Blue Ray on a 1080i TV

[nVJoe]

I know nothing about Blue Ray or HD other than HD-DVD is supposed to be better but it is losing the bidding war.

Any way I have a 1080i TV, would my TV take advantage of a Blue Ray player?

[NaitoSan]

yes both can.

btw, it's Blu-ray. ;) and it's better than hd dvd for few reason. blu-ray has finally caught up and has more studios but only thing is that it's expensive. price will drop soon if you wait or get ps3 which is best deal in the market and upgradable to profile 2.0. but really, even if you have profile 1.0, you can STILL watch blu-ray movies that has 1.1 or 2.0 features, only that you can't access them.

[nVJoe]

yes both can.

btw, it's Blu-ray. ;) and it's better than hd dvd for few reason. blu-ray has finally caught up and has more studios but only thing is that it's expensive. price will drop soon if you wait or get ps3 which is best deal in the market and upgradable to profile 2.0. but really, even if you have profile 1.0, you can STILL watch blu-ray movies that has 1.1 or 2.0 features, only that you can't access them.
Name correction noted. ;)


Thanks for the info. I know that the average person cannot tell the difference between 1080i and 1080p, at least I can't. I just wanted to make sure that my TV will take advantage of the HD.

I really don't care which is better. I have been waiting on a purchase for a time when the market has decided which format it will be going with. Now it looks like it will be blu-ray.

You are saying that the PS3 is upgradeable to the 2.0 profile right?

I will be using component cables BTW.

[NaitoSan]

it'll work fine with component cables. and yes, ps3 is upgradable to profile 2.0. right now it's 1.1 so upcoming firmware, it'll update ps3 to 2.0 when movies that needs it is released.

easy to notice the difference between 1080p (progressive) and 1080i (interlaced) is to bring up a fast moving scene i.e. car run by, you should see wave-alike lines at the end of moving car in interlaced mode. you won't see that in progressive mode. i'm sure you know that already. :)

[nVJoe]

it'll work fine with component cables. and yes, ps3 is upgradable to profile 2.0. right now it's 1.1 so upcoming firmware, it'll update ps3 to 2.0 when movies that needs it is released.

easy to notice the difference between 1080p (progressive) and 1080i (interlaced) is to bring up a fast moving scene i.e. car run by, you should see wave-alike lines at the end of moving car in interlaced mode. you won't see that in progressive mode. i'm sure you know that already. :)
I see what you mean.

Thanks for all the info.

[Lyme]

Thanks for the info. I know that the average person cannot tell the difference between 1080i and 1080p, at least I can't. I just wanted to make sure that my TV will take advantage of the HD.

I really don't care which is better. I have been waiting on a purchase for a time when the market has decided which format it will be going with. Now it looks like it will be blu-ray.

You are saying that the PS3 is upgradeable to the 2.0 profile right?

I will be using component cables BTW.

A few notes,

NaitoSan needs to work on his english.
Blu-Ray is only better because hd-dvd is dead.

Otherwise,

The ps3 is a mixed bag compared to stand alone players when blu-ray movies are concerned. The ps3 does not support all the output formats listed in 3.0 spec, but could potentially do so if Sony wanted. As well the picture quality from the ps3 has been reported to be of lesser quality of a number of the better stand alone units. The PS3 as it is a software player, can be upgraded for as long as Sony wants to.

Using component cables is fine, until Blu-ray movies start using the BD+ DRM. At which point the video will be artificially downgraded to regular sdtv quality. To resolve that problem you need to use HDMI.

As for the resolution and your tv, most good blu-ray players will take a 1080p signal, and convert it into 1080i, giving you a virtually identical picture.

[Mr Bigman]

So why is blu ray the norm now?

Its more expensive than HD DVD and HD DVD is Ford where as Blu Ray is the BMW.

Why couldn't people go with the cheaper more easy to buy standard?

I actually thought BLU Ray was dying cuz of it being to pricey but people love it and studios are going to it.

