the most influence are on Blu-ray's team and, just like with the VHS/Beta wars, the one with the highest capacity will triumph.

[Adam Daniel @ Jan 14th 2007 8:36AM]

To Shogmaster's point, what a $1200 combo player will do is make it more difficult to sell the several Blu-ray only players that are in the $1,000 to $1,500 price range.

The insiders on avsforum say LG will release this player with the HD DVD ROM logo, and replace it this summer with a new model supporting HDi and thus qualifying for the HD DVD logo. The DVD Forum cannot prevent a product from being sold; only from carrying a logo if it is not spec compliant.

[Lazarus Dark @ Jan 14th 2007 9:51AM]

I could care less about the combo player unit, all I want to know about is the combo pc drive! As all playback is done in software the combo drive should have no issues with features. But my question is why is the pc drive supposed to be 1200 too?! All it does is read/write the disc, it doesn't have to decode h264 or truehd or connect to the internet and doesn't have to have all the physical stuff like i/o ports and remote control and power supply.

Heck, with terabyte hdd coming soon, I don't even need writing capability. Just give me a friggin combo bd-rom/hd-dvd-rom drive so I can feed my 1080p westinghouse lcd with some hd goodness. Westy is hungry!

[steve @ Jan 14th 2007 10:42AM]

"why is the pc drive supposed to be 1200 too?! All it does is read/write the disc"

because a burner is always more than a player alone.

[peters @ Jan 14th 2007 10:10AM]

I work in this industry and can shed some light.

1) The HDi feature is integral and a vital part of HD-DVD. Without it, there are no menus, bookmarks, etc. This is not a "seldomly used" feature, but a critical component.

2) Currently, HD-DVD is outselling BD by more than 2:1 (discounting gaming consoles).

3) Gaming consoles considered, there have been approximately 100,000 HD-DVD add-ons for XBox sold through, while about 1 million PS3s sold-in. Currently, there is a tremendous inventory of PS3s sitting in retail locations - not selling. First glance has the PS3 struggling to find a market.

4) As far as image quality. We ran a recent blind comparison using top-tier HD-DVD content (V for Vendetta) and top-tier BD content (Kingdom of Heaven) and the results were unanimous amongst those polled, that the picture quality of V was "Significantly" better than Kingdom. [Most thought Kingdom was simply a DVD].

5) LG is a BluRay committee member and had never discussed the development of the HD-DVD side of this unit with the HD-DVD committee. As such, it appears to be a lop-sided player designed to make HD-DVD seem weaker than BD.

6) The current attach rate of titles to players in HD-DVD stands above 20 titles per unit on average. The current attach rate of BD stands at just above 3 titles per unit. This is of significant importance to the studios.

Lastly, I stand neutral in this battle, but often come to the aid and defense of HD-DVD as there is a lot of marketing FUD and HYPE about BD which is openly wrong or misleading (1080p vs. 1080i for example). While I think this battle is clearly far from over, currently HD-DVD has a significant lead (unlike pronouncement from Fox at CES that the war is over and BD has won).

[Jeff @ Jan 14th 2007 11:49AM]

"3) Gaming consoles considered, there have been approximately 100,000 HD-DVD add-ons for XBox sold through, while about 1 million PS3s sold-in. Currently, there is a tremendous inventory of PS3s sitting in retail locations - not selling. First glance has the PS3 struggling to find a market."

Come on dude, you can't be serious. You seem to be implying that the Xbox 360 HD-DVD add-on has sold better than the PS3. That's just not true.

The PS3 has sold approximately 1.1 million units worldwide - yes, SOLD. As in to consumers. That includes about 600,000 in the United States. That's according to NPD and Media Create data.

That absolutely dwarfs the 120,000 units the Xbox 360 HD-DVD add-on has sold.

What it all adds up to is about four times as many BD players out there as HD-DVD players, in total. Now, not all PS3 owners are gonna bother with Blu-Ray movies. But if even 10% do, then Blu-Ray already has an edge. And that edge will only keep growing over time. This is exactly how a lot of people predicted things would shake out. HD-DVD's "head start" really was totally meaningless - Blu-Ray has already caught up, and will have clearly surpassed HD-DVD permanently within six months.

