MS shows off 360 external HD DVD drive

Nevermind. I really don't understand what you were trying to say anyways.

Phantom rules!!!

cause there is no reason teh studios cannot provide identical versions on both formats

True, and I'm surprised any studios are even bothering to do separate encodings for HD-DVD and BluRay today, instead of just generating a 25GB MPEG movie that they can put on both media formats (and still look 2-5 times as good as DVD).

How can anyone say the PS3 is big after seeing these 2 giant things together.

"The PS3 is big". That's how. It's bigger than an Xbox. It's bigger than a Mac Mini. It's bigger than a pair of Wii's. It's bigger than a gaggle of GB Micro's.

Miniboss, if I want an HD-DVD layer, I dont want to be forced to hook up a cheap and scaled down version, through my 360, just so that I can ONLY watch movies on it (and not be able to play superior games on it). If I want to watch movies, ill buy a standalone, and connect it straight to my TV.

#48

My $1100 laptop did that stream fine, I don't know what you're talking about.

You people are trying to make it sound like Microshaft didn't put this drive in the Xbox 360 because they care about you so much and want you to have the option to opt out. We all know the real reason is they rushed the console out because they wanted to be first to market. They also thought...hell let's charge the idiots for the console and then sell them an external device to play the new format. That way we get paid TWICE! They didn't do it for you. They did it for Microshaft. Please don't be so blind and accept that you were owned!

fagaymer you probably don't know how retarded you look when you spout that fanboy crap... so here is your official "you look retarded" notification

Okay, I haven't read all of the posts here, but this is what I have to say (keep in mind I do not plan to own either an Xbox 360 or a PS3, but instead I'll be busy playing with my Wii and PC):

1. To those saying the 360 with the add-on HD DVD drive will look ugly compared to the all-in-one package of the PS3: WTF? The 360 is a decidedly sleeker machine than the fat PS3, and because the HD DVD drive is an option on the 360, it is a cheaper machine than the PS3. With the HD DVD drive, it should be about the same price as the PS3, which makes sense, because they are about the same machine.

2. HD DVD > Blu-Ray. I had a revelation a while back in which I realized all the reasons why Blu-Ray will fail. I won't go into those reasons right here, and this wasn't one of my reasons, but think about it: When has Sony EVER released a successful format for ANYTHING? Why would that change now?

3. Oh, that's about it. Choices = good for consumer. Price = good for consumer. Quality = good for consumer. HD DVD wins and so does Microsoft with this strategy compared to Sony with their PS3 strategy (or lack thereof).

I think an optional add-on drive is smart.

Consumers are in debt up to their eyeballs! Most adults will be buying these systems on credit cards and paying it off by monthly payments. Kids and teenagers will be saving up for their system, and every dollar is longer they have to work and save before they can buy their system.

Microsoft's approach allows people to buy the basic game machine, wait until they pay that off or save up more money, and then buy the add-on. Even if the total cost is more than the PS3, it's in two easier-to-digest chunks.

Microsoft got caught with their pants down after bragging about the HD Era.
HD Era, HD Era, HD Era...huh, Sir, we don't have a HD drive in it...Oh, OK, let's release an add-on...
Xbox 360 + add-on will be more expensive than PS3. Xbox 360 + add-on won't work as well as a built-in drive. Xbox 360 + add-on will take more space than Xbox 360. Xbox 360 + add-on will make more noise than Xbox 360 and much more noise than PS3. It's already difficult to watch movies on the 360.

Yep, great idea.

Unless it's less than $200, it won't sell.

"How can anyone say the PS3 is big after seeing these 2 giant things together. I'd rather have one nice device with all the goodies inside. Besides, the games can't benefit from the MS drive. It's only for playing movies. Sony's will actually make the games better because programmers can take advantage of the space...It's funny how these fanboys try and spin a negative into a positive. Too bad for you that most people aren't stupid enough to fall for that bs.

Posted at 5:21PM on Aug 8th 2006 by fagayme"

The PS3 will prob have a even bigger power supply outside of it like they said. The thing is going to have so many vents by the time its out. ANd dont you think as yourself as a fanboy your comments makes you seem like one too. The drive could eventually be used for games you dont know. Microsoft said not right now they wont be used for games, in the future maybe. We will have to see. They could eventually once the format is established.

The 360 will still be cheaper or even the same price as the ps3 which prob have a crappy Blu ray player in it. Just to keep down the production costs. Sony isnt the best just cause they cost more. Look at their tvs. They dont have the best tvs. In my opion Hitachi does and they get their stuff form Hitachi most companies do.

