• Hi, I am the owner and main administrator of Styleforum. If you find the forum useful and fun, please help support it by buying through the posted links on the forum. Our main, very popular sales thread, where the latest and best sales are listed, are posted HERE

    Purchases made through some of our links earns a commission for the forum and allows us to do the work of maintaining and improving it. Finally, thanks for being a part of this community. We realize that there are many choices today on the internet, and we have all of you to thank for making Styleforum the foremost destination for discussions of menswear.
  • This site contains affiliate links for which Styleforum may be compensated.
  • STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.

    Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.

    Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!

    Styleforum is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

Blu-Ray

SGladwell

Distinguished Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
1,246
Reaction score
0
Made that mistake with SACD. Never again.
 

Mike

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2002
Messages
423
Reaction score
1
My uncle bought a Betamax VCR n the 80s, bought many tapes and recorded countless more. By the 90s the Beta VCR was covered in dust and now there are boxes of beta tapes in the attic over there. I'm going to wait until one format is clearly the one in the majority, or there is a combo unit to play either Blu-Ray or HD-DVD.
 

alflauren

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
470
Reaction score
3
No, I'm going to sit out this format war for the time being. Plus, I'm more interested in burning high-capacity discs as opposed to watching movies, and the burners aren't exactly reasonable right now.
 

Brian SD

Moderator
Joined
Feb 5, 2004
Messages
9,492
Reaction score
128
Yes, because I'm a horrible tool and I'm going to pay $600 out ****** for the PS3, even though I know the Wii is going to be much more fun for much less money. I just have to have Tekken 6
frown.gif
 

Tokyo Slim

In Time Out
Timed Out
Joined
Apr 28, 2004
Messages
18,360
Reaction score
16
I will probably purchase both the PS3 and the Wii (even though it has a stupid name). J and I will then spend a week or so discovering the subtle nuances of Vision Gran Turismo.
 

matadorpoeta

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2003
Messages
4,324
Reaction score
1
beta was superior to vhs in every way except price. so i can only assume that the cheaper technology will win out in the end.

in mexico we all had beta because sony was considered the best brand, and to have anything other than a sony vcr was lame. eventually everyone had to switch over.
 

hopkins_student

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2004
Messages
3,164
Reaction score
176
I'm not sure which is more expensive, but I'm having a hard time figuring out how HD-DVD can beat Blu-Ray. It seems like Blu-Ray has a lock on 90% of the production companies, most with exclusive deals to make Blu-Ray the only HD version of their movies available. The only drawback to Blu-Ray was the sensitivity to scratching of the media, but they took care of that problem so well that it sounds like you could use a Blu-Ray disc as a coaster for ten years and still watch it.
 

Tokyo Slim

In Time Out
Timed Out
Joined
Apr 28, 2004
Messages
18,360
Reaction score
16
Originally Posted by matadorpoeta
beta was superior to vhs in every way except price. so i can only assume that the cheaper technology will win out in the end.

in mexico we all had beta because sony was considered the best brand, and to have anything other than a sony vcr was lame. eventually everyone had to switch over.


It actually had very little to do with price, and a lot to do with the fact that Sony wouldn't release the rights to BETAMAX to more than a handful of distributors. VHS was widely distributed and anyone could buy blank VHS tapes from any number of manufacturers, record their programming on it, and sell it as a product. (the Appreciation industry was a big beneficiary of this). Sony tried to have too much control over the medium and ended up losing the battle because their business model choked the format. That said, up until DV became popularized in the late 90's / early 2000's, almost all newscasts and TV shows were filmed solely on Beta. Many still are.
 

Tokyo Slim

In Time Out
Timed Out
Joined
Apr 28, 2004
Messages
18,360
Reaction score
16
Originally Posted by hopkins_student
I'm not sure which is more expensive, but I'm having a hard time figuring out how HD-DVD can beat Blu-Ray. It seems like Blu-Ray has a lock on 90% of the production companies, most with exclusive deals to make Blu-Ray the only HD version of their movies available. The only drawback to Blu-Ray was the sensitivity to scratching of the media, but they took care of that problem so well that it sounds like you could use a Blu-Ray disc as a coaster for ten years and still watch it.
Blu-Ray media will most likely be marginally more expensive, if nothing else, due to the fact that its storage capacity is much higher than HD-DVD. The players should be about the same price, because they both use the same hardware. The main difference is in the encoding/decoding end of the software.
 

imageWIS

Stylish Dinosaur
Joined
Apr 19, 2004
Messages
19,716
Reaction score
106
Originally Posted by Tokyo Slim
Blu-Ray media will most likely be marginally more expensive, if nothing else, due to the fact that its storage capacity is much higher than HD-DVD. The players should be about the same price, because they both use the same hardware. The main difference is in the encoding/decoding end of the software.

