Rant: Shopping. RAVE BLU RAY!!!

[David]

Lindsay really likes the Harry Potter Series. Well on tuesday the latest one was released on Blu Ray, DVD and HD DVD. Also at the same time they released a limited box set with all of the previous ones also on Blu Ray. So i decided i'd get it for her. So i go to best buy on tuesday to see if they had it... nope already sold out of blu ray... plenty of DVD and HD DVD but no blu ray. Told me to come back thursday.. So i did. Again no blu ray. I have one of their reps check... discontinued. :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad: ****. It really was limited. :pissed: So i run out to all the other stores i could think of. :( again sold out...


Amazon.com. Had it in Stock for $104.00 :woot: Should be here early next week. :woot:


So rant i could have just done my shopping from my keyboard and saved myself alot of trouble. Rave I have more Blu Ray.... Rave: Blu Ray > HD DVD and DVD this xmas.

[Cotnerdude]

discontinued- meaning not worth it.

[coop]

so you bought some movies for your playstation?

cool.............................................. ..........

[Gentoo]

so you bought some movies for your playstation?

cool.............................................. ..........

:lol:

[Bryan]

wow

[David]

so you bought some movies for your playstation?

cool.............................................. ..........

No.... I bought it for my super media station.

[coop]

so you bought some movies for your playstation?

cool.............................................. ..........

No.... I bought it for my super media station.

oh they changed the name?

[Bobby Light]

104 bucks? for some movies?

[coop]

but they are for his special blue media center hub teleportal machine system gigahertz

[David]

you forgot timemachine.

[David]

104 bucks? for some movies?

5 of em...

The newest one runs $34 by it's self.

[SHIFTER]

fail.

[Alley]

Very nice. I'm picking up Superbad on bluray this weekend. Hopefully BB isn't sold out. Also Pirates of the Carrabean sold 160,000 copies in its first week breaking the record of Spiderman 3 at 130,000. Bluray just keeps gaining momentum every week!

[David]

ya... upper management on the HD DVD end need to take a hard look at this.. they aren't winning, and are the under dog... sony has seriously picked up their marketing and the pain is coming hard...

Seriously from a business point a view and not my Blu ray nutswinging point of view I really think it's in the best interest of the HDDVD camp to give up... The loser of the war is a big loser... the longer it goes on the bigger the loser.

anyways... i think she will like em... i'm cheaping out this year because sometime next year i'll be making up for it.

[David]

fail.


They have the box set in HDDVD if you wanna waste your money.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51mZMxDCFRL._AA240_.jpghttp://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51qaRnT%2BYoL._SS400_.jpg

[Cotnerdude]

my sister is getting this

[spoonraker]

A blu-ray movie costs $35?

holy ****, I knew it was more expensive, but damn...

[C.J.]

i want the HD DVD set

[David]

quit acting like you're a baller.

[C.J.]

im not, that is why i can't afford blu-ray

[coop]

i want the HD DVD set

why would you? your HD dvd player will not work with HD DVDs when they quit making them

the day the stop making them all the ones you own go up in flames

[David]

By law they can't go up in flames. They simple breakdown and return to their natural form... Dog ****.

[spoonraker]

Why on earth would anybody want the same format of the same video with the same compression on both audio and video with the same resolution for half the cost? Blu-Ray FTMFW!!!!!

[coop]

Why on earth would anybody want the same format of the same video with the same compression on both audio and video with the same resolution for half the cost? Blu-Ray FTMFW!!!!!

you have to fill the baller status quo....and that is paying 35 bux for a dvd....wel/come to 1994

[spoonraker]

So if HD-DVD raised their prices to $60/Movie you would say blu-ray sucks?

[coop]

So if HD-DVD raised their prices to $60/Movie you would say blu-ray sucks?

when i can dl movies free on the internet.....both suck

[Bryan]

i concur

[Cobra Commander]

Harry Potter sucks.

[David]

Why on earth would anybody want the same format of the same video with the same compression on both audio and video with the same resolution for half the cost? Blu-Ray FTMFW!!!!!

Stop kidding yourself they are exactly the same. If they were equals their wouldn't be a war... Everyone else seems to understand the difference but you.


Both use a 405nm wavelength blue-violet laser. Blu ray is more expensive because they aren't DVD's like HD DVD's. :rolleye: New facilities to make the thiner disk had to be produced and those cost get passed on into the disk. The disks are thinner so the laser can focus on the .85 apature instead of .65 (HDVD) Doesn't matter if you use the same compression if you can fit larger images on the disk you get a better pictures. This is a problem for HDDVD because with their 15gb of space it's barely enough to hold 1 HD movie... Blu ray also uses a 54mbps data rate compared to HDVD's 36.xx or whatever it is. Thats bigger files moving at a faster rate.. There is a reason Hollywood has for the most part fully adapted Blu ray... The only reason it isn't 100% is because of very large money traction from the HD DVD camp to keep them afloat... Directors like Michael Bay understand the difference... but i'm sure he's just a nut and has no idea what he's talking about...

HD movies like Blu Ray and HD DVD look better than your normal HD you get from Timewarner. Because of the amount of data thats able to be stored/moved.

Speaking of Timewarner... They will be exclusivly Blu ray in 08.:shock:

[Alley]

If you can't afford bluray you can't afford HD DVD. And if you do the research and seriously choose a stand alone HD DVD player over a bluray player you might be semi-retarded.

[Cobra Commander]

VHS > *

[David]

If you can't afford bluray you can't afford HD DVD. And if you do the research and seriously choose a stand alone HD DVD player over a bluray player you might be semi-retarded.

This is like comparing a civic(HDVD) to an z06(Blu Ray)... they both get you from point a to point b... It's like they are the same thing... :sillyme:

what funny is spoon is the only way trying to play them off as the same but he's doesn't even own an HDTV, or either of the players. Making his "facts" just a line of BS he read online.

With TW coming over, this war could be over summer of 08.

[spoonraker]

I thought they both used the same resolution file encoded at the same bit-rate, the only difference were physical aspects of the disk, which would mean that one could store more, but the actual video would be identical. I could be mistaken...

I'm gonna go read because I'm tired of not being able to argue with you about this, you're fun to debate with David.

[David]

i the suck at debating... *closes closet* :bolt:

[spoonraker]

Both HD-DVD and Blu-ray can support the same codecs. MPEG-2/4, H.264, AVC, VC-1 etc.

Initially, HD-DVD was encoded on the new VC-1 codec while Blu-ray movies were encoded using the MPEG-2 codec (same used on regular DVDs) just at a much higher bit-rate and resolution than DVDs. Currently Blu-Ray disks are being encoded using multiple different codecs; about 40% are still MPEG-2, while the other 60% is either VC-1 or AVC. Currently HD-DVD and Blu-ray both use the same bit-rates and resolutions, although theoretically Blu-ray, with it's increased storage capacity is capable of using higher settings for ecoding.