"58. Microsoft got caught with their pants down after bragging about the HD Era.
HD Era, HD Era, HD Era...huh, Sir, we don't have a HD drive in it...Oh, OK, let's release an add-on...
Xbox 360 + add-on will be more expensive than PS3. Xbox 360 + add-on won't work as well as a built-in drive. Xbox 360 + add-on will take more space than Xbox 360. Xbox 360 + add-on will make more noise than Xbox 360 and much more noise than PS3. It's already difficult to watch movies on the 360.

Yep, great idea.

Unless it's less than $200, it won't sell."

So when MS says that a 360 + HD DVD drive is going to be less than a PS3... you think they are saying "it will be more expensive"?

Won't "work as well"? Just what criteria are you using?

Produce more noise? You have heard a PS3? The DVD drive in the 360 is the main source of the noise... so if you are watching a HD-DVD movie... there will be no ADDED noise.

Difficult to watch movies on the 360? I'm sorry what? You will have to explain that one to my wife because she can barely work the microwave and she can still watch movies on our 360.

Or maybe you're just as stupid IRL as you sound on Joystiq.

Could we get a few more people saying "Microsoft has screwed this up so badly" or "It's a friggin JOKE how bad MS has screwed this up"?

Or if you prefer the more concice "LOL@HD-DVD" that would be equally awesome (sarcasm)

Anyways, my 2 cents: It looks like a add on. Nothing more. To me it makes sense to make a new media drive optional because who knows who'll win the next gen format wars. I'd rather save the 100 bucks then be stuck with the format that will be the Betamax of the 21st century- whether it be Blu Ray or HD.

KawF

Again you seem to be missing the point. I never said that MPEG2 was inferior to VC-1 or newer compression algorithms with regard to attainable picture quality. However, to get the same quality from MPEG2 will require greater amounts of storage. Again the problem is not necessarilly MPEG2 its just that it is likely that due to MPEG2s dated compression the single layer Blu-ray disks don't have enough capacity to store an HD film at the same quality level as the current dual layered HD-DVD disks do using VC-1. If Sony were smart, they would use VC-1 or H.264 so that they could maximize their available space. But it seems that they are much more interested in supporting their own format (MPEG2 and before you think it, I know MPEG2 is not "theirs" but they do hold many many MPEG2 specific patents.

As for the other points you made, no one contested those to begin with. We all know that both Blu-ray and HD-DVD support the same encoding formats. And "yes" we all know that greater compression and higher bit-rates require more processing power but what does that have to do with anything? Currently the price of a Blu-ray player is twice that of an HD-DVD player yet the HD-DVD player has higher quality. Who cares what is going on inside the HD-DVD box with regard to processing. That cost is obviously not being passed onto the consumer when compared to Blu-ray cost.

-jasonb

It will be funny if neither format wins.
Much like super audio cd vs. dvd audio, People will just reach a certain point and become indifferent.

I prefer to keep things seperate.

The laptop for work/email (Nothing agaisnt HTPC's, but we've got Sat-TV).

The 360 for games.

And a dedicated DVD player with HDMI/DVI (currently Oppo 971) for movies.

Although I find the conponent HD fine off the 360 for games (my Samsung DLP has a great 'game mode') I'll probably wait for the holiday price drop on a dedicated HD-DVD player.

All these fools that say that the 360 and hd-dvd drive are too big and won't fit in their house, blah blah blah. Get a freaking decent job and by a good sized home and get out of that box you are living in. Where do you all live? Japan?

I like the fact that MS isn't forcing it down our throats. They give us options. I have 2 TVs and 2 360's. One TV is HD and the other just standard. I plan to buy one HD-DVD drive for my HDTV and I'm not forced to waste more for the other because I have that choice. Something Sony fanboys can't understand since they love things being shoved down their throats.

@61

For stupidity, you seem hard to beat.

First, Microsoft said the add-on would be "one of the least expensive HD-DVD player in the market".
(Considering there is only 1 HD-DVD drive in the market right now, it could cost $2,000 and still be one of the 2 cheapest. But, let's forget that...)
Second, Microsoft didn't say the Xbox 360 + HD-DVD add-on combo would be "one of the least expensive HD-DVD player in the market".
You really need to learn to read. Listening would be a good start, if your 5-minute attention span permits it.

Then, Xbox 360 is terribly noisy to be used as a DVD player.