This is *why* BD has more industry support. The manufacturers and movie studios are hedging their bets, but they're not stupid - they know which way the winds are likely blowing.

And it's just a better format. They use the same codecs but Blu-Ray has more storage capacity and higher transfer speeds. There's no reason whatsoever to hope the inferior format wins.

"Lastly, I stand neutral in this battle,"

Yeah, BS. You quote sold numbers for the 360 HD-DVD but only shipped numbers for PS3, then spend the whole rest of your post defending HD-DVD. It's pretty clear which camp you're in, and it's the wrong one.

[gregori0 @ Jan 16th 2007 9:30AM]

"4) As far as image quality. We ran a recent blind comparison using top-tier HD-DVD content (V for Vendetta) and top-tier BD content (Kingdom of Heaven) and the results were unanimous amongst those polled, that the picture quality of V was "Significantly" better than Kingdom. [Most thought Kingdom was simply a DVD]."

This test is not very scientific IMHO. You should have used the same movie for the blind test. Also, how you defind "top-tier"? By bit rate? By content? The problem with blind testing with 2 different movies you significantly increased the factor of "subjectiveness" of the audience. (e.g. Some poeple simply prefer one movie over the other and unconciously carry that judgment to the overall playback quality.)

[Coil @ Jan 14th 2007 10:36AM]

Interesting comments peters, though you sound like you are biased toward the HD-DVD.

This makes interesting reading: http://www.eproductwars.com/dvd/

I'm starting to back away from the blurry vs VD-DVD race as they are both horribly infested with DRM...

[ph @ Jan 14th 2007 11:13AM]

HD DVDs use VC1. Blue Ray still uses the outdated mpeg2 codec. Hd DVD looks better as a result.

[ph @ Jan 14th 2007 12:46PM]

Jeff, the 120000 is significant because those are going to be bought exclusivley for hd dvd. PS3s are not necessarily bought exlusiveley for Bluray.

huh?, my understanding is that hddvd is blue laser as well, though I could be wrong.

Also, bluray does not mandate high definition audio. Bluray could be mastered with a normal dolby digital track, for example. ALL hddvds have to have at least dolby digital plus, at least that is my understanding.

what you are saying about data rates and codecs could be true, but then why do HD DVDs STILL look better than bluray? (Yes, even new releases)

[Michael @ Jan 14th 2007 11:54AM]

I'd like to ask a question to all Blu-ray fanboy's. Why do you care?

The reason I ask is because blu-ray is more expensive and is being promoted heavily by a company who in the last 5 years has really done nothing but try and screw its customers over with heavy DRM schemes and shoddy products. It used to be Sony was the king. There was a time when everything I owned was Sony and told people with pride. But that hasn't been for a while.

So if the picture quality is the same (as you claim) but the price for HD-DVD is lower, then why are you even supporting blu-ray? The only two advantages blu-ray has is larger storage capacity (which does really matter for movies, as can already been seen) and better studio support at the moment. But of course if HD-DVD wins every studio will quickly jump ship, including Sony owned studios because the real money is in the content sales.

[Sy @ Jan 14th 2007 2:22PM]

How is Blu-Ray more expensive? HD DVD is outselling Blu-Ray discs 2:1? When you guys stop using old data? This might be true a few months ago but things has changed drastically. You can get a low end PS3, YES IT IS A BLU-RAY PLAYER, for $500 ...same price as the xbox360 + HD DVD drive add-on. At the end of December, Blu-Ray sales surpassed HD DVD sales by 20%. To say HD DVD sales has an sale advantage of to 2:1 NOW is dishonest. That was last year's news san PS3.

