View Full Version : Rip Hd-dvd


Speedo
Feb 16, 2008, 06:56 PM
3/31/06 - 2/16/08
*plays taps*

http://www.reuters.com/article/companyNewsAndPR/idUSL1627196120080216

TOKYO (Reuters) - Toshiba Corp is planning to stop production of equipment compatible with the HD DVD format for high-definition video, allowing the competing Blu-Ray camp a free run, public broadcaster NHK reported on Saturday...

Aramazd
Feb 16, 2008, 07:11 PM
That's great news, I'm glad Toshiba finally came around.

Genocidicbunny
Feb 16, 2008, 07:39 PM
Must really suck to be an early HD-DVD adopter right now.

MarineCorps
Feb 16, 2008, 08:59 PM
Must really suck to be an early HD-DVD adopter right now.

I was planning on getting one back in Dec but couldn't afford it. WOuld have been a waste of money. I hate that HD-DVD lost to a format pioneered by sony, a company famous for screwing over it's costumer(root kits come to mind), and I would be willing to bet paid a lot of money to companies to support Blu ray. I would be willing to bet Blu ray won't ever come close to market share that DVD has. HD-dvd still had a chance when warner bros quit but when all those other companies were paid to switch to Blu ray it was over,:( I hate being wrong. Now all their is to do is watch Blu ray go nowhere and Toshiba go bankrupt.

ainwood
Feb 16, 2008, 09:53 PM
:lol: I was initially thinking this was either an article on how to copy (rip) HD-DVD, or a request to ask how to do it!

One thing I have noticed is that our local video stores do have blu-ray disks available for hire. HD-DVD is conspicuously absent.

The Yankee
Feb 16, 2008, 10:05 PM
I thought this was an HD-DVD bashing thread. ("Ripping" the product.)

But...looks like that format is on its way out. Come to think of it, I've heard less commercials for HD-DVD movies lately.

Ball Lightning
Feb 17, 2008, 12:06 AM
Both Blue-ray and HD DVD are going to be short lived as there is semi holographic discs which store 100gb or more coming soon (next 20 years).

Genocidicbunny
Feb 17, 2008, 03:46 AM
Both Blue-ray and HD DVD are going to be short lived as there is semi holographic discs which store 100gb or more coming soon (next 20 years).

short lived? thats double what DVD has been as mainstream...

Mise
Feb 17, 2008, 05:29 AM
I was under the impression that HD-DVD was the "better" of the two formats?

AL_DA_GREAT
Feb 17, 2008, 05:57 AM
Both Blue-ray and HD DVD are going to be short lived as there is semi holographic discs which store 100gb or more coming soon (next 20 years).

In 2000 dvds where rare now they are the only format.

I was under the impression that HD-DVD was the "better" of the two formats?

Most techies say blue ray is better. Also the hd dvd backers are the evil companies like microsoft.

So blue ray will win?

Mise
Feb 17, 2008, 07:05 AM
Well having checked Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_high_definition_optical_disc_formats ), it does look like Blu-ray is better.

I think I'm biased against Blu-ray (a) because it has a stupid name, and (b) because it's made by Sony.

Speedo
Feb 17, 2008, 08:18 AM
Both Blue-ray and HD DVD are going to be short lived as there is semi holographic discs which store 100gb or more coming soon (next 20 years).
That would make them the longest lived format so far. VHS lasted perhaps 15 years as the mainstream media of choice. DVD will get perhaps 10 years, perhaps a bit more.

Zelig
Feb 17, 2008, 10:51 AM
I was under the impression that HD-DVD was the "better" of the two formats?

Well having checked Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_high_definition_optical_disc_formats ), it does look like Blu-ray is better.

I think I'm biased against Blu-ray (a) because it has a stupid name, and (b) because it's made by Sony.

In terms of audio and video quality, they're very similar, particularly because most studios use the exact same renders for their HD-DVD and Blu-Ray discs.


Most techies say blue ray is better. Also the hd dvd backers are the evil companies like microsoft.

So blue ray will win?

Microsoft is no more evil than any other multi-billion dollar company. Actually, probably less so, with the money they give to charity.

Blu-ray has already won, HD-DVD is effectively dead.

And most techies who know what they're talking about and have actual hands-on experience will not say Blu-ray is better. Quality is comparable between the two formats, but HD-DVD is much more consumer friendly, all of the content protection garbage on Blu-Ray discs make them a real hassle to do anything with.

Mise
Feb 17, 2008, 01:36 PM
In terms of audio and video quality, they're very similar, particularly because most studios use the exact same renders for their HD-DVD and Blu-Ray discs.

But how much of that is just because the rendering software is designed for both HD-DVD and Blu-ray? In other words, is it likely that, when Blu-ray emerges as winner, they'll start investing in better renders?

