Article Detail - Gadgets news

Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD: First Comparison

Posted Aug 03, 2006 at 11:30PM by Myra M. Listed in: Home Entertainment, Blu-ray, HD-DVD Tags: Dolby Digital

blu-ray And on this corner, storing 25 gigs, the BBBBBlllluuuu-rrrrrrrrrrrrrayyy Disc!
To my right, storing 15 gigabytes, is the HD-DVDDD!
(applause)
Let's get rrrrreaady to rrrrrummmmbbbbllle!

It seems that the HD-DVD is more than ready to fight, with its VC1 compression better than the Blu-ray's MPEG2/AVC scheme. It boasts of less polarization and posterization of images, but with its single-layer HD-15 disc, will it be able to emerge as the winner?

According to Peter M. Bracke, it seems so. His reviews on the Blu-ray and HD-DVD show that the Blu-ray has a narrower aspect ratio (the images were cropped on the side), darker colors, slower menu access, and as mentioned earlier, has more posterized images and polarized backgrounds. It also makes use of Dolby Digital, which is a step lower than HD-DVD's Dolby Digital Plus. However, the Blu-ray boots faster and has bigger storage capacity than the HD-DVD.

The HD-DVD on the other hand, has a slight brightness shift, also has posterization but not as severe as Blu-ray's, and has better sound quality than the Blu-ray due to the Dolby Digital Plus.

Bracke adds that both have sharp images and vibrant colors. Grainy images aren't a problem for both discs as well. But it seems that Bracke's conclusion tilts more into HD DVD's favor. However, it's just from his point of view. We could expect more improvements on both discs in the future, so this isn't a closed case just yet. Read the entire comparison between the HD-DVD and the Blu-Ray and tell us about your take on this.

Read Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Digg It!

Bookmark / Find this article on:

59 Comments

Sort by:

last added

highest rated

by Vecha - 2006-08-03

» I don't see how morons...

can just say, "blu ray has more space!" and that is their only base for prediction that and "THE PS3 HAS BLU-RAY"...

Not like i really care...500-1000 dollars for a "better" picture...

and don't say i'm being negative because i don't have the equipment..i do...two hdtvs that output at 1080p.

by uhm (Unregistered) - 2006-08-03

» ...

The images/video stored on the disc have nothing to to with WHERE its stored. Blu-Ray, as a storage medium, is much better than HD-DVD. It's just that the Codecs used on HD-DVD are better (at the moment)

by iNCREDiPiNOY - 2006-08-03

» The winner is...

HD-Ray!!!! How come I see Dual Player instead of just HD-DVD or Blu-Ray? I hope its a tied because I don't know why they want to make it together.

by - (Unregistered) - 2006-08-03

» -

PS3 FTW!!

by Vecha - 2006-08-03

» i've also..

"The images/video stored on the disc have nothing to to with WHERE its stored. Blu-Ray, as a storage medium, is much better than HD-DVD. It's just that the Codecs used on HD-DVD are better (at the moment)"

heard the (at the moment) argument...

Did the codec for DVD players and Discs changed over year?

If not..what makes you think it'll be different for blu-ray?

by fu (Unregistered) - 2006-08-04

» br sucks

due to the pitch that the laser sits at with BR data is more prone to corruption and error. although br holds more space hddvd is better designed.

by Vecha - 2006-08-04

by Warrior (Unregistered) - 2006-08-04

» Blu-Ray

Blu-Ray will win. More space, more support, and to top it off... the PS3.

by Advertising -

by Shatterdome - 2006-08-04

» ...

How can blu-ray truly be next-gen if it's using current gen sound? Pretty funny since sony people said how can you have a next gen machine without a next gen storage format....good job.

by fu (Unregistered) - 2006-08-04

» niether will win

un-needed. too expensive. devided formats. and to top it all off... download distrubution.