I've also found that with triple layering, HD-DVD has not only matched, but slightly surpassed Blu-ray's current storage capacity. However no movies on HD-DVD have yet been released on a triple layered disk. Blu-ray's disk specification has been finalized, but technology is still being developed including quad layered Blu-ray disks with over 100Gb of storage.

In terms of sound quality both are 100% completely identical in every way. The only difference is that Blu-ray is more backwards compatible, offering more support for older formats.


So... right now, the two formats are as close to identical as you can get. Some movies might have different codecs, some might not. Blu-ray is theoretically capable of having more storage capacity, and when that happens, is is again possible that videos stored on them might be encoded at a higher bit-rate and resolution.

Blu-ray is the future, but whether or not they utilize the technology is going to be the deciding factor. Even if they develop higher storage capacity blu-ray disks, if they don't encode the videos differently there is no reason to buy a blu-ray other than potentially getting more extras.

and that's all I have to say about that

[David]

nice ****ed up data.

[spoonraker]

Well I'm the only one to present any data so far, so feel free to post some of your own.

You'll find the same "****ed up" data all over the place, what part of it do you believe to be incorrect?

Also you do realize that I ultimately said that Blu-ray is the better technology, right? If anything you should agree with me. Blu-ray is being underutilized now, and if it continues to be, there is no reason to buy it.

[David]

how about you provide a link... My data is accurate except for the xx.

[David]

let me put it this way. in the idea of "size" is 60min of video always equal?

[Alley]

Your not correct in Audio being exactly the same. Because Bluray has more space so it can put uncompressed audio on there discs. Transformers for example on HD DVD ran out of space so they had to use a compressed audio track. LAME

[David]

Your not correct in Audio being exactly the same. Because Bluray has more space so it can put uncompressed audio on there discs. Transformers for example on HD DVD ran out of space so they had to use a compressed audio track. LAME


OMG NO WAY..



seriously though... When Bay found out it was going to be published on HD he was pissed, so pissed he said he wouldn't do another because he wanted everyone to fully experiance the movie on the best format (blu ray). It can't be displayed in all it's glory on HDDVD sure... it looks nice and sounds probably equal to a DVD but all the work it put into that movie and to have it ****ed up like that is pretty insulting.

[spoonraker]

Uhm.... you didn't actually provide any data, other than some physical aspects of the disk that make blu-ray have a higher storage capacity. We already know that blu-ray has more storage.

What I'm talking about is the actual data stored on the disk, it's identical. It's the same source file, encoded with the same bit-rate and resolution, on the same codecs. Yes, the codecs aren't always the same since early on Blu-Ray only supported one codec, but in general the actual data on the disk is identical. And on the earlier movies, HD-DVD actually used the better codec (VC-1), so if you actually can notice a difference (which is bullshit, you can't tell the difference between two codecs with the same resolution at that high of a bit-rate) then the advantage would go to HD-DVD.

Technical info about blu-ray
http://www.answers.com/topic/blu-ray-disc

compare/contrast the two (although not much technical video data)
http://www.engadget.com/2005/09/19/blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-state-of-the-s-union-s-division/

more compare/contrast with some tech specs
http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-13817_7-6462511-2.html?tag=arw

I could find plenty more sources for you...

[spoonraker]

Your not correct in Audio being exactly the same. Because Bluray has more space so it can put uncompressed audio on there discs. Transformers for example on HD DVD ran out of space so they had to use a compressed audio track. LAME

I'm sorry, but you are wrong. Both disks support the exact same audio, including uncompressed. Just because on one movie they used a different method doesn't mean that all formats aren't supported on both disks.

Also like I said HD-DVD has a triple layer disk capable of holding more than current Blu-ray disks

[Alley]

Thats what I meant. Its capable of it. But storage space is limited so they can't do what all bluray can do. If HD DVD can hold more then why arn't they doing it?

[David]

http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/#hddvd

Blu-ray has also adopted a higher data transfer rate for video and audio (54Mbps vs 36.55Mbps). The greater capacity and data transfer rates for Blu-ray will allow the movie studios to release their movies with higher quality video and audio than the HD-DVD format.

[spoonraker]

Because it's a brand new technology and they just haven't put it out yet.

Neither disk is finalized (actually I heard blu-ray was, but only in one source so I don't know if I believe that or not) and they both have room to expand.

By the time both disks reach their max storage capacity, using current video formats, encoding, resolution, and bit-rate, storage will be a non-issue since you can easily put any movie with uncompressed audio on either disk.

Like I said...the deciding factory will be whether or not Blu-ray chooses to utilize their storage capacity advantage buy encoding the movies at higher quality. Currently they don't, but again like I already said, both technologies still have a ways to go.

[David]

Your not correct in Audio being exactly the same. Because Bluray has more space so it can put uncompressed audio on there discs. Transformers for example on HD DVD ran out of space so they had to use a compressed audio track. LAME

I'm sorry, but you are wrong. Both disks support the exact same audio, including uncompressed. Just because on one movie they used a different method doesn't mean that all formats aren't supported on both disks.

Also like I said HD-DVD has a triple layer disk capable of holding more than current Blu-ray disks

Wait so in equal layers...

Single layer Blu ray wins
Double layer Blu ray wins
Triple layer Blu ray wins
Quad layer Blu ray wins

[spoonraker]

http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/#hddvd

Blu-ray has also adopted a higher data transfer rate for video and audio (54Mbps vs 36.55Mbps). The greater capacity and data transfer rates for Blu-ray will allow the movie studios to release their movies with higher quality video and audio than the HD-DVD format.

You misunderstood that quote...

Blu-ray has a higher data transfer rate meaning it is capable of reading data at a faster rate than HD-DVD, that has nothing to do with the actual files on the disk. Data transfer rate is not the same thing as video encoding bit-rate.

Currently both Blu-ray and HD-DVD are using the SAME video codes at the SAME bit-rate and the SAME resolution. The physical differences only mean that Blu-ray is theoretically capable of handling higher quality files, just like that quote said.

I don't get how you aren't understanding this...

[David]

Because it's a brand new technology and they just haven't put it out yet.

Neither disk is finalized (actually I heard blu-ray was, but only in one source so I don't know if I believe that or not) and they both have room to expand.

By the time both disks reach their max storage capacity, using current video formats, encoding, resolution, and bit-rate, storage will be a non-issue since you can easily put any movie with uncompressed audio on either disk.

Like I said...the deciding factory will be whether or not Blu-ray chooses to utilize their storage capacity advantage buy encoding the movies at higher quality. Currently they don't, but again like I already said, both technologies still have a ways to go.

you are comparing apples to oranges and try to make the oranges apples... I'm not sure how to better explain all this to you.

You = hopeless.

[David]

http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/#hddvd

Blu-ray has also adopted a higher data transfer rate for video and audio (54Mbps vs 36.55Mbps). The greater capacity and data transfer rates for Blu-ray will allow the movie studios to release their movies with higher quality video and audio than the HD-DVD format.

You misunderstood that quote...

Blu-ray has a higher data transfer rate meaning it is capable of reading data at a faster rate than HD-DVD, that has nothing to do with the actual files on the disk.