Zelig
Feb 17, 2008, 02:28 PM
But how much of that is just because the rendering software is designed for both HD-DVD and Blu-ray? In other words, is it likely that, when Blu-ray emerges as winner, they'll start investing in better renders?

Some movies will be bigger, but at 1080p, there isn't a huge video quality difference between 25gb and 40gb.

Genocidicbunny
Feb 17, 2008, 03:04 PM
Might very well lead to 1620p though. Chances are though, unless you have a huge screen, you wont really care.

Gilder
Feb 19, 2008, 09:45 AM
All that's changed is who gets my money come to upgrade time.

BirraImperial
Feb 19, 2008, 10:05 AM
That's gotta suck for those who bought HD-DVD players, they must be feeling like Beta-max owners right now. <lol>

Abaddon
Feb 19, 2008, 10:58 AM
So how much losses has Tosh bitten by accepting this loss?

GoodEnoughForMe
Feb 19, 2008, 11:05 AM
Over the last five days their stock has inreased pretty good. Bascially investors were happy they were cutting losses.

woody60707
Feb 19, 2008, 03:57 PM
I think people are still jumping the gun with HD.

Few people have HD tv's (I sure as hell don't) Blu-ray disk cost like 10 or 20 times more to make, and the players them self are still like $400.

DVD's are cheap to make, there players are cheap, and can be played on any TV. DVD's are here to stay for more then a few years still.

Zelig
Feb 19, 2008, 04:51 PM
I think people are still jumping the gun with HD.

Few people have HD tv's (I sure as hell don't) Blu-ray disk cost like 10 or 20 times more to make, and the players them self are still like $400.

DVD's are cheap to make, there players are cheap, and can be played on any TV. DVD's are here to stay for more then a few years still.

People won't be jumping the gun anymore, now that Blu-Ray is going to be the physical HD format for the next decade or so, most likely.

HD stuff isn't much more expensive than non-HD stuff if you're buying new either way. You can get small 1080p screens for under $400, and Blu-ray drives for around $200. These double as computer peripherals and TV equipment.

Abaddon
Feb 19, 2008, 04:57 PM
I'll still stick with the idea the whole thing is going to fail as fast internet means its easier just to download onto a harddrive tv recorder thingy.

skadistic
Feb 19, 2008, 07:00 PM
That's gotta suck for those who bought HD-DVD players, they must be feeling like Beta-max owners right now. <lol>

My family did VHS but did fall into the laser disc player trap in the late 80s.


I was gonna get a PS3 eventually anyway so I guess I'm happy even though I don't watch much in the way of movies.

Maniacal
Feb 20, 2008, 01:09 AM
I'll still stick with the idea the whole thing is going to fail as fast internet means its easier just to download onto a harddrive tv recorder thingy.

Not nesecaraly, my kbs rate seems to max out at 170kbs, usualy 150-160 kbs. It takes some time to download even a gigabyte. Torrenting can be quite slow sometimes (which is why I don't pirate movies), and I'm running out of my room on my hard drive as it is.

Strider
Feb 20, 2008, 01:46 PM
I'll still stick with the idea the whole thing is going to fail as fast internet means its easier just to download onto a harddrive tv recorder thingy.

Torrenting a movie will always be questionable (corrupt data, is it what you were looking for, etc.). I've heard streaming being the "next big thing," but that is also highly unlikely. It costs more bandwidth then it would be to just buy the Ray disc. This is also not taking into account storage costs.

Blu-Ray is, for better or worse, going to be around for the next decade or so.

Genocidicbunny
Feb 20, 2008, 04:05 PM
Downloading movies is not gonna be a good way to get them. ISP's are always one step behind in terms of speed. A full size HD movie is easy a dual layer DVD nowadays ( 8.5 gigs) and will continue to grow. Yet have you ever tried downloading 8.5 gigs? It takes a day at least, and that is if it doesnt get interrupted. Average Joe will not want to do that, so he will go out and buy the movie. As Strider said, Blu-Ray is here to stay for a while.

Zelig
Feb 20, 2008, 04:47 PM
Streaming Blu-Ray is completely unrealistic. A standard Blu-ray movie weighs in at about 30GB, for the average internet user in North America, this would take a minimum of about 24 hours.

I'm on a 45mbit down connection, and even with that, it would take me close to an hour to fully download a movie, 30mbits is about the minimum speed necessary to stream Blu-ray content.

And this isn't even considering bandwidth caps; in some areas, Time Warner is rolling out service where the fastest tier allows for only 45gb of downloads per month. Comcast and similar providers would threaten to cut service before you made it to 10 movies in a month.