HD video decoding is compute intensive. Hence, those monstrous fans you have in the 360 will have to run. To that, you can add the noise of the external drive, which will have to spin.
So, as a HD-DVD player, Xbox 360 is likely to be noisy.
I can tell you are not a videophile, though.

The 360 isnt loud at all. If you have your sound a a decent volume and you are up and close. You wont hear it. I never hear mine and I have the intercooler. You people gotta turn up your sound and stop hiding that your playing. Are you going to be watching your movie from 1 foot away i dotn think so.

HD-DVD just to play movies? Nice to have a choice but I'll pass. If we're talking games; then HELLZ YEAH!
Microsoft is giving everyone the option; once again beating Sony by miles by releasing it sooner than later.
I hope they're releasing it soon!

The Xbox 360 is already the absolute total gaming experience; XBox Live Arcade is only a small feature and another choice at that (you don't have to have xbox live arcade) and it's added a whole new dimension to the 360 gaming experience. Microsoft set the standard for online gaming (consoles) and has been miles ahead of everyone. I still have my nintendo gamecube ethernet adapter (will that work on the wii?)

Facts are facts and Microsoft coming into the marketplace changed what we all expect from console manufacturers. Sony is following Microsofts Online blueprint.

It's nice that Sony has a Blu Ray player that no one can do anything about.......oh wait, there is something they can do; pay 500 or 600 dollars.

Has anyone noticed fight night 3 for the ps3 on ebgames.com? Priced @ 59.99; guess what; it's not in the Blu Ray format! But you still have to pay for that Blu Ray gigantic PS3 in order to play the game. I wonder why it's priced @ 59.99? If it's not a Blu Ray disc; why even produce the title? You can just buy the PS2 version and pay the cheaper price to play it.

I'll be nice and just say Thank You to Microsoft for giving us a complete next generation gaming experience one year ahead of time and also adding new dimensions to the whole 360 experience with Xbox Live Arcade and now with the HD-DVD add on.

Microsoft delivered the xbox 360 to the consumer and asked us to take it out of their hands and make it ours; They are delivering on that promise and are giving the xbox 360 community exactly what they asked for; an HD-DVD add on as a choice and down the line an xbox 360 with the HD-DVD built in. Lik Sang leaked details about an HDMI cable.........lol, the surprises keep coming.

C'mon guys; this is a good thing; it's an add on peripheral, just like our Hard drives and external burners. Just think about it; when the price of external Blu Ray drives drops; Microsoft just might piss all of you off again and offer yet another choice for an external peripheral.....................LMAO

I have to agree with #64 on this one. I see a lot of similarities between this format war and the SACD DVD-A fight. Both the new video and audio formats required relatively expensive equipment. Both offered a smaller performance increase over the previous format than the jump to DVD and CD. Neither offered a huge improvement in usability such as DVD and CD not requiring rewinding. Both also required additional equipment that was not in every home. HD-DVD BD require HDTV's DVD-A and SACD required 5.1 input equipped tuners.

Finally, both will face direct competition from digital downloads in general and Apple in particular. iTunes came out of no where to be the new digital music standard with the ease of downloading your music and storing without physical media that can be damaged. Apple also won with a product that provided inferior performance (audio quality) to the two new audio formats. Audiophiles bought the new formats but Joe Consumer downloaded iTunes and got an iPod.

Fast forward to today. Apple is prepping their video service and other video downloads services are offering burn to DVD functionality. Can Apple pull the double down and beat out HD-DVD and BD with digital downloads, with inferior quality, and a true video iPod with some chic apple design and ease of use. It won't surprise me on bit.

Wow.. everyone is so focused on mighdef movies, you'd think this was a videophile convention. I thought we were on a game site here.

My big question: can the add-on play OTHER formats better as well? What happens if you put a game in the drive?

It would sell like mad if the added player was also a 16x DVD drive that could load games. You get an added 4x speed on load times, I think that alone would help coax it into more homes and make it worth it.

Davethe1... how are you dissing the PS3 over the price of fight night at 59.99? its the exact same price as the xbox 360 version and thats a DVD as well.