[huh? @ Jan 14th 2007 12:17PM]

ph... you may want to get a newer spec sheet.
Originally Blu-ray only supported MPEG-2 and did look pretty bad, but now both formats support MPEG-4 AVC(H.264) and VC1. Both are now capable of over 50GB of storage (Blu-ray dual sided dual layered ~ HD-DVD single sided triple layerd). Both appear to have equal number of titles available. Big difference now is the fact that HD-DVD uses a much wider red laser (compared to blue-violet of Blu-ray) and much slower max data rate- Blu-ray=54Mb/s, HD-DVD=36.55Mb/s. As studios tailor compression schemes, I would imagine the more info you can read off of the disc at once, the better potential picture you could have (i.e. 128Kb/s MP3 vs 256Kb/s MP3).
Unfortunately most consumers could care less which product is better (Betamax vs VHS), they just care about their wallets.
Michael... really... Sony is WAY overpriced for what you get, but sounds like your post is more about your dislike of Sony than HD-DVD vs Blu-ray. Try the "I hate Sony" message board next time.

[hemmy @ Jan 14th 2007 12:47PM]

HDDVD has sold more by virtue of being out longer, and that's it. And that lead has evaporated quickly. The HDDVD camp blew it, as far as I can see. It was theirs for the taking, and they squandered every advantage.

@ph: This myth about Blu-ray/Mpeg2 is no longer applicable. Studios have been using VC-1 and AVC for a while now for Blu-ray movies (Syriana:VC-1, Blazing Saddles:VC-1, Corpse Bride:VC-1, Descent(unrated):AVC, Superman Returns:VC-1, and *tons* more).

Blu-ray has perhaps 90% of Hollywood support, whereas HDDVD has *half*. HDDVD is dead in the water without Fox/MGM/LionsGate/SonyPictures/BuenaVista/Disney/Touchstone/and whoever else I'm forgetting. HDDVD has Universal exclusively, and the rumblings in the industry is that is about to change. There is only so long Universal can carry HDDVD before they *have* to cave in, even if they don't want to.

What do you think will happen when people realize they can't get Spiderman 3 on HDDVD? When they can't get Pirates of the Carribean 1/2 on HDDVD? When they can't get their kids their favorite Disney movies on HDDVD?

There are 1.5 million PS3's out in the wild, and 1.1 of them are in the homes now. And the massive November/December spike in Blu-ray movie sales is telling, that PS3 owners are investing in Blu-ray movies titles. Even if a small fraction of PS3 owners buy movies, Blu-ray is ahead significantly.

It also doesn't help that right *now* you can download decrypted HDDVD movies from torrents (Serenity, anyone?). That's must really piss off studio execs and give them yet another reason to look at Blu-ray for having additional layers of security built into the spec.

It's no longer a question of HDDVD dying, it's how fast this will happen with 2007 being the year of Blu-ray.

[ph @ Jan 14th 2007 12:55PM]

yes, hd dvd uses a blue laser http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD_DVD

[hemmy @ Jan 14th 2007 12:57PM]

@huh? (BD50 are dual layered, single sided)

Even TDK's quad layer 100GB BD is single sided, and so is their six layered 200GB BD...

[peters @ Jan 14th 2007 1:25PM]

Guys, simmer down. There is a lot of FUD going on in these comments. Let's see if I can cut through some of it.

1) BOTH systems use a Blue Laser - in fact the laser is almost identical, it is the focusing optics which are different as HD-DVD uses the middile layer (like traditional DVDs), where BD uses the top of the disc (thus requiring a "coating" layer to deter scratches).

2) While BOTH systems support MPEG-2, MPEG-4 and VC-1, Sony is a STRONG promoter of MPEG-2 and Toshiba is a strong supporter of VC-1. Where almost all HD-DVD titles use VC-1, most BD titles use MPEG-2. Exceptions on BD are when the same title is on HD-DVD and the VC-1 encoded video is simply transfered to a BD disc, or when the disc is a Japanese encoding which generally uses MPEG-4. MPEG-2 is undeniably the weakest of the three codecs, and is one reason for image issues still with some BD titles.

3) BD titles can use 50gbs per disc. This is single-sided dual layer. However, due to the fact that there is a VERY high failure rate for these titles, they have to be basically done by hand (this is why the PS3 packing was TN on a BD-25 (high-volume) where the release was BD-50 (low volume). HD-DVD has just announced 51gb per disc for replication later this year. This will be a single-sided triple-layer disc and "should" play in existing players (this is one of the design criteria). In addition, this new spec also allows for much higher bit-rates.