Currently both Blu-ray and HD-DVD are using the SAME video codes at the SAME bit-rate and the SAME resolution. They physical differences only mean that Blu-ray is theoretically capable of handling higher quality files.

NO, i did't.. This is a prime example of transformers.

[David]

Your understanding is under developed.

[spoonraker]

David, really, you look like an idiot in this thread I'm sorry to say, you have no clue what you're talking about.

The way that Blu-ray reads and stores data on the disk is in no way at all linked to, nor does it have any effect on the final video quality. The effect of the different storage/read methods is that Blu-ray is ultimately capable of storing more data on a disk.

Currently the data stored on both formats is identical. They both have the same video file encoded exactly the same way with the same audio track and supported audio formats.

It is theoretically possible that in the future Blu-ray will fully utilize the advantage it has in storage by using video files that are encoded at higher bit-rates and resolutions.

So like I've said many, many, many times :

HD-DVD and Blu-ray right now are as close as you can get. The deciding factor will be whether or not Blu-ray chooses to use their space advantage by encoding their videos differently. Only time will tell...

[David]

David, really, you look like an idiot in this thread I'm sorry to say, you have no clue what you're talking about.

The way that Blu-ray reads and stores data on the disk is in no way at all linked to, nor does it have any effect on the final video quality. The effect of the different storage/read methods is that Blu-ray is ultimately capable of storing more data on a disk.

Currently the data stored on both formats is identical. They both have the same video file encoded exactly the same way with the same audio track and supported audio formats.

It is theoretically possible that in the future Blu-ray will fully utilize the advantage it has in storage by using video files that are encoded at higher bit-rates and resolutions.

So like I've said many, many, many times :

HD-DVD and Blu-ray right now are as close as you can get. The deciding factor will be whether or no Blu-ray chooses to use their space advantage by encoding their videos differently. Only time will tell...

Your right me and everyone in hollywood are all retarded... :rolleye: I'll tell you what since i cant' get this across to you...

Why do movie studios make movies???

Because they like to make money... More money the better so as this format war goes on do they care which wins? No.. they just want to sell movies.

So in the Market place which has the advantage to sell more? The HD DVD with cheaper players and cheaper movies (movie studies aren't making extra off the increased blu ray manufacturing cost) or the in your eyes the over priced blu ray.

According to you, a person how has spent time looking at plenty of HD content. :rolleye: knows that HD DVD is the only way to go. IT's cheap and does everything the same right? Most american's would agree with you if that was all true...

There is a reason people are buying blu ray and why it's kicking the **** out of HDDVD and why more companies are moving over to Blu ray... because the consumer realizes it's a better product.

Having watched movies on both, I choose blu ray. There is also a reason why in best buy and other stores they typically use blu ray players to show off their HD TV"s. because it looks better. Your agrument is fully based off of something you ahve never seen. Thats like ordering a car based off of what car and driver said.

[David]

There is a reason Michael Bay director of Transformers which is only produced on HDDVD is so vocal about which format is better. and I quote.


Outspoken movie director Michael Bay (http://gadgets.qj.net/tags/michael-bay/13004), the man behind the blockbuster (http://gadgets.qj.net/tags/blockbuster/3141) movie Transformers, recently commented that Microsoft (http://gadgets.qj.net/tags/microsoft/94) wants both the HD DVD and Blu-ray formats to fail (http://ps3.qj.net/Michael-Bay-Microsoft-wants-HD-DVD-and-Blu-ray-to-fail/pg/49/aid/109043) and that the whole format war is just a diversion to create confusion.

Now he adds in his site that he doesn't care about the war at all (since he can play both formats in his screening room anyway) but that the Blu-ray (http://gadgets.qj.net/Michael-Bay-Blu-ray-suits-my-films-better-/pg/49/aid/109215#) format suits his films better:



Does anyone out here want to challenge what I feel suits my films better in terms of look. I see every frame of my films over a hundred times before it is ever released. [...] - Blu Ray suits my films better. But that said - I don't a care about this format war because I have both formats in my screening room - I'm just filling you in on what people deep in the film industry feel ultimately is going on -

[David]

Furthermore who are the first to rush out and buy new tech.?? Enthusiast are. those that demand the best in home entertainment. They are the first wave of purchasers.. That first wave picked Blu ray... The sales numbers 100% back that.

[spoonraker]

I proved you wrong about the original argument so you just broaden the discussion a bit to give yourself some more points to argue? Good try, but it's not going to work on me.

The original debate was that Blu-ray and HD-DVD have the same VIDEO QUALITY.

The fact is that you were proved wrong : Currently HD-DVD and Blu-ray are identical in terms of quality. Accept it and move on with your life.

If you want to broaden the discussion and ask the question : "Which is overall better?" then I would agree with you that although right now they are very similar, Blu-ray is a better investment because in the future it will be a superior product. With faster read speeds the loading will be quicker, and with more storage capacity it is possible that the videos will be higher quality. If Blu-ray chooses to not capitalize on it's storage advantage than I would have to flip my position and say that HD-DVD is a better value because you get the same quality for less money, the only difference being load times. If you are somebody who puts a lot of value in extra features, then even with the same video quality, I could see the extra money being worth it for Blu-ray since even though the quality is the same, there is still extra space available for more extras on Blu-ray.

I'd just like to say this one more time though : You're wrong, the current video quality of both formats is identical.

[David]

Ok.. you're retarded and ignorant..

Based off what you are saying. IF you took a HD DVD player and a Blu ray player and put the same movie in it, it would be impossible to see a difference.

You are 100% ****ing wrong.



PLEASE ANSWER THIS QUESTION

HAVE YOU EVER WATCHED A MOVIE ON BOTH HDDVD AND BLU RAY?

[spoonraker]

If the movie was encoded the same way, yes, that's exactly what I'm saying.

Although like I also said, they aren't always encoded using the same codec since early on Blu-ray was limited to only using the older MPEG-2 codec. Although most current movies utilize the same codec on both formats.

[Alley]

David is correct on all accounts on this thread.

[David]

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/davidnewman3/mi1.jpg

[spoonraker]

Oh wow an image with no description of any kind that only shows (assuming that is supposed to be the difference between HD-DVD and Blu-Ray) that somebody needs to adjust their color... that totally disproves all of the cited facts that I have posted in response to your biased bullshit

congrats, you win!

[David]

Those ares side by side comparisons. Can you pick out which one is Blu ray and which one is HD DVD?

You can sure tell there is a ****ing difference in many aspects of the picture. Get over it you won't even answer my simple ****ing question which completly proves YOU ARE TALKING OUT OF YOUR ASS

[spoonraker]

A tiny image on the internet proves nothing.

We don't know how they captured the image, we don't know whether the same TV with the same settings was used on both, we don't know which movie it is, whether both used the same codecs for that video...as a matter of fact we know nothing about that image whatsoever.

Does anybody have an HD-DVD player? We could just hook them both up to David's HDTV and really find out.