[NaitoSan]

NaitoSan needs to work on his english.
Give me a break. English is my second language and I try my best to proof read my posts. It's nearly impossible to master English when you're speaking in different language everyday. My primary language is American Sign Language (ASL) and I use it because I'm deaf. ASL has whole different grammar structuce so it's often confusing when writing in English. For you hearing people, you hear English being spoke everyday and learn from it, like how words are used, etc. I don't.

You really do have no idea how hard for me to learn English. Thanks.

[Lyme]

You really do have no idea how hard for me to learn English. Thanks.

It is reportedly the second hardest language to learn after a dialect of mandarin Chinese. I can believe that completely as I have known english as a first language for 33 years and still have difficulties with university level composition. Even so, when you say "it's better than hd dvd for few reason." you are expected to backup that position with two or more references to why it is so. Rather than state something as a fact, and then simply continue without justification. And while I pointed out that you need to work on your english, I was neither overly critical of that, nor did I say it in a insulting way.
Furthermore, while I appreciate the fact that you are trying to learn English, I will not stop in my efforts to improve your usage of english.

[Lyme]

So why is blu ray the norm now?

Its more expensive than HD DVD and HD DVD is Ford where as Blu Ray is the BMW.

Why couldn't people go with the cheaper more easy to buy standard?

I actually thought BLU Ray was dying cuz of it being to pricey but people love it and studios are going to it.

The turning point in the competition between blu-ray and hd-dvd was a month or so ago when Fox and Warner were going to go fully hd-dvd. But, before they announced that, Fox was convinced to go to Blu-ray instead and Warner followed. This secured +70% of the international studio's under Blu-ray, and dictated who the winner is. Shortly after that, virtually everyone has snowballed onto the Blu-ray side, which reinforces that outcome.

Now it is purely educational to discuss exactly why Fox, just days before siding with hd-dvd switched. Most on the hd-dvd side say they were bought off, but most on the blu-ray side say it isn't true. Just as it is a educational discussion to figure out why a number of companies decided to invent the blu-ray standard after hd-dvd had been almost complete. As well as why people have sided with a more expensive format, which only has the benefit of 15gig more space and more DRM.

None of that changes the simple fact that blu-ray is victorious over hd-dvd.

[NaitoSan]

It is reportedly the second hardest language to learn after a dialect of mandarin Chinese. I can believe that completely as I have known english as a first language for 33 years and still have difficulties with university level composition. Even so, when you say "it's better than hd dvd for few reason." you are expected to backup that position with two or more references to why it is so. Rather than state something as a fact, and then simply continue without justification. And while I pointed out that you need to work on your english, I was neither overly critical of that, nor did I say it in a insulting way.
Furthermore, while I appreciate the fact that you are trying to learn English, I will not stop in my efforts to improve your usage of english.
Do you do this to everyone? Are you an instructor from school? Either way you have no right to have the power over me and tell me that I need to work on my English. I'm fully aware that my grammar needs work (look at my sig) and I continue to improve.

If nVJoe wants to know exactly why Blu-ray is better then I will explain in details. I have expressed my opinion on why Blu-ray is better in general and this isn't thesis paper otherwise I'd backup my opinion with more than several references.

But to be honest, you didn't backup your position on why Blu-ray is better because HD DVD is dead. Or your comments on Profile 3.0.

Do you know Profile 3.0 refers to audio only Blu-ray? It can be done via software and Sony said they will update PS3 when needed. But it's mainly for Blu-ray audio player. There's not much infomation on Profile 3.0 so we shouldn't worry about it. At least for now. There's rumors about Profile 4.0 where it may add iHD and other features.

I still stand by my opinion that Blu-ray is better.

-higher storage capacity than hd dvd discs (50 gb vs 30 gb)
-higher bandwidth (48mbit/sec vs 30mbit/sec)
-has more studio support (more movies)
-improved with codec/audio and now matches to hd dvd if not better
-has gaming support

But of course, only thing that keeps people from buying Blu-ray because:

-high cost
-region coding
-excessive copy protection
-players that aren't future-proof

Technically, Blu-ray is superior. If you're able to afford it, that is. Or wait until price drops. Region coding is old news... DVD has them. Soon all players will be profile 2.0 ready, and I'll bet that company will offer sort of rebate for early adopters. I'm not sure about excessive copy protection but it doesn't bother me much. Much larger storage capacity discs (100GB+) are on way in near future.