4) While 120,000 or so HD-DVD add-ons have been sold for the XBox 360, we can assume that 100% of those are for watching HD-DVDs. If we assume about 10% of the PS3 units sold in the US are primarily for BD watching, then we get a number of about 60,000 PS3s used primarily for BD. If we extend that to another 10% used for casual watching of some significance, then we are at the same 120,000 units - ergo a wash at best.

5) The current "hack" to decrypt HD-DVDs is the same for BD discs as this is a circumvention of the AACS encryption through a software player which plays BOTH HD-DVD and BD discs. The additional security features of BD do nothing here, as they are aimed at stopping mass duplication (pirating from Hong-Kong) of BD discs. In this case they are irrelevant.

6) Yes, people who want Spiderman 1-3 or Pirates 1-3 will have to purchase BD. However, just the same, those that want Harry Potter 1-7 or Lord of the Rings 1-3 or the Matrix 1-3 will have to buy HD-DVD. The number of studios issue is an irrelevancy if you want a single title which is exclusive to the other format. In that case you will need to own both.

As to my bias, as I said, I own and support BOTH formats. However, I am more than a little upset with the false technical information that the BD camp has spread in its FUD marketing campaign. This has turned me off, being technically minded about this stuff, to their cause (from a technical perspective).

Issues are:

1) 1080p vs. 1080i (from film source) there is no difference. Also, BOTH formats are encoded exactly the same way - 24 frames progressive and can output exactly the same data.

2) MPEG-2 is the equal of VC-1 for High-Def content. This is simply not true. VC-1 has been shown time and again to be the single best codec for HD content, but Sony refuses to use it (as they would be forced to include Microsoft in their royalty stream - and Sony has not VC-1 tools of their own). http://video.ldc.lu.se/pict/WM9V-MP4AVC-MP2V_comparison-Goldman.pdf

3) Blue Ray has "Won the War" simply because they have shipped in a great number of PS3s. Look, the PS3 has already been a generally acknowledged failure. They will have one chance to redeem themselves with the March Firmware Update they have promised, but to date they are dead last. http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/14/official-holiday-2006-console-sales-figures-dont-surprise/ and it seems that BD may have a lot to do with this (through artifically raising the retail price and dramatically increasing the loss Sony takes on each unit sold).

So, there you have it.

[Ted Brown @ Jan 14th 2007 2:45PM]

"4) While 120,000 or so HD-DVD add-ons have been sold for the XBox 360, we can assume that 100% of those are for watching HD-DVDs. If we assume about 10% of the PS3 units sold in the US are primarily for BD watching, then we get a number of about 60,000 PS3s used primarily for BD. If we extend that to another 10% used for casual watching of some significance, then we are at the same 120,000 units - ergo a wash at best."

You take way too many assumptions.

5) The current "hack" to decrypt HD-DVDs is the same for BD discs as this is a circumvention of the AACS encryption through a software player which plays BOTH HD-DVD and BD discs. The additional security features of BD do nothing here, as they are aimed at stopping mass duplication (pirating from Hong-Kong) of BD discs. In this case they are irrelevant."

Not really. Don't you think if it was exactly the same someone would have already written a tool to find the keys on bluray titles?

"6) Yes, people who want Spiderman 1-3 or Pirates 1-3 will have to purchase BD. However, just the same, those that want Harry Potter 1-7 or Lord of the Rings 1-3 or the Matrix 1-3 will have to buy HD-DVD. The number of studios issue is an irrelevancy if you want a single title which is exclusive to the other format. In that case you will need to own both."

Uh what? None of those titles you mentioned are Universal properties, so they can be released on bluray. I guess your completly unbiased self with both players did not know Warner has been releasing bluray titles for months. The only studio that has held out is Universal and it looks like that is about to change.

"As to my bias, as I said, I own and support BOTH formats. However, I am more than a little upset with the false technical information that the BD camp has spread in its FUD marketing campaign. This has turned me off, being technically minded about this stuff, to their cause (from a technical perspective)."