[David]

you're right, but your first hand experiance tells all.

answer the question.

[David]

You realize your idea of comparing image quality is never seening the image right?

[spoonraker]

Answer what question? Can I tell which of the images are supposedly Blu-ray? No I can't and I don't really care what the answer is because it proves nothing.

A fair comparison would be taking two of the same model of TV with all the same settings and putting them side by side. Take an HD-DVD and a Blu-ray player and play each of them individually on both TVs using the same movie that was encoded the same to make sure that the TVs are really the same picture. Then play the HD-DVD and Blu-Ray on them side by side, maybe switch TVs to again ensure that the only variable is the player.

Until I see that, I'm going to continue to argue that the image quality is the same, because there is no reason related at all to the compression of the video that would cause the images to be different.

That's like saying that the same camera, with the same lens, only with one model that records to SD cards and one that records to a CD or DVD, takes better pictures on say the SD card model.

[Bryan]

are you two nancies done fighting yet. its a ****ing movie! either you see it and hear it or you dont jesus ****ing christ....

[coop]

this thread is as gay as the users posting in it

[spoonraker]

We're not fighting, I'm just repeatedly presenting the same evidence and David keeps avoiding it.

[Bryan]

this thread is as gay as the users posting in it
well in that case...
POST

[Bryan]

post

[spoonraker]

Someday I will actually change David's view on something... someday...

360/PS3 : nope
Military : nope
Blu-ray : not looking good

[Bryan]

man on man: looking great

[spoonraker]

:gaysex: :gr_rainbow: :kysmiley: :gayspin: :tagteam: :gayflag: :bananasex:

[Bryan]

omg i love it

[David]

You lose everytime i dont' even get why you bother... You dont' have a leg to stand in each case you are always talking about things you know NOTHING ABOUT... but strangly they are all topics i'm well versed in...

Spoonraker = consistantly wrong on all levels... .

So since you can't answer my question that you are an expert in or seemed to ignor i'll ask it again maybe if i ask it enough times you will finally answer it..


PLEASE ANSWER THIS QUESTION

HAVE YOU EVER WATCHED A MOVIE ON BOTH HDDVD AND BLU RAY?

[David]

PLEASE ANSWER THIS QUESTION

HAVE YOU EVER WATCHED A MOVIE ON BOTH HDDVD AND BLU RAY?

[David]

PLEASE ANSWER THIS QUESTION

HAVE YOU EVER WATCHED A MOVIE ON BOTH HDDVD AND BLU RAY?

[spoonraker]

No I haven't seen an HD-DVD and a Blu-ray movie, but that doesn't matter.

It's the same file just stored on a different disk, the quality will be the same, period.

I have plenty of experience with video editing and compression however, and it doesn't take anything more than common sense to know that the type of device a file is stored on doesn't have any effect on the file that is stored. Both HD-DVD and Blu-ray are more than capable of reading the file from the disk. It's not like an old vinyl record where the reading of the data can actually have an effect on the quality.

Take a short video clip and store it on a ZIP disk, take the same video clip and put it on a DVD, a CD, a Blu-Ray, and an HD-DVD. They will all play back exactly the same, because it's the SAME DATA.

[spoonraker]

And I'm sorry you are obviously not at all well versed in this topic.

All you know is what the Blu-ray hype sites tell you, and you don't even seem to understand what you read there. I'm experienced in video editing and compression techniques.

[David]

Someday I will actually change David's view on something... someday...

360/PS3 : nope
Military : nope
Blu-ray : not looking good


whats there to change.. you're always wrong..

360/PS3. PS3 is better in every regards to the 360. IT's cost effective over the 360. It has built in blu ray which again is next format, and the list goes on.. You have never been able to prove that the 360 on any level is better. The PS3 sales are picking up and once it's big titles start making it to the shelves it's going to blow that red light 360 right out the door.


Military: Just because there is no way that you could make it in the military doesn't make it a bad decision as you claim it to be. You show me where one can have a part-time job that pays out the equivalent of taking home $78 an hour. I bet with your level of education you make that plus some at your full-time right? You know it's probably best to dissolve our military and our government... Who needs it any ways.. The reality is your jealous of mil. benefits.. it's really that simple..


Blu ray.... At this point i'm convinced you have never watched a blu ray movie or an HD DVD movie... and i'm also convinced that your HD experiance is next to nothing... With that said it really doesn't matter what you say... you can't be right, if you can experiance it how can you eve know what your talking about??? you can't. Until you move out of you mom's house... get a 1080p TV that isn't a pile of **** like some are and atleast one of the player for the above format, shut the **** up.. you don't know... get over it... interesting enough the only people that have posted in this thread that have TV's that can make use of this format both support blu ray..

So recap...

PS3/360... your wrong
Military ..... wrong again
Blu ray..... yup still wrong

[spoonraker]

And the other topics like the PS3/360 debate and the military were just opinion threads, I was just trying to get you to acknowledge the other side of the debate.

This thread isn't about opinion. There is no room for opinion here.

The fact is when you read the same data from two different storage devices that are both perfectly capable of handling it without losing any data, the end result is THE EXACT SAME DATA.

The same file went in, the same file comes out, period.

You are the worst debater I've ever seen David, you just flat out deny evidence clearly presented to you and refuse to even acknowledge another side of an issue.

[David]

and bump for being gay.. :woot:

[David]

And the other topics like the PS3/360 debate and the military were just opinion threads, I was just trying to get you to acknowledge the other side of the debate.

This thread isn't about opinion. There is no room for opinion here.

The fact is when you read the same data from two different storage devices that are both perfectly capable of handling it without losing any data, the end result is THE EXACT SAME DATA.

The same file went in, the same file comes out, period.

You are the worst debater I've ever seen David, you just flat out deny evidence clearly presented to you and refuse to even acknowledge another side of an issue.

Thats really funny... because i've gone to state for debate and even have my ubber cool letter from Southeast.. i the suck at debate. :lol:

[David]

No I haven't seen an HD-DVD and a Blu-ray movie, but that doesn't matter.

It's the same file just stored on a different disk, the quality will be the same, period.

I have plenty of experience with video editing and compression however, and it doesn't take anything more than common sense to know that the type of device a file is stored on doesn't have any effect on the file that is stored. Both HD-DVD and Blu-ray are more than capable of reading the file from the disk. It's not like an old vinyl record where the reading of the data can actually have an effect on the quality.

Take a short video clip and store it on a ZIP disk, take the same video clip and put it on a DVD, a CD, a Blu-Ray, and an HD-DVD. They will all play back exactly the same, because it's the SAME DATA.


This experiance... do you have a degree in this?

[spoonraker]

Seriously, anybody who looks over this thread will realize that you were completely obliterated on this topic.

I repeatedly presented evidence to support my opinion with factual information taken from multiple credible sources.

The only actual credible evidence you provided was a quote from www.blu-ray.com about the data transfer rate which you didn't even understand what it meant. You were confusing it with encoding bit-rate.