by senjutsu - 2006-08-04

» blue-ray wins

I don't care about next gen format, but I'll buy a ps3 to play games, and if the movies are the same price on dvd and blue-ray I'll buy blue-ray movies dah, so BD wins ( maybe not in PC, but... maybe, because for PC we don't care about the "image", we care about THE SPACE and 25g per layer is.. well... my friends have almost all 40gig HDD so a bdouble layer is already beter then their total memory storage, lol. for myself I have two HDD, one 40g and one 160g so ~50g for a double layer ( basic in ps3 ) is ¼ of my total space, lol. 4 BD for my 2 HDD complete back-up? I'm in! lol

by the onyx (Unregistered) - 2006-08-04

» i agree with #10

i agree with #10
in a few years who's going to care about either "format"
when you download what you want online. it'll be cheaper and easier for everyone

by Kwyjibo (Unregistered) - 2006-08-04

» Blue-Ray

Blu-Ray will lose. Space will never be the deciding factor for a new medium (especially since the trend is moving AWAY from optical storage sollutions). Nor will the fact that the PS3 has it be the deciding factor; early adopters for HD-movie content will want the very best quality for their machine, and the PS3 will be manufactured to save money however it can (by cutting corners in the quality department). Support is not a factor either here; look at the support UMD had when released, and where are they now?
Every single format Sony introduced in the last decade or so has FAILED. Why? Because they overcomplicate things. The winning format is always the least complicated one, not the most advanced; MP3-players where around for years, but it was the easy-to-use iPod that won the format war. Same for CDR over MD, VHS over Beta, Memstick over UMD-movie and the list goes on.

by Bob (Unregistered) - 2006-08-04

» Bob's opinion(s)

I dissagree with you about the optical storgage things. When computers are updated, and the BD-ROM Drive or BD-RW, a double dsided one will be able to store more than an average MP3 player.
And also, lets face it, when buying a film, you always look at the back to see what extra features it has. Little kids will buy for more features, asking for BR disc's aswell.
And how people cant say that the PS3 wont have any impact, is beyond me. I think, that because the PS3 BR player is being offered at such a low price (search for the prices xbox fanboys, PS3 is alot less expensive), it will have a decicind factor.
Price will also have an impact, if one is miles cheaper than another one, then the non technical minded people, who think the DVD is still good, will go for the cheaper.
Thinking of DVD still, these next gen formats will not catch on for a long time. Normal people are still going to buy DVD's for along time, because there is no need to buy a new player, discs, TV etc. When the DVDis perfect (for some people).

Thats what i think, fell free to comment on this

Bob

by SteveTao - 2006-08-04

» Blu-Ray is the future

There's not much support for HD-DVD.
And with the PS3, the industry rather side with Blu-Ray than with HD-DVD because there's no console that supports HD-DVD. Sony knows that the PS3 will be the trojan horse that will put Blu-Ray into millions of home. And the industry knows this too. So why would they risk going with HD-DVD (there's only a few people that will have HD-DVD players) when they can just go with Blu-Ray as millions of people will have a Blu-Ray player as part of the PS3?

This is the reason HD-DVD will fail and Blu-Ray will triumph.

by kura (Unregistered) - 2006-08-04

» Don't listen to others and read my words

First of all, the movie they used at the test is from HD biased Warner Bros.

Second, Blu-Ray has all the capabilities as HD, only with with bigger capacity.

From what I've read, Blu-Ray has all the capabilities but just not allowed by Sony at the moment or something.

But I'm sure it will change once the studios have their own machines.

HD-DVD's Dolby Digital + is also supported by Blu-Ray (Both as an option)
doesn't this just scream at you about the bias?

This doesn't prove either one's superiority over the other format. It just shows how *****ed up Warner Bros is.

and Kwyjibo, stop ranting. CD and DVD was developed also by Sony.

CDR never competed with MD. MD was very popular in Japan (Just like the iPod is right now).

Beta is still being used by the TV stations because of its high quality, and that's AROUND the globe.

Your perspective isn't worth a damn...

Oh, by the way, MPEG2 takes up larger storage but has less loss rate than VC1 or something... VC1 was around 5% worse, and in HD, I guess it might be huge. I read it somewhere but I couldn't find it anymore.
That's why they're trying to use MPEG2 and fully use up its advantage, which is storage capacity.