What you SHOULD be asking is... why is microsoft making us pay a 10 dollar premium on an old format if Sony can do the same on a new and supposedly more expensive format? I would applaud Sony in that case for not charging 70+. although if they did they'd be shooting themselves in the foot.

and as for the HDMI cable thing.. the system doesn't have an HDMI output so what would be the point? how would you use it, i thought the system was incappable of taking advantage of that.

and as for the Harddrive.. yes its a periphrial but you do technically kind of need it if you want to store ANYTHING. AS those memory cards fill up quick and by the time you bought 2... you'd of been better off with the Harddrive. (I still dont get that decision...but whatever)

JJ; It was no dis; it's simply a fact that the PS3 is hyping blu ray but games like fight night 3 are not blu ray format titles. I got that str8 from a source. It's a DVD title not Blu Ray. Yes it's the same price as the xbox 360 game which I've been playing for quite some time now and enjoying every minute of it. Fantastic game; incredible graphics all on a DVD. What's that? An HD-
DVD optional add-on? For movies? Hmmmm......until they make HD-DVD games; I won't be adding it on just yet. But if I do decide; it's nice to know I have that choice and that my Xbox 360 is expandable just like my pc is!

Microsoft didnt tell the devs to charge that much the devs made that change them selves. Because they had to make up for development costs. Microsoft is still charging 50 for their studio games. SO no MIcrosoft isnt charging anything extra.

LOL The 360 and HD DVD player too big?
The PS3 weighs 11 Pounds!

Just to add a comment regarding the following statement made earlier "It's already difficult to watch movies on the 360."

I disagree. You can watch movies on the 360 either by playing DVDs or using the media center functions of the 360, coupled with a media center PC. I record all the time on my media center PC and stream it to the 360. Works like a charm. There's nothing difficult about it.

As far as the comment, "Xbox 360 + add-on will make more noise than Xbox 360 and much more noise than PS3."

Unless you already have the 360 HD DVD drive and/or a PS3, I don't know how you can make that statement. Neither of these items are shipping. You don't know how much noise, if any these items will make.

Lastly, the statement "First, Microsoft said the add-on would be "one of the least expensive HD-DVD player in the market". (Considering there is only 1 HD-DVD drive in the market right now, it could cost $2,000 and still be one of the 2 cheapest. But, let's forget that...)"

There's three stand alone HD DVD players available in market right now, two from Toshiba, and one from RCA. The entry level Toshiba and RCA model are both $499, while the high end Toshiba model is $799. Anything above $800 would make it the most expensive HD DVD player on the market.

Should have been inside of the 360, not tacked on next to it.

And some of you guys who think MS is 'giving you a choice' or say 'the 360 would have been expensive if they had forced that on us' are likely the same people who LOVE to point out that MS has such deep pockets that they can afford to take a $4 BILLION loss on the original Xbox for the sake of 'future marketshare.'

MS can do no wrong in your eyes!

To me, it seems MS put the 360 out early to get a jump on Sony, yet they didn't have the balls or confidence to commit to a format MS said they were behind - in their own flagship hardware. I'm sure I join many others when I speculate this HD-DVD drive will be inside the 360 within 18 months. Unless, of course, the HD-DVD format bricks...

I love my 360, but this add-on thing is just WACK.

I consider myself to be an 'entry level' audio/videophile. I do my homework before I buy and I am willing to spend money on quality componentry. I am at a point in life where a $600 expenditure is not unreasonable to me. I spent somewhere between $14k-$15k on my home theatre hardware and for you hardcore audio/video guys, you know that is indeed entry level. But, when choosing hardware, for example, I couldn't tell the difference between the $1200 and $2000+ subwoofers at listening levels short of being painful and unpleasant but I could tell the difference between the $1200 and $1000 (and below) subs so I bought the $1200 model. I apply the same type of reasoning for all hardware I buy.

Okay, now you guys understand where I am coming from, on to my actual points regarding 360 vs ps3. As pure gaming consoles each has some strengths and weaknesses compared to each other in harware and services but none of them are glaring. As for the games, 80% of the upcoming games are crossplatform and the exclusives all have similar flavoured counterparts ie halo/killzone, forza/gt etc, etc. Some will be stronger, some will be weaker but there will be quality exclusives on both sides to quench whatever market niche you are into.

My point is that if you remove any bias toward an individual company or particular franchise then, as pure gaming machines, it's a wash. Buy the cheaper one. If you have a bias toward one company and/or a particular franchise then why are you even here debating? Debating this won't change your mind or your purchase and your arguments are predisposed toward a certain outcome adding little value to this forum. It's pointless. If you are like me and enjoy franchises on both platforms then buy the 360 now and wait to buy the ps3 later when there has been a price drop and early franchises have dropped in price also and save yourself a whack of money without losing anything.

However, there is one last major decision criteria left for many people, high definition movies. In this one area I believe Microsoft by far has the best approach given the set of present conditions.