I understand how Blu-ray's work, I understand how HD-DVDs work, I understand how video compression works. I know all the technical details about both disks and the types of files supported and put on them.

They are the same. Stop arguing, or at least debate with logic and evidence, because you just look dumber every time you post.

[David]

You do realize that picture i have is a direct comparison of Blu ray and HD DVD... you can ***** about settings but that is what it is..

[David]

Seriously, anybody who looks over this thread will realize that you were completely obliterated on this topic.

I repeatedly presented evidence to support my opinion with factual information taken from multiple credible sources.

The only actual credible evidence you provided was a quote from www.blu-ray.com (http://www.blu-ray.com) about the data transfer rate which you didn't even understand what it meant. You were confusing it with encoding bit-rate.

I understand how Blu-ray's work, I understand how HD-DVDs work, I understand how video compression works. I know all the technical details about both disks and the types of files supported and put on them.

They are the same. Stop arguing, or at least debate with logic and evidence, because you just look dumber every time you post.


So... how do you know this.. you worked for sony and toshiba? you must make atleast 6 figures.. sorry for questioning you. I didn't realize you were one of the very few people that actually worked in both camps... God that must mean you were there during develeopment.. That would have made you like 10... holy **** thats impressive.

[spoonraker]

No the picture you have is a tiny obviously modified image found on the internet that proves nothing.

If it was really a direct comparison the image would be thousands of pixels wide at least.

I bet I could take 2 TVs and put a HD-DVD in each one and tell you one of them was Blu-ray and you would tell me that the Blu-ray one looked better. ****, I bet you'd say a VHS tape looked better if you believed it was a Blu-ray disk.

[spoonraker]

anyway I'm going home, thanks for giving me something to do today and somebody to laugh at

[David]

You mean thanks for making you look retarded all day..

hey no problem..

[David]

You realize between the both of us i'm the only one that seen both... heard both.. can afford both apprently even though you have some crazy paying job and live at home... If they are the exact same then why do you care to argue on behalf of HDDVD and why is there a war when in 2005 they tried to consolidate all of this into one...

[David]

No the picture you have is a tiny obviously modified image found on the internet that proves nothing.

If it was really a direct comparison the image would be thousands of pixels wide at least.

I bet I could take 2 TVs and put a HD-DVD in each one and tell you one of them was Blu-ray and you would tell me that the Blu-ray one looked better. ****, I bet you'd say a VHS tape looked better if you believed it was a Blu-ray disk.


The size was reduced.. which means nothing changed.. your an expert in this i don't know why your questioning it.

There are alot of different in those pictures but you refuse to look. from color saturation, sharpness, etc... your ignoring it because it blows everything you have been talking about out of the water. The funny thing is I won't tell you which is which..

[David]

Btw there is one imporant fact iv'e been leaving out of this for well before this started and i've mentioned it before (different thread)... You're right on many accounts but it's never made me wrong... ;)

[David]

The funny thing is to know what i'm talking about you would actually have to watch and compare...

[spoonraker]

No the picture you have is a tiny obviously modified image found on the internet that proves nothing.

If it was really a direct comparison the image would be thousands of pixels wide at least.

I bet I could take 2 TVs and put a HD-DVD in each one and tell you one of them was Blu-ray and you would tell me that the Blu-ray one looked better. ****, I bet you'd say a VHS tape looked better if you believed it was a Blu-ray disk.


The size was reduced.. which means nothing changed.. your an expert in this i don't know why your questioning it.

There are alot of different in those pictures but you refuse to look. from color saturation, sharpness, etc... your ignoring it because it blows everything you have been talking about out of the water. The funny thing is I won't tell you which is which..

No the funny thing is that you believe you are right. I haven't been acknowledging your "evidence" because it's nothing more than a tiny image found on the internet.

If they actually properly captured an image from each of the videos they would be thousands and thousands of pixels in size and look identical, because they would be from the same file.

I just don't get it, honestly, it boggles my mind how you don't understand this.

I'm going to break this down again...

If you take two of the same file, and compress it with the same video codec, with the same bit-rate and the same resolution, what happens? That's right, you get TWO OF THE SAME FILES AGAIN, only compressed.

Now you take your two identical files and without modification to either one burn them onto two different storage devices and play them back...what happens? You're right again, you get THE SAME VIDEO.

The only time HD-DVD and Blu-ray used different compression was early on when Blu-ray was limited to only using the older MPEG-2 codec which is what was used on regular DVD movies, blu-ray just used higher resolution and bit-rate settings to make it high def.

[David]

still wrong... you wont' get it until you watch. You seriously are retarded. I've been giving you clues this whole ****ing time.. YOu want to talk about mind boggling.. You keep trying to act like your some expert.. That you "Know" how **** works.

The reality is your are missing atleast 3 parts of this puzzle and thats why they display differently.. The above information you mentioned is right but you are missing a couple other items.. For those reasons you are still wrong...If you can't figure out what those others are it really doesn't make you retarded it just means you weren't thinking about the problem hard enough.. You have to understand this is rather entertaining.

The reason you aren't trying hard enough is because you believe you are so right you are not looking for the other parts of this. You would try harder if you actually seen 2 exact movies played side by side... but you are so wrapped around compression this and bits that, that you are completly over looking the other details... i've been trying to help you through this but can't seem to think outside the box... This is why i win. i'm not going to give you the information because then you will toss a fit about those details.

I understand how storing data works. quit trying to re-invent the wheel and make yourself look like your some expert. You aren't impressing me or anyone else. Honestly i doubt anyone else is reading this thread .. i seen a few browse it for a min. but this is really just the 2 of us..

This has been my game and i've had the upper hand the whole time... as soon as you said i was fun to debate you lost.

[spoonraker]

So you agree that it's the same data, and that the storage device has nothing to do with video quality?

So how do you propose that the quality of Blu-ray is any better when it's the same device displaying the same data?

Until you post some of your own details I'm going to just keep on assuming I'm right because that's the only thing that has been proven. You can keep acting arrogant and acting like you have some smoking gun that you have yet to unleash...well back up your **** and post up what you have.

If you're right then you're right and I will admit it. Maybe ALL the websites that I have been to have only told half the story. Fill me in and I will admit that I was wrong.

[David]

negative... i have a ****ing nuke and you don't wanna hear it...


Sure we agree that the method of storage has nothing to do with it.. File X looks exactly the same on a DVD as it does on Blu ray.

If i copy a dvd and burn it to blu ray it will be the same exact file.. if i copy it again from blu ray to dvd again and play both DVD's it "should" look 100% identical.

[spoonraker]

and here is some more..