I used to HD DVD supporter but not anymore. And I hate combo discs. ;)

[NaitoSan]

double post, sorry :(

[ViN86]

Do you do this to everyone? Are you an instructor from school? Either way you have no right to have the power over me and tell me that I need to work on my English. I'm fully aware that my grammar needs work (look at my sig) and I continue to improve.

If nVJoe wants to know exactly why Blu-ray is better then I will explain in details. I have expressed my opinion on why Blu-ray is better in general and this isn't thesis paper otherwise I'd backup my opinion with more than several references.

But to be honest, you didn't backup your position on why Blu-ray is better because HD DVD is dead. Or your comments on Profile 3.0.

Do you know Profile 3.0 refers to audio only Blu-ray? It can be done via software and Sony said they will update PS3 when needed. But it's mainly for Blu-ray audio player. There's not much infomation on Profile 3.0 so we shouldn't worry about it. At least for now. There's rumors about Profile 4.0 where it may add iHD and other features.

I still stand by my opinion that Blu-ray is better.

-higher storage capacity than hd dvd discs (50 gb vs 30 gb)
-higher bandwidth (48mbit/sec vs 30mbit/sec)
-has more studio support (more movies)
-improved with codec/audio and now matches to hd dvd if not better
-has gaming support

But of course, only thing that keeps people from buying Blu-ray because:

-high cost
-region coding
-excessive copy protection
-players that aren't future-proof

Technically, Blu-ray is superior. If you're able to afford it, that is. Or wait until price drops. Region coding is old news... DVD has them. Soon all players will be profile 2.0 ready, and I'll bet that company will offer sort of rebate for early adopters. I'm not sure about excessive copy protection but it doesn't bother me much. Much larger storage capacity discs (100GB+) are on way in near future.

I used to flavor HD DVD because Blu-ray wasn't ready until I got PS3 and Blu-ray has improved by then. Also I hate combo discs. ;)
so you favor blu-ray because you bought a player and dont want to shell out more cash for an hd-dvd player.... :|

[NaitoSan]

so you favor blu-ray because you bought a player and dont want to shell out more cash for an hd-dvd player.... :|
Naw, I wanted to get PS3 because I was interested in few games and my PS2 was dying.

I couldn't afford to buy other player, so I didn't go crazy on Blu-ray movies until recently with news on format war.

[XDanger]

pS3 isnt the best deal if you have a pc capable of playing HD.

BD-HD-DVD combi drives are cheap, single format drives are cheaper still

pS3 over here is a choice between the gimped version or the overpriced version.

[Revs]

Would I be correct in thinking you could burn a BluRay film on a HD-DVD disc and play it on a PC?

If so I see a reason for both formats. While the film companys are favoring BluRay, HD-DVD's are better (or cheaper) for burning disc on PC's. At least ATM.

[Lyme]

Do you do this to everyone? Are you an instructor from school? Either way you have no right to have the power over me and tell me that I need to work on my English. I'm fully aware that my grammar needs work (look at my sig) and I continue to improve.

You are correct in that I have no power over you, however that is a double edged sword. Given that fact, the reverse is also true, you have no power over me. Which, by inference gives me every right to state and defend my opinion that your English needs work. In my opinion you are taking the comment far too personally, it isn't as though you are being graded on this, simply accept it and strive to do better.

[Mr Bigman]

So why do people adopt a more expensive format even during bad times in our countryies econemy?

Don't we want cheap in formats like VHS vs Beta was?

I guess people don't mind spending 350 bucks over 100 bucks for hd contentha. Idiots.

Blu Ray is for those people who have alot of money to spend and HD DVD is for those who want affortable and they should offer content on both.

This is a whole rich and poor issue not the formats themselves its what people can afford. HD DVD would sell more cuz its cheap.

[Lyme]

I still stand by my opinion that Blu-ray is better.