No trust me, it was completly obvious which format you side with. Do you actually like HD-DVD better, or is it just the support the underdog feeling that some people have?

[ph @ Jan 14th 2007 2:29PM]

And you can get a hd dvd player for 300 to 400 dollars.

[Sy @ Jan 14th 2007 2:33PM]

"However, just the same, those that want Harry Potter 1-7 or Lord of the Rings 1-3 or the Matrix 1-3 will have to buy HD-DVD."

Sorry to bust your bubbles but the Harry Potter series, Lord of the Rings and the Matrix are NOT HD DVD exclusives. The only HD DVD exclusive studio is Universal. Warner Brothers and New Line Cinema are neutral. Last time I checked, both Harry Potter and the Matrix are Warner Bros and LoTR is of course New Line Cinema.

[Arnie @ Jan 14th 2007 2:40PM]

The comment about the codec is wrong. Current Blu-Ray movies use the new h.264 codec.


http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2886

[hemmy @ Jan 14th 2007 3:21PM]

2) Exceptions are now the rule. Sony favors MPEG4, not MPEG2. The encoders were the problem initially, and now that's changed. Disney, Fox, Sony, Warner, and Panasonic's lovely new h.264 encoder say hello.

3) For someone who talks about FUD, the irony is laughable. BD50 issues were down to supply problems. As of last year, Sony DADC had 6 BD50 production lines cranking out 60,000 discs a day. If they had this supposedly "high failure rate" (fanboy wishful thinking drivel), they would have burnt their production facilities to the ground by now and called it a day.
Click, The Searchers, Unforgiven, Black Hawk Down, Layer Cake, Kingdom of Heaven, The Last Samurai, Enemy of the State, Flightplan, Superman Returns, From Hell, World Trade Center, Talladega Nights, Invincible, Pearl Harbor, The Descent all say hello. Failure rate, my ass.

4) These assumptions are spurious at best. I can make assumptions with nicer percentages that win my argument for me too. The reality is that until Nov/Dec, HDDVD sales were unquestionable. Now HDDVD sales are struggling to keep pace with Blu-ray. DVDEmpire is selling more Blu-ray titles as of today. The PS3 had something to do with that, no matter how much you care to trivialize its effect.

5) They are relevant in the eyes of studio execs. ROMMark, what you're talking about, and BD+ go along way to protect content, even if they are compromised in the long run. Right now we're looking at Serenity and Superman Returns being traded on the net. That's not going to sit well with Hollywood who looks over at the Blu-ray camp and recognized they at least employed a bit more armor and whose films aren't being dumped and traded at the moment.

6) Warner and New Line aren't HDDVD exclusive. This is a shortlived advantage as Warner has pledged to catch up its Blu-ray catalog with its HDDVD releases. It means those Blu-ray only folks will have to wait for Potter/Matrix/Batman Begins/etc a little longer. This year there will be a point where titles will be published simultaneously and the Potter argument can no longer be made. That leaves Universal, but not for long, if insiders are to be believed.

FUD marketing campaign? Sorta like what you're doing here? Clearly you have some biased affiliation despite your effort to claim being unbiased.

As for PS3 being a failure? Making this claim while the console is about 2 months out the gate, well... that says it all. See: above.

Despite Sony's pathetic blunders and PR nightmare after PR nightmare, and the Blu-ray camp's delay after delay and exorbitant pricing all around, Toshiba and the HDDVD camp STILL could *not* seal the deal and preempt what is happening now:

Blu-ray taking over.

[Thierry @ Jan 14th 2007 6:45PM]

You all seem to forget the only reason why people owning a PS3 are currently buying movies is because there's not much else they can do with it right now. Other than maybe 3 or 4 games that are decent (not great), there are no good games on PS3 yet.

Let's see what happens to BR sales when a bunch of good games start showing up for PS3... It might not get as bad as UMDs for the PSP, but I doubt it will be pretty.