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/feature/frankenfight-bluray-vs-hd-dvd-formats-not-equal-238336.php

^ This website polled over 300 people and they actually gave a very slight edge to HD-DVD in terms of video quality, however the statistic was too close to call. Plenty of people agreed that Blu-ray's ability to put uncompressed audio tracks (due to extra storage) gave them a clear edge in sound quality, however again video quality was identical

http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/HD-DVD-vs-Blu-ray-video-quality-head-to-head-comparison.html
^Yet another direct side by side comparison of the two formats gives HD-DVD a slight edge in video quality, although once again they were admittedly very similar

http://www.hometheaterblog.com/hometheater/2006/06/bluray_vs_hddvd.html
^Oh look another website that viewed both formats and gave the edge to HD-DVD. Citing that the newer codec used is clearly superior to the old MPEG-2 codec used on Blu-ray disks.

http://www.tech-evangelist.com/2006/10/20/hd-dvd-blu-ray-video-formats/
^ more of the same


So like I've been saying all along. Blu-ray has the CAPABILITY, WHEN they come out with higher capacity disks to encode their videos with the same codec at higher bit-rates and resolutions thus created better image quality. However, as I've said again and again, they currently DONT. The quality is IDENTICAL, in fact on early movies where Blu-ray still used the MPEG-2 codec the quality on HD-DVD is superior.

[David]

btw.. i had read all of those before you posted them...

yawn... you are getting much closer though.

[David]

i can find equally as many results saying blu ray has the quality advantage...

those results are not what i'm talking about...

[David]

and here is some more..

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/feature/frankenfight-bluray-vs-hd-dvd-formats-not-equal-238336.php

^ This website polled over 300 people and they actually gave a very slight edge to HD-DVD in terms of video quality, however the statistic was too close to call. Plenty of people agreed that Blu-ray's ability to put uncompressed audio tracks (due to extra storage) gave them a clear edge in sound quality, however again video quality was identical

http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/HD-DVD-vs-Blu-ray-video-quality-head-to-head-comparison.html
^Yet another direct side by side comparison of the two formats gives HD-DVD a slight edge in video quality, although once again they were admittedly very similar

http://www.hometheaterblog.com/hometheater/2006/06/bluray_vs_hddvd.html
^Oh look another website that viewed both formats and gave the edge to HD-DVD. Citing that the newer codec used is clearly superior to the old MPEG-2 codec used on Blu-ray disks.

http://www.tech-evangelist.com/2006/10/20/hd-dvd-blu-ray-video-formats/
^ more of the same


So like I've been saying all along. Blu-ray has the CAPABILITY, WHEN they come out with higher capacity disks to encode their videos with the same codec at higher bit-rates and resolutions thus created better image quality. However, as I've said again and again, they currently DONT. The quality is IDENTICAL, in fact on early movies where Blu-ray still used the MPEG-2 codec the quality on HD-DVD is superior.


Btw. your argument this whole time has been that they are exactly the same. I've said they are not. I've not put any focus on one being better than the other. I have simply stated their is a difference. This simply proves me right. :eek2smiley:

you don't poll people unless their is a difference.

[spoonraker]

Yes there is a difference, but that difference does not involve image quality. Early on there was a slight difference which gave HD-DVD the advantage, but now they are 100% the same images.

You're arguments are getting more and more dumb David. Like I've said in the past you always try the "Prove I'm right by proving they're wrong" method. Guess what, in addition to being a huge logical fallacy, you didn't even prove that I'm wrong.

The fact is it's the same image, with the same codecs, and the same settings. Please...try and prove me wrong, or hey why not go nuts and try and actually prove yourself right as well.

[David]

You must be seriously retarded or just lame... You just admitted there was a difference. Your argument has been they are exactly the same. in your above post. You say.

Yes there is a difference

they are 100% the same images

Dont' tell me i'm dumb when you make retarded post like that. Seriously just say i'm right and walk way.. having made this post and those links above prove you are wrong... it's that easy.

Yes, i did prove i'm right. As you stated this is not an opinion based debate. It's facts.
so yes or no. Right or wrong. If your wrong I'm right. it's that easy.


BTW. you have no idea how to debate and don't try to "school me" God you are ****ing retarded 90% of the time you keep trying to educate me on things i obviously know way more about then you. If debating was about proving who was right there would be no point in debating. It's about proving you are more right...**** you don't even have to be right if you can make them look obviously wrong. Which is what i've done. you are wrong.......................................ITS THAT EASY...........................YOU LOST.................GET THE **** OVER IT!!!

[Thunder]

great i just wasted 3 minutes of my life, thanks

[David]

great i just wasted 3 minutes of my life, thanks


:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

just think... i've wasted far more..


Thunder FTW.

[spoonraker]

Uhm...

I said image quality was the same. It is, and I've proved that many many many times.

Early on, again like I already said, Blu-ray was limited to only using the older MPEG-2 codec while HD-DVD was using VC-1, so while the quality difference was not noticable to the average viewer, they were still slightly different, with HD-DVD having better quality.

Now blu-ray has support for all the codecs so the movies are all compressed the exact same way, making the image quality exactly the same.

My argument has been all along that there is no difference in image quality. I did say that early on there was a slight difference, but now that blu-ray has caught up they are the same.

Again...you keep trying as hard as you can to punch holes in my argument, but the entire time, all 2393453483 replies you have not once given any evidence to support your own argument except for one misunderstood quote from blu-ray.


The original statement by you is this :

Blu-ray has better quality than HD-DVD

What I proved is this :

HD-DVD was actually better when they first were both released, but since then Blu-ray has caught up. Currently both offer the exact same quality. Neither one, in terms of image quality alone, is any better.

[David]

You can't prove their is no image quality difference. You have never seen either. So how can you know? You don't. You have proven and stated their is a difference just get over it. You cut your own head off on this.

[spoonraker]

I can't prove that you don't believe there to be a difference

but I can prove that there is absolutely no difference in the source, the encoding, or the presentation...therefore proving that any percieved difference is simply your own belief

It's the placebo effect. You believe there to be a difference, so you see it. Like I said I bet I could line up two TVs with HD-DVD in both of them, but tell you that one of them was Blu-ray, and you would always say that the one you believe to be Blu-ray has better quality.

Just face it, I have factual information backing up my theory, you don't.

[David]

No you don't. You can't understand until you see. I want you to see before i tell you why so you realize what kinda of a retard you are.

You keep getting wrapped up in how it was stored... <-----This is your problem


Your not wrong about your thinking your wrong about the end results.

THe reality is this has never been to me, to prove that blu ray is better than HD DVD which is something you have burnt in your head...

You asked for a debate. You got one... You lost... get over it. If I got a group of people together and had them side by side watch 2 side by side movies with the same screen... if any of them can see any difference you are wrong... The reality is there is a difference and thats why people in the industry choose one of the other... Like Mr. Bay. That also includes but is not limited to those article you picked up thinking they supported your end but really only proved mine. Why did they compare? Everyone should know they are the exact same so why would they do a side by side comparison? Because tehy know there will be some difference.


I'm not going to tell you why. I know you will jump in another thread at another date and scream DAVID'S WRONG DAVID's WRONG THEY HAVE TO BE THE SAME OMG... and then i will call you retarded and explain why in a very short answer.. You will realize that i am right because it makes logical sense. You will think back to this thread and realize what i was poking at the whole time and realize damn.


Why wont' i just tell you then? I've already won here and didn't have to use it.