-has more studio support (more movies)
-improved with codec/audio and now matches to hd dvd if not better
-has gaming support

But of course, only thing that keeps people from buying Blu-ray because:

-high cost
-region coding
-excessive copy protection
-players that aren't future-proof

Technically, Blu-ray is superior. If you're able to afford it, that is. Or wait until price drops. Region coding is old news... DVD has them. Soon all players will be profile 2.0 ready, and I'll bet that company will offer sort of rebate for early adopters. I'm not sure about excessive copy protection but it doesn't bother me much. Much larger storage capacity discs (100GB+) are on way in near future.


Excessive, possibly not, there is no doubt that there is more DRM included in the spec. The DRM BD+ as far as I know, is not in use as of yet. When the studio's decide to start using it, I expect quite a large number of very unhappy customers. The issue revolves around the technical issue that in order for BD+ to work with your setup, you must have end-to-end secure channel for video, otherwise it will downgrade the signal. In addition to that, BD+ is implemented as a mini java application that runs on the player, and decodes the data on the fly. I expect that if your home entertainment setup is not using hdmi, you will have issues.

As for the changing of what is latest and greatest Blu-Ray Spec. Many of the early players (ps3 excluded) do not include the hardware so that they can be software upgraded to the new spec. So much so, that there is another thread in this forum around the issue of one early adopter suing Samsung for producing players that are not compliant with the current spec. I expect that Samsung will loose the case for marketing their Blu-Ray players in bad faith. Simply consider that Blu-Ray has gone through 1.0, 1.1, and now to catch up to where hd-dvd is the 2.0 spec, while hd-dvd is still at 1.0 and it is feature complete. However I am not a lawyer, and those decisions are best argued by them.

The point is, that even while Blu-Ray has won, there are many curious things to exactly why they won given the oddities of the situation. As well, if you are a consumer, you really need to be extremely careful in what you buy tv/blu-ray dvd player, because while it may work right now, it may not work with all blu-ray movies in the near future.

[nrdstrm]

A few notes,

NaitoSan needs to work on his english.
Blu-Ray is only better because hd-dvd is dead.

Otherwise,

The ps3 is a mixed bag compared to stand alone players when blu-ray movies are concerned. The ps3 does not support all the output formats listed in 3.0 spec, but could potentially do so if Sony wanted. As well the picture quality from the ps3 has been reported to be of lesser quality of a number of the better stand alone units. The PS3 as it is a software player, can be upgraded for as long as Sony wants to.

Using component cables is fine, until Blu-ray movies start using the BD+ DRM. At which point the video will be artificially downgraded to regular sdtv quality. To resolve that problem you need to use HDMI.

As for the resolution and your tv, most good blu-ray players will take a 1080p signal, and convert it into 1080i, giving you a virtually identical picture.

Your going to rip him for bad English? You may want to examine your own writing. Should you do so, you will discover poor use of punctuation and run on sentences...

We are on a forum. To be honest, his English is better than some of the native English speakers here.

On a Blu-Ray note, I am just happy one camp has won. I have a PS3, but was about to pull the trigger on an HD-DVD Player. I had just started to research them when the crap hit the fan. I'm going to use my PS3 for Blu-Ray until lower priced (and decent) stand alone players are available...

@ nVJoe - You will love Blu-Ray on your 1080i TV. You will immediately be able to tell a big difference between DVD (Upconverted) and Blu-Ray IMO...

[Lyme]

Your going to rip him for bad English? You may want to examine your own writing. Should you do so, you will discover poor use of punctuation and run on sentences...

We are on a forum. To be honest, his English is better than some of the native English speakers here.

I completely understand what you mean. We should be happy with the lowest common denominator.

[NaitoSan]

So why do people adopt a more expensive format even during bad times in our countryies econemy?

Don't we want cheap in formats like VHS vs Beta was?

I guess people don't mind spending 350 bucks over 100 bucks for hd contentha. Idiots.

Blu Ray is for those people who have alot of money to spend and HD DVD is for those who want affortable and they should offer content on both.

This is a whole rich and poor issue not the formats themselves its what people can afford. HD DVD would sell more cuz its cheap.
It's all about advertisement. HD DVD lost because of not enough advertisement (I keep seeing Blu-ray ads everywhere and part of PS3 ads). Blu-ray had a bit of advantages because PS3 has Blu-ray built in.

