Warner has gone Blu-Ray Exclusive, HD-DVD owners enjoy anal sex. More at 11.

So now that blu-ray's features are more competitive with those offered by hd-dvd, the other clear advantages that the blu-ray format has over hd-dvd, such as greater disc capacity {50 gig for blu-ray, 30 gig for hd-dvd} and greater bandwidth {48 mbit/s blu-ray, 30 mbit/s hd-dvd}, should bring you happily over to their side, right? You bring up a point about the audio standards on the players, but what point is it to have mandatory HD audio support on your player, when your flagship title doesn't feature HD audio. I mean correct me if I'm wrong, but Transformers didn't feature a lossless audio track due to space limitations, right?

It's just that hd-dvd was basically a half step forward from the standard dvd. The look and sound of pretty good, and whatnot.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by JasonTerminator

WUT.

You obviously didn't hear about triple layer HD-DVDs, which do 51gb.

Last I heard, they were having some trouble getting that to actually work in the players that were already on the market.

Quote:

And Transformers is simply because they didn't want to. They had nearly all the special features in HD instead. The DD+ track is excellent.

Transformers is already two disc release. Why not just have the movie, and a lossless audio track on the first disc, while putting all special features on the second disc? Or wait, wasn't the only thing on the first disc, other than the movie, the behind the scenes picture in picture stuff? So they just randomly decided to not have a lossless audio track? The DD+ track might sound excellent, but it is not perfect. The look and sound of perfect, except sometimes when we chose not to, not because of inability to fit it on the smaller disc, but because we totally didn't want to man.

Quote:

And bandwidth? Both formats do full 1080p with lossless sound, and HD-DVD had been doing HDi features much earlier than Blu-Ray got their competition working.

So yeah, what improvements were that again?

I've seen several of my blu-rays go above 40 mbit/s during movies, and many of them consistently pass the 30 mbit/s that hd-dvd maxes out at. The fact is that more data being passed to the screen and audio receiver means greater level of detail {sharper picture}. Are you cool with being able to pass less data to your screen and audio receiver?

And yes, hd-dvd did their HDi stuff before blu-ray did their bd-j stuff. There is no arguing with that. I don't see why it matters, now that both are in place, which one came first though. But hey, now that it is in place for blu-ray, expect to see Batman Begins in a blue case right around the time that The Dark Knight hits theatres. Since that was the only thing keeping them from releasing that on blu-ray to begin with. That would be happening regardless of the Warner announcement.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Hah, this dude is talking about moneyhats after the hd-dvd group ponied up $150 million for Paramount's exclusivity.

And what so called facts are you speaking of? The fact that there was not one single week during 2007 during which hd-dvd outsold blu-ray? Looks like a win for hd-dvd there. Hd-dvd didn't outsell blu-ray during Transformers week, or during Bourne week.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

It's too bad that outputting 1080p is not one of the minimum requirements for an hd-dvd player.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?