Also, all those that think BD is more protected than HD-DVD as far as getting cracked have no clue what they're talking about. BD and HD-DVD are only protected with AACS at this time, BD+ has not been implemented. As for Rom mark, the hackers couldn't care less about that, it's not there to prevent ripping and never will. Muslix64 has stated many times that the reason he started with HD-DVD (and not BD) is because he couldn't afford a BD burner. The software that allowed him to find the keys plays BD and HD-DVD, so whatever he was able to do with HD-DVD can be done right now with BD as well.

And to all those that think the format war is over, let's meet again next Christmas and see if you're going to spread the same BS by then.

[tranzparentl @ Jan 14th 2007 5:02PM]

I will support HD DVD till my dieing day!!

[peters @ Jan 14th 2007 5:14PM]

"What FOOLS these mortals be..."

[JM @ Jan 14th 2007 5:20PM]

[quote](scarcely used thus far) HDi support[/quote]???
Almost every HD DVD title is made in advanced content and thuis using HDi.

[coyotej @ Jan 14th 2007 5:21PM]

@ph:
HD-DVD and Blu-ray actually both have the same codec support (MPEG-2, H.264, VC-1). However, studios pressing initial Blu-ray discs so far seem to have opted for MPEG-2 in the short run. Why? The only reason I can think of is because they had the extra space and they have plenty of experience releasing MPEG-2 content. The quality differences so far have far less to do with VC-1 or MPEG-2 codecs, and more to do with poor encoding/transfers by the studios.

[Phil @ Jan 14th 2007 6:40PM]

CompUSA already has the BH100 on sale and in stores. They got it in two days ago. I can take pictures if you want but I'm sure other people have seen it in. I've played with it a few times and while the build quality leaves something to be desired compared to even the Sammy BD player (on the unit they have on display you can press the top lid and it pops back like it's not totally flat) the performance is just about like I expected; i.e. pretty darn good. There's no HDi support but all the discs I tried worked just fine as far as playback was concerned, even titles like Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift which had U-control. It sucks not being able to access all the cool features of discs like that and frankly this is really a BD player with HD support shoe horned in. There's no HD DVD logo anywhere and it plainly states that playback of picture and audio is the only real HD DVD functionality the deck has. Standard DVD-style menus are accessable, of course, but that's it.

Still, I doubt many will care as to be honest I can't see special features being important to anyone other than the diehards. Unfortunately those are (perhaps unintentionally) the intended market for this player because of the price tag and as a result I can't really recommend it to anyone serious about getting into the hobby.

[hemmy @ Jan 14th 2007 8:31PM]

"You all seem to forget the only reason why people owning a PS3 are currently buying movies is because there's not much else they can do with it right now. Other than maybe 3 or 4 games that are decent (not great), there are no good games on PS3 yet.

Let's see what happens to BR sales when a bunch of good games start showing up for PS3... It might not get as bad as UMDs for the PSP, but I doubt it will be pretty."

Sounds like fanboy FUD. Like the 360 had an initial stellar lineup. By your logic the HDDVD addon should be dropped right now, because the 360 has a few decent games finally, and nobody is going to buy movies.

Yeah, yeah, we all know the story with Muslix64 and PowerDVD by now. The point is not that BD is impervious, but that HDDVD isn't doing well, and the dumps aren't helping. The BDA took further steps to secure the format and this will weigh on Hollywood's minds. BD+ isn't even finalized, hell, I'm not sure if it's even being used at all in any form. But this leaves room for some extensibility right now to increase measures. That has value to Hollywood.

"And to all those that think the format war is over, let's meet again next Christmas and see if you're going to spread the same BS by then."

It's clear you'll be there spreading the same BS as well. I'm certain HDDVD will be around then. That it will die is an inevitable eventuality, however.

[David @ Jan 14th 2007 9:00PM]

Geez. How hard does this have to be.

Why can't manufacturers go down the path of the original DVD Burners used in PC's. Rememember the "+" vs "-" format debate. Everyone was parannoid whether they'd be caught out with the wrong format. As soon as combo +/- players became the norm - problem solved. Now nobody really cares as all modern DVD burners work with all media.

[Dave @ Jan 15th 2007 3:52AM]

Blu-ray all the way!