1. HD-DVD or Blu-Ray, no one knows which will emerge as the standard. Anyone who claims that they know is an imbecile, plain and simple. Right now, the ps3 is best compared to one of those TV's with a vcr built in. Even if you only want the TV, you still pay for the vcr and once you buy it, you're stuck with it. And in this case it's even worse, if the BDROM in the ps3 fails then it won't function as a console or movie player. Atleast if the vcr fails, you still have a TV. And even worse than that is the risk that your built in vcr is a beta and you've just wasted a bunch of money (ie HD-DVD becomes the standard, Blu-ray fails). The 360 gives you choice, you can choose to pair it up with a cheap vcr or instead use the money for a better quality vcr and you have the choice of waiting to make sure you buy the 'VHS' standard vcr and don't waste your money on the 'beta' one.

2. A 'jack-of-all-trades' console will -never- be able to compete with the watching experience and features given by a stand-alone player. The $200 difference in price can be used to purchase a stand-alone player in the future when it is more certain which format will be the standard. If you insist on commiting to a format now, then keep in mind that you can purchase a 360 AND a stand-alone HD-DVD player for less than the cost of a stand-alone Blu-Ray player.

3. High definition media is $30-$40 right now often for movies that you can find for eight bucks or less on DVD. It's hard to justify either format right now, all the more reason not to commit to (by paying for) one format or the other.

Why do people think just because an HD DVD add-on will exist, that anyone has to buy it? Likewise because the PS3 has Blu-Ray it's worth the extra cost?

I'm not interested in playing movies on my game machine, nor am I'm interested in paying a premium for a feature I don't want nor will I use. I don't have an HD TV.

I'm a gamer. I like to play games. I don't have unlimited funds.

This is why I appreciate that Microsoft gives you choices. And that is why I appreciate Nintendo not charging you an arm or leg for their consoles and handhelds.

I'd buy the add on in a second, Its getting boring listening to the Blu-Ray fanboys going on about how Blu-Ray might at a later date be better than HD DVD, It wont matter for the 100+ releases that are already here or due. They are ALL encoded in MPEG2 on 25Gb Discs, Whilst all HD DVD's are 30Gb with a more efficient encoding system (at least x1.5).

They won't ever get away with relaunching the current Blu-Ray titles at a later date with better encoding, so if you buy Blu-Ray you are stuck with a considerable amount of poor quality movies in your library. The quicker they release the best movies, the worse it becomes for Blu-Ray, as these will inevitably be in MPEG2 on 25Gb discs if they come out any time soon.

Sony haven't even managed to get a consumer Blu-Ray device out of the door yet, having pulled their own player when the Samsung BR player got slated so they could try and compete with the better Toshiba player at half the cost. Do people really think the PS3 will be a more accomplished player than a standalone $1,000 unit? I know the PS2 wasn't a better DVD player than DVD players costing twice what it cost at launch.

HDMI or component, doesnt really matter, in fact some displays look better fed with a component signal rather than a digital one.

I'll be bitterly dissapointed if the poorer quality format (Blu-Ray) wins out in the end, from what I've seen its only marginally better picture quality than normal DVD's, HD DVD blows it away.

@Jason B

"If Sony were smart, they would use VC-1 or H.264 so that they could maximize their available space. But it seems that they are much more interested in supporting their own format (MPEG2 and before you think it, I know MPEG2 is not "theirs" but they do hold many many MPEG2 specific patents." -Jason B

1) How do you know at all that Sony decided: "you have to use MPEG2, or else!". Please show me a link to one single reputable source that makes this claim. As I said in my second or third post, please show me that type of evidence. Who "oredered" MPEG2 to be used. Speculation is NOT proof.

2) Maximize the available space? Sure. But first, as I again said in my second or third post, what bitrate are the HDDVD's encoded at? You can't simple raise the bitrate and expect it not to be a problem.

3) Many companies own patents pertaining to MPEG. One company owns the patents for VC1. And so on. Does it matter? Do you think that cost was a factor? Again, show me some proof of this please. And since Sony does own "own" MPEG2, how would that be ANY different from "them" using h264 or VC1? You are contradicting yourself.