[David]

I can see your working on another response. Let me put it this way. You've already proved that viewers can see a difference. That proves my point... Doesn't matter that you "proved" that HD DVD was better... But by providing that information you cut your own hand off doesn't matter what else you post. you lost.

[spoonraker]

You haven't proved your side, and you have't disproved mine.

When I said the quality is the same I didn't mean 100% all the time it's the exact same thing, there was a difference early on which I already talked about, I just meant that the quality right now is so similar that anybody claiming to see a noticable difference is just making **** up because they are biased.

Hardware-wise there is no difference besides the storage capacity of the disk, which has no effect on image quality. It creates the possibility of better quality, but since they aren't utilizing it, it doesn't matter.

They both support and fully utilize all of the exact same technologies both hardware and software right now.

You won't provide any evidence because you HAVE NONE. Your first hand experience is not evidence because it's just your opinion.

Like I said...it's the placebo effect. You believed something so you saw it. I've seen clips where an actor goes into a fancy restaurant acting like a waitor. He comes in with a bunch of glasses of water all filled out of the same GARDEN HOSE and claims that they are all different brands, and guess what, people say that certain ones taste better because they believe it to be so.

If you have evidence, now is the time to provide it, because you're starting to look like a guy backed into a corner.

[David]

You dont' get it...You said i'm fun to debate.... You by doing so asked for a debate. You can't drag this on and on because you can't accept the out come...

I don't have to prove i'm right because you proved yourself wrong. Thats how this works. If you prove the basis of your own argument wrong while trying to prove it right you can't win.

YOU LOST!!! Quit trying to claim i have nothing. I don't have to have anything... I could 100% agree with everything in your post and know you are right and i'm still right because you stated you are wrong...


Stop trying to dig at this you lost... Accept that you lost and if you ask nice instead of trying to sound like your better than me (which your not) i "Might" be willing to help you understand what i've been holding back..


But i'll tell you what.

I've already agreed with you about them both being just storage devices.


Your missing the bigger picture. Part of the answer is your post above, that is inaccurate.

Do yourself a favor. Dont' try to go through your post and justify it. You will be wasting your time

[David]

Let me put it this way... There are freshman in highschool that do this better than you... I know, i've judged them.

[spoonraker]

The only thing you proved was that you interpreted what I said wrong.

I've said all along that different codecs are sometimes used, but currently most movies are encoded exactly the same, so once again if any difference in quality does or did exist, it was very small and always in HD-DVD's favor.

Stay on topic David, I'm not debating who is the better debater here or which one of us would win if we were on a debate team.

This is quite simple :

You believe Blu-ray has better quality video than HD-DVD.

I have proved over and over and over and over again that at best Blu-ray's image quality is equal to HD-DVD.

I'm not trying to pass off HD-DVD as being better than Blu-ray, I'm simply trying to prove that you're belief that Blu-ray has better quality is wrong, which I have done.

I don't have a "side", this isn't a debate, this is simply me proving your belief to be wrong.

Until you can justify your statement you've only proven that you have way too much time to nitpick through my posts looking for any signs of a logical fallacy, which you still haven't found.

[David]

Quote me somewhere in here where i said blu ray is better.

You can't. so dont' waste your time.

You said you wanted a debate now your saying you don't. you say this isn't a debate because that would mean you lose. So as a last ditch effort after 6 pages you finally say... oh this isn't about a debate its' about your belief.

But at the beginning you also said this was about facts.

You have flip flopped all over this thread. Dude you don't know, your making **** up and doing whatever you can to make you look right.

If you weren't trying to prove HD was better then why post those links? To prove there was a difference? are you ****ing kidding me. Those links did NOTHING FOR YOU. These FACTS as you called them...

You keep trying to teach me about codecs/compression/storage etc. You havent' told me one thing i don't already know...... You can't accept that i'm right and can't prove it because you won't even bother to do an experiment. Your so convinced that there can't be a difference but your wrong there is. You just don't understand why. But you don't bother to look for the answer because you already think your right. But you don't know that your wrong because you haven't seen it happen.


IN the end you have changed your story, the argument, keep ranting over the same lame not helping the topic tech **** that i've already agreed too and still just dont' get it.

[spoonraker]

I haven't changed my argument one single time. I have had to say the same things numerous times in different ways while you try everything you can come up with to avoid the truth : you have nothing to support your argument other than your opinion which is worthless in a fact based discussion.

I'm not going to discuss debate techniques with you, and I'm not going to let you escape the truth by changing the subject.

Let me put it this way...

David, here is my statement :

Blu-ray does not have higher quality video than HD-DVD.

Here is my evidence to support my statement :

-Blu-ray and HD-DVD currently use the same video compression. The same codec is used, at the same bit-rate and resolution
-Blu-ray's storage capacity advantage and data-transfer speed advantage have no effect on image quality, which, from a hardware standpoint, is the only difference between the two formats.

If you want, I will gladly cite (again) many sources for that data, but I don't think it's necessary since you can easily find all that information yourself.

now David, it's your turn...

[David]

If you want to keep this going you have to play by my rules. I have already showed you how you have flip flopped through this. How you use sites like CNET to prove yourself right but infact proved you wrong..

If you agree to play by my rules which will cut out these long drawn out post i'll continue.

[spoonraker]

it would be easier to make a decision if you actually provided the terms of the agreement...

[Thunder]

great i just wasted 3 minutes of my life, thanks

and I keep reading, theres something about this.... I can't just stop looking.

http://img.nytstore.com/IMAGES/NSAPTRAN4_LARGE.JPG

[spoonraker]

well at least you're learning something while reading along

go to best buy and ask them about either one of them and then impress them with your knowledge when they start spewing bullshit

[David]

i'll ask you questions. You provide short answers. When i say it's ok for you to ask a question of me you may. your question must be short and i in turn will provide a short answer.

[spoonraker]

I guess we'll try this, could be interesting. I already know what your first question is going to be though...

[David]

Really i'm not even sure what my first question should be...

[David]

Which is better. HD-DVD or Blu Ray?

[David]

remember short answers. don't care why

[spoonraker]

Right now I don't think either one is better overall. In every aspect of overall better they are both so close, and they both are still developing technologies.

[spoonraker]

Also, did you forget what we're talking about here?

All Im concerned with is image quality, i dont' give a **** about anything else. This is something I know lots about and can prove my side in. So you should be asking questions about that, not about unrelated general opinions

[David]

That answer was way to long... Try again like... Neither.

[spoonraker]

That was a very concise post. I started with my statement and provided my reasoning for having that view. I'm not going to do one word answers.

[David]

Fine fine fine...

Go ahead and ask a question.

[spoonraker]

Do you believe that Blu-ray's image quality is superior to HD-DVD's?

[David]

No.

[David]

Do you believe that blu ray and HD DVD disks are storages devices and nothing more?

[spoonraker]

wait back up a second....

You just said that you don't believe Blu-ray's image quality to be superior to HD-DVD...

HOLY **** THE THREAD IS OVER, I win, and I'm done.