Either way, even if BR fails, the games will still have BR storages, so it's a Win Win situation for the gamers.

by DarkLegacy - 2006-08-04

» heh

As much as I would want HD DVD to be the format of choice, Blu Ray has better studio support. Which in the long run should give it the edge. In my opinion however, Blu Ray sucks big time as I am exposed to the POS on a daily basis. I do part time work at a local best buy as there computer repair specialist. It is indeed very slow when it comes to loading & launching a movie. The picture quality is not all that surperb, especially when compared to a movie playing in 720p. The Best Buy display model that we have has known issues of chopping up once in awhile in a movie. So far, the movies we've played in it are Triple X, Hitch, The Fifth Element & Underworld Evolution. The picture quality is "OK" at the most, but nothing worth dropping $1000+ on a player for. Only a handful of players have sold from our present location. Toshibias HD-DVD player flew off the shelf the first day we got it. Even though from my knowledge, we only had a stock of 200. We also have no stock of HD-DVD movies since they sold very quickly as well :). Still awaiting a restock. Don't know how its fairing anywhere else, but Blu Ray is doing real bad in NYC.

by Advertising -

by Nameless (Unregistered) - 2006-08-04

» Well...

I think it's too early. And by that, I mean there aren't enough incentives to the unknowledgeable consumer.

In video storage media, the VHS was introduced in 1976, and it remained the US standard until 1996, when DVD was introduced. The largest benefits are obvious, with better picture quality, menus, larger storage, and the physical benefit of size; DVDs "stack" and require less space to physically store. Needless to say, people were willing to drop VHS in favor of the virtually superior DVDs.

However, neither Blu-Ray nor HD-DVD boast as big a leap as was from VHS to DVD. Apart from that, the benefits aren't as obvious either. Uninformed consumers don't want to hear technical drivel from a BestBuy employee about "the newest media disc" because they don't care.

What they DO care about is if they can view their movie with pleasure.

People buy the new Video iPod, yet its video size is terrible. Now, don't get me wrong, iPod video won't replace DVDs, but I exemplify this to express a point:

People are interested in gimmicks because they suprise us the most. Nobody would have suspected that an iPod would display video, and yet now it does, and people want it.

Neither Blu-Ray nor HD-DVD have enough benefits over the current DVD that make themselves obviously better than DVD. Sure video is crisper, and sure they have more size. But are such features APPARENT to consumers? And if they are, is it worth the PRICE?

But who knows. If Sony has bought out enough companies to persuade them into revolutionizing the market into Blu-Ray-only movie releases, then the consumer might have no other choice but to switch. However, I doubt it, because that means buying out A LOT of companies, and that requires A LOT of money, even for Sony. And let's not forget, Betamax was Sony's combatant to VHS, and VHS ultimately won in the end.

by Nameless (Unregistered) - 2006-08-04

» Sry

Or maybe society in this day and age has become so technically savvy that even slight innovations of existing technology sell well. Maybe the technically savvy "niche" market has grown enough that their purchases may allow even small-time innovations to become "mainstream".

Who knows.

by Kwyjibo (Unregistered) - 2006-08-04

» @Kura

CD where developed by a consortium of Sony and Philips, not just Sony.

DVD's main developer was Toshiba, not Sony.

You, in all your infinite wisdom are mixing up Betamax (Sony's failed format) and BetaCam (still the main standard for broadcast, with later iterations called Beta SP, DigiBeta and Beta SX), BetaCam was developed from BetaMax, but has no consumer application whatsoever. So they are two completely uncomparable standards from a consumer point of view.

Support for one format or the other can change overnight if one format turns out to be more interesting for a particular studio. Sony had plenty of support for their BetaMax on release, and how many moviestudios have continued that support?

I am NOT ranting, just giving my opinion. Deal with that. My perspective is worth as much as yours (maybe even more since you seem misinformed on several key issues).

by daz (Unregistered) - 2006-08-04

» hmmm

people can argue all day and night about which one is better or not. Lets face it, these are relatively new formats, there not going to be perfect straight away, plus there not just competing against each other, there competing against DVd, which in my opinion will still be the main disc format for many many years.
The only key difference between hd-dvd and blu-ray is that Blu-ray is in PS3. People ignore that if you want, but its a big difference. There'll be at least 2million people come november with blu-ray in there homes. I will be one of them, and ill be buying one or two movies to see what all the fuss is about.
Nobody can argue that the BD format will be in greater use come later this year, simply because theres more blu-ray players around than HD-DVD.
Anyway, DVD wont be replaced by either, the format is far too big at the moment to be replaced

by NEO FOLLOWER2 (Unregistered) - 2006-08-04

» this isnt true...