"As for the other points you made, no one contested those to begin with. We all know that both Blu-ray and HD-DVD support the same encoding formats." -Jason B

Actually, I see that all the time, people here even that believe that this [MPEG2 vs VC1] is "proof" that somehow BluRay is an inferior format. The studios could have chosen to use MPEG2 on both video-disc-formats for this initial batch. That is quite honestly fully up to them. Of course they are probably more than welcome to discuss it with both consortiums first, but it is still up to them as they have that freedom based on both standards. (And yes, both BluRay and HD-DVD are backed by consortiums, who's biggest proponents and spokes-"persons" might be Sony and Toshiba, but tey are certainly by no means singlehandedly in control. Stop dreaming about that you conspiracy theorist fanboys [directed at you all]).


"Currently the price of a Blu-ray player is twice that of an HD-DVD player yet the HD-DVD player has higher quality." - Jason B

As you might've known, if you read up some on the matter, the only BluRay [standalone]-player available today supports fully the "HD" standard. As in full playback of video up to and including 1080p output. The Toshiba HD-DVD player does not. So sure, with the current batch of discs, and the types of TV's used in the tests, and the current BluRay-player on market, the HD-DVD player from toshiba at 720p is better. It's like saying BetaMax should have won because it had the picture quality advantage in the fist gen of tapes, no matter that it didn't have enough support or capacity to store video at that quality for full-length movies.

Please come back to me again when it [HD-DVD-players] actually can do 1080p at least. Anything less on my screen I'm planning on buying that has 2560x1600 pixels (optimum resolution) would just look like shite. (Available now from Apple and Dell at 30" and $1999).


Again, I would very much like to know if anyone has any credible articles or proof of why MPEG2 was chosen for the initial batch of BluRay movie discs and at what bitrate the MPEG2 movies are encoded at and at what bitrate the VC1 encoded HD-DVD's are encoded at. Just because they could do a 4.3MB/s (or 34Mbps) VC1 stream does not mean that they could neccessarily decode the same. Again, that type of codec requires shiploads of processing power, and that is not cheap as some might think. Especially not at this point in time.

Again, when both BluRay and HD-DVD internal or external PC-players are available, and can be played back with near identical or identical software, then we can start bickering with FACTS on which format is indeed better.

The thing is then, since both formats are identical in every aspect except for disc space... well... let's just wait until then.

Sorry for the double post, but an error got in in my last posts first paragraph, section 3, it sohuld read as follows: "And since Sony does [not] own "own" MPEG2".

And before anyone brings up price as an aspect:
1) Comparing a low-end HD-DVD-player to the price of a higher-end BluRay player is not a good comparison. Had the Toshiba HD-DVD-player had 1080p output, then it would've been comparable.

2) Have you actually compared the price of blank BluRay media to blank HD-DVD media? The ones I've seen, from respectable companies, no noname shite, come up at BluRay media being CHEAPER per GB than HDDVD.

Have you compared the cost of the BluRay movies? It's the exact same figure for both BluRay and HD-DVD.

Have you compared the price of games on BluRay to even DVD? I know at least that EVERY store in sweden that is offering PS3 pre-orders have the price [for games on BluRay] set to the exact same ammount as the price for Xbox 360 games on DVD. I seriously doubt that they would just pull that out of their arses.

If you find that some local store or online store seems to believe that PS3 games will be more expensive and you pre-order from them already... tough luck for you. I know at least I'm not getting ripped of by my retailers.

All this fanboy bickering is literally making me sick to my stomach. I skipped over the majority of these comments because I'm just fed up with it.

Whether or not you prefer Sony or Microsoft has NOTHING TO DO with this! I prefer Sony by a longshot, and I'm not foolish enough to lie to myself about this. If Sony were going the Microsoft route on this issue, and letting the consumers make a choice in the matter, the PS3 could probably be an easy $100 cheaper, if not more.

Sony is so obviously trying to use one of the factors that helped them sell so many PS2s when they first came out: they are providing a cheap alternative to a player for a new media format. The difference here is that for the PlayStation 2, the transition was from VHS to DVD, and entirely separate medium. This time around, it's still DVD, BUT WAIT... the new one will play the same movies in the same way, but it has sharper image quality.

The truth is, high definition has not yet been accepted by the mainstream. At least not enough so that it's an intelligent move to try force an expensive new way of playing high definition movies so zealously. Tech geeks and movie junkies will understand these concepts fully, and will be able to make informed decisions on whether or not it matters to them. The average consumer, however, will simply not be attracted by this feature, whether it be a perk and value-add to the PS3 or not.

Making the drive optional is definately the only way to go at this point. Those who wish to view all of their DVD movies on a 60 inch plasma screen in high definition will purchase the add-on. Those of us who simply wish to purchase an Xbox 360 for its games can do so, and we are not obligated to pay out the nose for a feature we will most likely not utilize.

