Blu-ray seems beta, but it will win


The following is my current impression of the status of HD formats at this moment.

There have been some comparisons of picture quality (PQ) made between HD-DVD and Blu-ray, and the latter often comes up short.
One factor is the codec used.

For some reason, the Blu-ray movies being released are mostly encoded with MPEG-2, rather than the two-generations-better VC-1.
Apparently there is encoding software coming out that runs on a PC in near realtime.
I wonder – since HD-DVD uses CV-1 as well, why can’t they encode it once for both formats?
Are there internal “HD-DVD” teams and “Blu-ray” teams at the various studios?
I really hope not.

The other factor is hardware bugs.
There have been some issues, although they may be fixed by a firmware update.
Unfortunately, I haven’t heard of one being released.

Now, despite all these issues with Blu-ray, it is still my pick as the eventual victor, for the exact same reason VHS beat beta: quantity.

Beta could only hold 60 minutes of video, while VHS offered 2 hours, or 6 hours if you didn’t mind crappy quality.
It’s not quite the same for Blu-ray: even at HD-DVD’s minimal 15 Gig size for a one-sided, single-layer disc, there is plenty of room for a good-quality HD movie.

However, these discs will also be used to store data on computers, and with Blu-ray being demonstrated at 200 GB (using 6 layers of 33 GB each), HD-DVD doesn’t even come close.
With our 750 GB hard disks in our computers, we need this for long-term shelf storage.

I really think it’s that simple.
Because Blu-ray and HD-DVD certainly don’t differ in any meaningful way when it comes to HD playback quality.

Published by


Mac developer

7 thoughts on “Blu-ray seems beta, but it will win”

  1. I bought into Blu-Ray because of the quantity item. As for the war in general, I am not too concerned who wins, as I knew from the beginning I would buy a second unit in a few years, if one or the other format is dead, then I have a very expensive (and slow-booting) DVD player that plays a few museum piece DVDs, but 2 years of HD enjoyment under my belt.

  2. Denon does not have confidence in either format at the moment. They are waiting for a victor in the format war to emerge.

    Long term storage should be handled by hard drives. They are cheap and getting larger all the time. How long is it going to take me to burn a 200GB BR disc?

  3. From The Tech Report;

    “Engineers at Seagate have successfully achieved a storage density of 421 Gbits per square inch for the purpose of a magnetic recording demonstration, the company has announced. This density, which is over three times greater than that of Seagate’s latest Barracuda 7200.10 hard drives, was achieved using a perpendicular recording head and thermally-stable recording media built with current production equipment.

    With that much data crammed per square inch of platter space, Seagate reckons it can hit capacities of almost 2.5TB with desktop hard drives, 500GB with notebook hard drives, and 275GB with iPod-size 1″ and 1.8” hard drives. Seagate says its demo proves that it can scale current technology “for the foreseeable future without major technology changes or capital additions.” That said, the company is already looking for ways to continue boosting platter densities once current perpendicular recording tech reaches its peak, which is likely to happen in four to five years.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

To create code blocks or other preformatted text, indent by four spaces:

    This will be displayed in a monospaced font. The first four 
    spaces will be stripped off, but all other whitespace
    will be preserved.
    Markdown is turned off in code blocks:
     [This is not a link](

To create not a block, but an inline code span, use backticks:

Here is some inline `code`.

For more help see

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.