[TK @ Jan 15th 2007 3:29PM]

wow peters and ph, talk about lying out your ass.

peters, Kingdom of Heaven on BD looks like a DVD? lmao, now that is what you call fanboyism.

ph, VC1 does not look better than MPEG2. Movies like Black Hawk Down, Kingdom of Heaven, MI:3, Crank, Transporer 2 and others look just as good as any movie using VC-1.

[Nick James @ Jan 20th 2007 2:35PM]

ARGHHH the bias is still there. HD-DVD does not have "better" picture quality than Blu-ray Disc. THEY USE THE SAME DAMN CODECS. Compare Superman Returns on both Blu-ray and HD-DVD. They both use a 1080p VC-1 transfer... and look the same.

The Last Samurai. SAME.

Comparing AVC/VC-1 and MPEG-2 is a load of crock. And there are still MPEG-2 releases that look good. If I recall correctly, Mission: Impossible III is MPEG-2, and it looks great, since it's a dual layer transfer.

This HD-DVD bias is a crock of shit. It seriously is. Technically speaking, Blu-ray IS superior. There's no doubt about it. Don't give me that HD-DVD looks better crap. It looks the same, at this point, until releases start to use the bigger bitrates afforded to MPEG-4 releases on Blu-ray, in which case, Blu-ray will look better.

In fact, the first disc to use this is going to be the live NIN disc, Beside You In Time, I think. There was some information on it at AVS Forum about how the VC-1 transfer was probably going to have a larger bitrate than the HD-DVD version, due to the uh, 20GB extra space.

By the way, has anyone ever seen a single-layer HD-DVD? Anyone? Hmm. Oh and those new triple layer HD-DVDs won't work in current gen players. And no, a firmware upgrade won't fix it. The laser diode won't be able to access the third layer. And, I believe, nott even the first two, due to a different density of the layers (they're not 15GB each, like the normal discs)

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying HD-DVD sucks. I have more movies on HD-DVD than I do Blu-ray at the moment, but that is going to change. Real soon. Just look at the announced list of discs for Blu-ray exclusives at CES this year. Mindboggling.

Consumers don't really care about the technical side though, they care about the money... and they also care about the marketing.

Right now, HD-DVD is marketed towards a very niche market. Anyone ever seen an HD-DVD commercial? Or hell, even a really nice HD-DVD setup at a brick-and-mortar?

My mom, who knows jack shit about anything electronics, asked me what Blu-ray was out of the blue (no pun intended) the other day. I asked her if she had heard of HD-DVD. Nothing.

Same deal with my dad. Now why is this? Well, for one thing... "Coming soon to DVD and Blu-ray." I hear that a lot on the telly. There's also that whole PlayStation 3 thing, which attracted quite a bit of attention (not just for gamers).

No one's winning yet, but Blu-ray is poised to take the lead pretty quickly.

The player prices do not mean nothing at this point. First-gen DVD players cost far too much way back in the day... as did first-gen VHS players (and Betamax too!). HD-DVD does have a price advantage, but who knows it? No one knows what HD-DVD is. You have to look outside these blogs. Yes, we all know what this shit is, because we read about it every day. We like gadgets. We like HDTV. We like movies.

But Joe Sixpack (pardon the term) doesn't necessarily know much of anything. Something I think these blogs and commenters always miss... the general public is not as well versed on this as we are, unfortunately.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that Blu-ray has a marketing advantage, and this year will have far more exclusive releases than HD-DVD. They have a larger player installed base (by a LOT) thanks to the PS3. That remains to be seen whether it will make an impact, but we should know by the end of March how many PS3 owners are actually buying Blu-ray Discs. In order for HD-DVD to be success, they need to start advertising that they ARE cheaper. They need to really advertise those sub-$500 player prices. They need to market that HD-DVD addon for the Xbox 360. They need to get the fact out there that there is a HIGH DEFINITION DVD and it kicks ass.

As a minor aside, I like the blue asthetics of the Blu-ray Discs more than the red asthetics of the HD-DVD. But that's just me, and has nothing to do with anything. Meh.