These facts make me a little sad, becaus I love the PlayStation brand. While I think the PS3 is definately worth the money Sony is asking for what it provides, I know that I won't be purchasing one for at least a couple years. Many will pass it up completely.

It's time to accept that, if Sony does not change its tune on this matter quickly (which I doubt will happen), then the Xbox 360 is the PlayStation 2 of this generation.

Kawf

1080i and 1080p would look identical on that Apple/Dell screen you are talking about, you do realise that all LCD's are Progressive anyhow and therefore you only see a progressive image, even when fed with a 1080i image. Also 1080i and 1080p use exactly the same amount of data, its just that 1080i sends half the data twice as quickly.

Whatever happens the Apple/Dell you are talking about will have to rescale to its native resolution.

The reason the Sony Blu-Ray disks are only in MPEG2 is that currently only MPEG2 authoring software was available for Blu-Ray, Its not the choice of the film companies - of course they would rather do one lot of authoring, rather than the two they currently have to do.

currently HD DVD at 1080i looks FAR better than Blu-Ray at 1080P, end of story.

1080i transfers half the picture. correct. therefore it would require image processing (deinterlacing) on the other end to stitch it together into a full picture. As far as I know these screens (computer screens) do not have that. I would then need to feed the image through some other device in order to get it working correctly. Perhaps I am wrong about this. But as far as I know, I am not.

Also, with interlacing, do you not get potential problems such as worse image quality due to having to digitally combine the fields? At least the "HD quality" interlaced movies I've seen in WMV9 are really bad. Interlacing and distorted picture all over the place.

Or are these images just transfered as one full 1080p but split in two so that it takes "longer" for one frame to "travel across the wire" and is then just combined, one line from part 1 and one line from part 2 and over and over again?

The "problem" with Blu-Ray isn't the foramt its the Samsung player. Its rushed and buggy (Some units even have a defective IC inside that needs a flash update to correct MAJOR picture quality issues).

A reason why many players have been delayed is because Blu-Ray isn't quite ready yet. Sony are making sure its perfect (They say) before releasing their own. I don't understand why Samsung chose to release early other than to try and get in quick, but all they have done is damaged the very important first comparisons.

Don't compare HD-DVD and Blu-Ray just yet, its not really fair. HD-DVD players had problems early on too, but their was nothing to compare to then (Although people were saying there was no difference between DVD and HD-DVD initially, thats improved already).

As for the Xbox 360 HD-DVD addon, it looks horrible and the whole setup is clunky at best. Also, the HD-DVD addon is VIDEO only, no games will use it. PS3 uses Blu-Ray as a high storage GAME medium also, thats a very big advantage. If HD-DVD VIDEO fails, you have one big useless chunk of plastic. If Blu-Ray VIDEO fails at least its still a high storage medium for PS3 games. Plus, Sony are backing Blu-Ray with a passion, they WANT it to succeed. MS don't give a toss about HD-DVD or BD for that matter. The main reason they chose HD-DVD was to make the war even more intense. Thus creating confusion and eventually consumer rejection of BOTH formats. MS want Digital Distro ASAP. They could have chosen Blu-Ray and effectively ended the war, but no, they come up with piss poor excuses as to why HD-DVD is a better choice so that they can get rid. I feel more secure buying into a product I know is been fully supported by the creator.

Even Toshiba want to settle out, they are quaking in their boots, But I think MS are saying no, they want war.

Cont...

Trying to get a post active on this site has been a PAIN IN THE ASS for the last few weeks. What the hell is going on?

I've been trying to post on here for the last 2 hours. copy and pasting my message. I get no email to activate.

Waste of time.

Kawf

ALL digital displays only output progressively, in simple terms I suppose you could say that when displaying a 1080i feed, the display simply, takes the two lots of half size data, and combines them to be a 1080p image. It doesn't take any longer or any excessive processing, its just half the data at twice the speed.

As for the other poster who said its not fair to compare the formats yet, Of course it is - they have been released, 100+ movies are already available on each of the formats. Who's to say that Toshiba's next model may not offer as much more over their past model as the Sony one could over the Samsung player.

Today and for the near future HD DVD wins hands down the Blu-Ray movies already released will always look poor quality.