Earlier in format war, HD DVD hardware has sold more than Blu-ray hardware. That's not same for movies where Blu-ray has sold more.

It's not always about how much money people have. Do you realize HD DVD is uber cheap because Toshiba is losing the war? If Toshiba was winning the war, the price will stay unchanged. I'm sure Toshiba was losing money from low price of HD DVD players. I think Toshiba was only one making HD DVD players, not other company like Pioneer, Samsung, etc. (I could be wrong) The price of Blu-ray player has dropped a bit and soon, we'll see cheaper Blu-ray players in the future.

That happens with DVD player where it was $599 or higher for high-end players. Now they can be found for under $100.

[nrdstrm]

I completely understand what you mean. We should be happy with the lowest common denominator.

Yet you still didn't address your own misuse of punctuation, etc. :cool:

[Imbroglio]

@op, yes blu-ray will still look great on a 1080i tv, depending on you ht setup will determine whether to go with a standalone or the ps3 (still sad that at $400, you don't get complete support but it is still the best price/performance)

for those spouting bd "facts" they found on the bd pamphlets at their local best buy, let's not kid ourselves about a few topics:

1) this is not comparable to vhs/beta aside from competing for the format, this round was not settled by the consumers, this round was settled by board room pricks who are willing to pay whatever it takes so that it's not another beta/umd/dvhs/etc device.

2) the ps3 will only be 2.0 compliant if they choose to not include dts-hd/ma in the spec. but that's another story, for the individuals with remotely decent ht setups, the ps3 is not for them.

3) bd and hddvd drm have already been cracked, so that is a moot point. region encoding is still around 50/50. and also that old "storage" arguement, moot. 50% are still using bd25 discs (price of the bd50 disks are not cheap), this number is finally starting to drop (use to be ~80% bd25) source (http://www.blu-raystats.com/stats.php)

let's be honest here, the only reason this format is where it is is because of the money that exchanged hands. think of how poorly the ps3 sales would have been the past 2 months had it not been for bd getting major studio support. sony didn't want to have their console go down the ****ter, a 2.something attach rate isn't exactly a good thing.

[Lyme]

It's all about advertisement. HD DVD lost because of not enough advertisement (I keep seeing Blu-ray ads everywhere and part of PS3 ads). Blu-ray had a bit of advantages because PS3 has Blu-ray built in.


True Blu-ray has advertised significantly more. Strangely, I have only seen Blu-Ray advertisement from Sony, and yet, they are simply one of many BD companies.
The building in of Blu-Ray into the PS3 has both advantages and disadvantages. One of the possible disadvantages is if people buy the PS3 because it is the cheapest Blu-ray player, they may not buy any games. Game sales when it comes to the PS3, is Sony's method of recouping manufacturing costs.


It's not always about how much money people have. Do you realize HD DVD is uber cheap because Toshiba is losing the war? If Toshiba was winning the war, the price will stay unchanged. I'm sure Toshiba was losing money from low price of HD DVD players. I think Toshiba was only one making HD DVD players, not other company like Pioneer, Samsung, etc. (I could be wrong) The price of Blu-ray player has dropped a bit and soon, we'll see cheaper Blu-ray players in the future.

That happens with DVD player where it was $599 or higher for high-end players. Now they can be found for under $100.

I don't think you can draw the conclusion that hd-dvd was cheap, because they were loosing. I also don't think you can draw the conclusion that because blu-ray has won, it will become cheap.

I tend to think, that hd-dvd players were cheaper, because they were less expensive to build. However, I have no proof either way on that items.

Jumping back to one of your previous items, it is always about the money. While four hundred dollars or more is par for the course when it comes to video game consoles these days, the cheaper consoles wii/ps2 still have proven they sell extremely well based upon price alone. We know that gamers are willing to drop a significant amount of money on a console that just happens to have blu-ray built in. Just as movie enthusiasts are happy to purchase high priced audio/video equipment. When it comes to the typical run of the mill public, of which by definition we are not, affordability means everything. Which raises the questions: how long will it take for blu-ray player prices to come down, and what is the price range at which items of this kind become so affordable that mass adoption occurs. (feel free to speculate on the answer to those last two questions, I will not hold you to them).