The reason why Blu-Ray costs more is because the hardware needed to make the discs is different than the hardware currently used to manufacture CD / DVD / HD-DVD's. Since Blu-Ray uses both a disk that starts "˜imprinting' closer to the edge of the disc and closer to the surface of the disc (yes, they solved the scratching problem using TDK's "˜Durabis' clear-coat technology), the current machines that manufacture DVD's don't have the ability to make a Blu-Ray disc, thus they would have to re-tool to make Blu-Ray's vs. HD-DVD, which requires no additional tooling and can be manufactured using the current DVD-manufacturing machines.

Personally, I think because of the size advantage, that is to say the amount of more data you can fit into a "˜standard' (single-layer) Blu-Ray disc vs. what you can fit into a "˜standard' HD-DVD, the costs even out.

Jon.
 

Tokyo Slim

In Time Out
Timed Out
Joined
Apr 28, 2004
Messages
18,360
Reaction score
16
Originally Posted by imageWIS
The reason why Blu-Ray costs more is because the hardware needed to make the discs is different than the hardware currently used to manufacture CD / DVD / HD-DVD’s. Since Blu-Ray uses both a disk that starts ‘imprinting’ closer to the edge of the disc and closer to the surface of the disc (yes, they solved the scratching problem using TDK’s ‘Durabis’ clear-coat technology), the current machines that manufacture DVD’s don’t have the ability to make a Blu-Ray disc, thus they would have to re-tool to make Blu-Ray’s vs. HD-DVD, which requires no additional tooling and can be manufactured using the current DVD-manufacturing machines. Jon.
This is somewhat innacurate Jon. The laser imprinters that HD-DVD uses to encode are different than the ones they use for regular DVD The manufacturing process is simpler to change over, because the burn format is the same, but it DOES use different laser hardware. They still needed to upgrade the equipment. Blu-Ray uses a completely new format, so needs a completely new manufacturing process. HOWEVER, Sony is pretty adamant that this isn't going to impact the price of the disks at all. I think they want to destroy HD-DVD, and they seem like they are willing to take a few losses to do it.
 

Mike

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2002
Messages
423
Reaction score
1
Originally Posted by Tokyo Slim
That said, up until DV became popularized in the late 90's / early 2000's, almost all newscasts and TV shows were filmed solely on Beta. Many still are.


When I was producing TV commercials a few months ago, we backed up all work on Digi-Beta tapes that were sent to a library, as well as on hard drive. So Beta is still used, in a smaller capacity format.
 

matadorpoeta

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2003
Messages
4,324
Reaction score
1
Originally Posted by Tokyo Slim
It actually had very little to do with price, and a lot to do with the fact that Sony wouldn't release the rights to BETAMAX to more than a handful of distributors. VHS was widely distributed and anyone could buy blank VHS tapes from any number of manufacturers, record their programming on it, and sell it as a product. (the Appreciation industry was a big beneficiary of this). Sony tried to have too much control over the medium and ended up losing the battle because their business model choked the format.
i'm not sure about this. we had access to every movie that was also available on vhs. i don't recall ever looking for a movie and then discovering it wasn't available on beta. that is, not until years later when vhs had won out.
That said, up until DV became popularized in the late 90's / early 2000's, almost all newscasts and TV shows were filmed solely on Beta. Many still are.
almost all programming is currently on digi-beta, regardless of the format used to shoot the raw footage.
 

Featured Sponsor

How important is full vs half canvas to you for heavier sport jackets?

  • Definitely full canvas only

    Votes: 85 37.8%
  • Half canvas is fine

    Votes: 86 38.2%
  • Really don't care

    Votes: 23 10.2%
  • Depends on fabric

    Votes: 35 15.6%
  • Depends on price

    Votes: 36 16.0%

Forum statistics

Threads
506,408
Messages
10,588,996
Members
224,224
Latest member
gregroyce
Top