"Sony isnt the best just cause they cost more. Look at their tvs. They dont have the best tvs. In my opion Hitachi does and they get their stuff form Hitachi most companies do"

Tristan, you are talking out of your backside. I work with monitors everyday, I repair them. Sony CRT's are made by Sony (Trinitron). Many OTHER companies take Sony's CRT's. Its more the IC's inside that are generally taken from other manufacturers (For example Hitachi), but all Sonys CRT TV's mainboards are designed by Sony. And Sony's Trinitron is considered the best in general consumer electronics for CRT.

In the LCD's its a different story. Sony generally Use Samsung panels and thier own controller boards. Its the controller thats very important in LCD panels. Its no good having a cool panel with a cruddy controller. Sonys controller boards are incredibly nice. Addmittedly Sony arent necessarily the best in the LCD market, they are up there with Samsung and Phillips.

In my opinion Samsung make the best LCD TV's but Sony arent too far behind. Sony got into the LCD race very late as they had such a good quality CRT product that they tried to keep going as long as demand was there which left them playing catch up in the LCD market. They have however caught up pretty nicely.

Bit off topic, sorry.

Darth pixel, you seem equally moronic as well.
Toshiba's HD-DVD player costs $500.
The XB360 with one optical drive running and one core presumably running is short of intensive.

I can tell you love insulting people and backing it up with no facts though.

SOny is having porblems with ps3s cause the cell isnt ready yet. They have to rush everything and ruin something that a company has worked years on. The cell isnt made for games. I saw a video awhile back. The cell is great for making pre rendered videos. Todays grpahics card including the ps3s wont be able to do what the cell will let a prerendered vid do. When SOny saw that they thought maybe in a few years they could do that. SO I know they will be using the cell in future ps.
Hitachi is the better company if you ever go into a store and compare and you will see who is better Hitachi even ask the store people they point you towards the Hitachiif you say which is better Sony or Hitachi. When I would ask alomst everyone of them would say Sony means Mony now. Sony is overpriced for what they can do. They are one of the most exspensive tv makers out there and they arent the best. If you compare a Hitachi and a Sony you will see the difference by alot.

OK KawF I am tired of trying to be nice. It is obvious that you just don't get it and therefore I haved deduced that you must be of subpar intelligence. I submit, it is impossible to defeat your ignorance with mere reason , logic, and knowlege. I will pass the torch on to others like Ben Hobbs. But, before I go.

"Or are these images just transfered as one full 1080p but split in two so that it takes "longer" for one frame to "travel across the wire" and is then just combined, one line from part 1 and one line from part 2 and over and over again?"

Bingo! The source is what really makes the diference. In the side by side comparisons the sources are the same (the same mastered movie). That is why it appears that the problem is with the Blu-ray conversion process at this point in time.

Now I may be wrong on this but I believe that a 1080p (Read Blu-Ray) signal only refreshes at appx 30Hz meaning 1080 horizontal lines of image are displayed in one frame every 1/30 of a second. A 1080i (read HD-DVD) signal displays 1/2 a frame (540 horizontal scan lines) every even 1/60 of a second with the second half of the frame (the other 540 lines) being shown every odd 1/60th of a second. The net effect is very similar to 1080 lines every 1/30 of a second just like Blu-ray. True, the output is not progressivly being scanned with HD-DVD but the end result is the same as far as your eyes can see. There is NO DIFFERENCE in the amount of picture quality or detail.

I'm sure you didn't understand any of that but I thought other might.

-jasonb

phipscube (#89): I'm really sorry to drag this off topic again, but you seem like the kind of person who could give me good info on this.

I'm looking for about a 26 inch (nothing bigger will fit in my entertainment center) hi-def TV. I want it to be flat panel, and I want it to be able to switch to full screen mode so that there is no stretching on things that aren't supposed to be in widescreen. Those are really my only requirements. Can you suggest anything?

Thanks.

JasonB

Nearly right, however only CRT's can even show an interlaced image - ALL LCD's, Plasma's, DLP's etc... are progressive only, so even when fed an interlaced image you will only see a progressive one.

Well have a look at all this.
1. Where is the PS3 ? Still in development.
2. MS has beaten Sony to it all
3. A 360 and HD DVD is less then a Ps3
4. The 360 is so much more powerful then the ps3 as they can't got any thing to work and now has less in it...

over all M$ I take my hat off to them has done it's R&D in the games field and has beaten Sony to every thing In the UK a 360 Core with HD DVD is £400 where a PS3 is £540 and games at £70 if you want $ work it out.

Sorry but Sony has lost it and M$ one this one. Better luck next time Sony.