currently blu ray discs are only 25 gigs(single layer)
50gigs dual layer blu rays havent came out yet

while hd dvds are in both 15gigssingle layer and 30gigsdual layer depending which movie.

by M$ (Unregistered) - 2006-08-04

» That's why

Thats why Microsoft decided to take the HD-DVD, cause it will win the fight and Sony, with his blue-ray, will loose it !! :) (And Sony already did lose that kind of fight in the past)

by DerDude (Unregistered) - 2006-08-04

» I blow your bubble

"Thats why Microsoft decided to take the HD-DVD"

you failed to mention: "AS AN ADDON"

M$ is not fully supporting it, hence why the kiddybox1.5 has still DVD and also thats why never ever a kiddybox game comes in HD-DVD.

Capiche?

by M$ (Unregistered) - 2006-08-04

» » I blow your bubble

Hmm, nop ! Not at all ! ;) So, i don't "Capiche" ! ;)
Kiddybox 1.5 don't need more than a DVD to play Kiddybox 1.5 games and will be able to play the same games Dumpstation 3 has, but maybe with 2 disc instead of one (This will happen with BIG BIG GAMES by the way)

And you failed to say that Sony will lose ! :P

Capiche ! :)

by smokeelaa - 2006-08-04

» The point should not be...

when Sony implements better codecs, Blu-Ray will win. The point should be why hasn't Sony, the studios, etc. implemented better audio/video codecs from the get go. If the success of this format is so important to Sony, they should not leave anything to chance.

And actually, I am less apt to blame the studios, as every HD-DVD release thus far has been using the VC-1 codec and every Blu-Ray has been using MPEG-2. Why would the studios choose to use codecs that are of lesser quality for their showcase of the latest and greatest technology.

Every review I have read up to now has given HD-DVD the edge, especially on the HD forums whose members are alot of those early adopters that Sony needs for initial success.

Sony and/or the Blu-Ray consortium members who make decisions about which codecs to use need to get their s**t together and fast.

by Target Render - 2006-08-04

» Samsung BD-P1000 IS NOT A REFERENCE PLAYER!

All reviews using this player is INVALID. The player has an error in the firmware that softens the image.

The same Blu-ray movies will look much better in PS3.

Don't forget that. Here is my source:

"Reports indicate that playback of BD titles in a modified player (with the noise reduction turned off) looked much closer to the master video tape and far better than an unmodified player, such as those currently available on the market."

http://cdrinfo.com/Sections/News/Details.aspx?NewsId=17578

by Advertising -

by kura (Unregistered) - 2006-08-04

» :$

nocomment

by Shep (Unregistered) - 2006-08-04

» HD

HD DVD plays all your old DVD's and is cheaper. nuff said

by kura (Unregistered) - 2006-08-04

» :$ oops....pressed enter as a typo

Kwyjibo, if you knew about Betamax and BetaCam that much, why were you mentioning MD!

as a sad former MD lover, that set me off!

However, more research leads me to believe that you are right in your rebuttal.

Sony DITCHED its and philips' version of DVD for Toshiba's

Sony also developed the CD in CONSORTIUM with philips'

but I thought you meant that every format that sony backs is doomed.

Otherwise, I wouldn't have said such enraging things:P

<< First Page < Previous Page 1 Next > Last Page >>

Contact

Send us news tips
Contact us
Advertise
QJ.NET Forums

QJ.NET Blog Network
MyQJ	Feed / PDA
MyQJ	RSS / PDA
Blog of Blogs	Feed / PDA
QJ.NET	RSS / PDA
Gaming Consoles	Feed / PDA
Nintendo DS	RSS / PDA
PlayStation 3	RSS / PDA
PSP Updates	RSS / PDA
Wii	RSS / PDA
Xbox 360	RSS / PDA
PC Gaming	Feed / PDA
Age of Conan	RSS / PDA
Games for Windows	RSS / PDA
MMORPG	RSS / PDA
Tabula Rasa	RSS / PDA
World of Warcraft	RSS / PDA
Science	Feed / PDA
Science	RSS / PDA
Technology	Feed / PDA
Apple	RSS / PDA
Gadgets	RSS / PDA
iPhone	RSS / PDA
Mobile	RSS / PDA
Photography	RSS / PDA
Tech	RSS / PDA