[David]

no you didn't thats never been the argument.

[spoonraker]

:rofl:

[David]

I'll take back my last question.


What do you think this agrument is about?

[David]

LOL at you for searching my post.

[David]

http://img178.imageshack.us/img178/4121/spooneb1.jpg

[Alley]

Too bad we can't just have raves about bluray here without haters comming in and trying bring it down.

[David]

you've been on this screen for now 4 mins. either your typing out another huge response or your slow.

[David]

The funny this is he's gonna be pissed when i tell him why they display differently...

but you know alley their are reasons for raving about blu ray... Blu ray is winning and will win. We have it first... it looks bad ass on our super bad ass TV's. We won't have to buy new players in a couple years unless we want too.

[spoonraker]

This debate is about Blu-ray and HD-DVD image quality, is it not?

[David]

No, it's about there being a difference in the image.

[David]

My turn.

[David]

Can you see image quality by looking at a disk?

[spoonraker]

So you agree that this debate was about the image quality of HD-DVD and Blu-ray.

And you agree that Blu-ray does NOT have better image quality than HD-DVD.

Well then, I have accomplished my goal and proven you wrong about something, and now I'm done.

[David]

Blu ray is better. The only thing you have accomplished is looking like a fool because you wont' finish this. You keep trying ot jump out because you know you are about to get schooled. Just like you did on page 6.

[spoonraker]

Oh just give it a rest already.

You've stated numerous times that you think Blu-ray has a better image than HD-DVD and I just proved you wrong. Game over.

[Alley]

Bluray is better but not superior, like spoon phrased the question.

[David]

you haven't proven ****. You can't even keep u with your own arguments. I try to make this easy on you so you don't have to get all heated and you cry like a lil baby and say OMG I WIN HA i'm out. When i've already kicked your ass for the first 6 pages and then gave you again a 2nd chance.. so you took your second chance something you agreed to and then try to run... Seriously the only consistance in this is you being inconsistant.

[spoonraker]

:lol:

superior1 [suˈpiəriə] adjective
(often with to) higher in rank, better, or greater, than

stop splitting hairs, this is over

[David]

LOL

[David]

Bluray is better but not superior, like spoon phrased the question.


Exactly... He keeps changing words.

[spoonraker]

THEY MEAN THE SAME THING...good lord this is ridiculous

[David]

:lol:

superior1 [suˈpiəriə] adjective
(often with to) higher in rank, better, or greater, than

stop splitting hairs, this is over


Why do you keep trying ot say it's over you agreed to play my game.. Now that you are about to get socked in the nuts again you wanna run away.

[Alley]

lol, this debate is over. Spoon has to resort to looking up words in the dictionary to back his puny arguments. We common sense tells us what was meant.

[David]

I guess i don't blame you... if i was getting my ass kicked left and right and was so over my head i'd probably try to run too

[spoonraker]

How are you still talking? Seriously, I'm genuinely confused...

You said numerous times that Blu-ray had a better/superior image quality when compared to HD-DVD

I proved you wrong and got you to admit it, therefore, I WIN

[David]

No you asked if it was superior... I said no... you asked if it was better i said yes.

[David]

Is that concept too much for you...

should i draw you a picture...

[David]

You went away from the questions.. I can spew **** out just as fast.

[Alley]

If the debate is over spoon, then quit posting in this thread.

[spoonraker]

They are ****ing synonyms. Do you know what that means?

[David]

Exactly. THis thread was over when i proved there was a difference in image quality. I didn't prove this you did. Thats where all this ended. I was giving you a second chance to put the first 6 pages to rest and start over. You ****ed it up. THis is over you got your ass handed to you...

You asked for a debate then said... uh this isn't a debate

You said it was bout facts but then post up links about opinions

[spoonraker]

Oh...My...God...

How do you not understand this...

You said Blu-ray has better image quality. I proved you wrong. I got you to admit that I was right.

That's all there is to it

[David]

If they were the exact same word, then why not use the same word again?

[David]

Oh...My...God...

How do you not understand this...

You said Blu-ray has better image quality. I proved you wrong. I got you to admit that I was right.

That's all there is to it


ARE YOU BLIND I clearly wrote BLU RAY IS BETTER!!!

[spoonraker]

because sometimes superior sounds fancier

[David]

You haven't proved me wrong. You posted links of opinions that support that HD DVD was better. But you said it's about facts and ops are not FACTS

[David]

because sometimes superior sounds fancier


be consistant. changing of words and context change the meaning. It's the english language i know it's complicated but try to keep up.

[spoonraker]

Uhm....do I really need to go back and quote all the FACTS that I have posted?

[David]

What facts.... you don't have any..

[spoonraker]

Uhm...

Blu-ray and HD-DVD use the same codecs, encoded with the same bit-rate and resolution

that's a fact

[spoonraker]

sorry...

CURRENTLY, they use the same codecs, etc.

there was a difference in the past

[David]

Agreed. WOW LOOK AT WONDER BOY WITH HIS WONDER FACTS.


I"VE TOLD YOU 100X's thats NOT WHAT CHANGES THE PICTURE

[spoonraker]

well than fill me in, what does change it?

[David]

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHHAAHHAHA THINK FOR 1 min...


you finally asked the right ****ing question you ****ing noob.





























What can affect the color/picture/everything in the image.

[Alley]

Ask 100 people if superior and better mean exactly the same thing. 99 will say no. Your the only noob that will say yes.

[David]

Ask 100 people if superior and better mean exactly the same thing. 99 will say no. Your the only noob that will say yes.


True.

[spoonraker]

Don't answer a question with a question David, just state your case and be done with it.

If you legitimately prove me wrong then I will be the first to admit it...so please...PLEASE...just say what you've been supposedly holding back

[Alley]

The studio is what makes the high def picture. They take a master source and reconstruct it screen by screen. Some of the early blurays didn't look that great at all. But now there mastering the art of bringing movies into high def. And its easier with bluray since its the superior format.

[Cotnerdude]

OMG you are all crazy who cares :shithitsthefan:

[David]

Mr. Bay perfers Blu Ray over HD DVD because he's films look and work better in Blu Ray... He knows because he spends hours going over every frame of his work. Which explains his bitter hate for having his film in HD DVD.


The difference is hardware you stupid noob. Players are not created equal. You must have a player to have either HD or Blu. The hardware/firm ware within will not generate 100% the exact same picture. That does not mean that all Blu ray players are better, nor does it mean the reverse. So when I said orginally they are not the same and you have to watch both side by side to see... I'm right because there is a difference. The image in the beginning that you cried about is a comparison of HD vs Blu.

[spoonraker]

That's only partially true...

When you are converting a non-high-def movie into an HD movie without the uncompressed source, then yes that is what happens.

However with current films what happens is the movie is shot. The raw, uncompressed footage is edited and saved as the final uncompressed movie. Then companies take it, compress it using the codec of their choice with the settings of their choice (bit-rate and resolution) and the compression settings are what determines if a film is considered HD. Since both Blu-ray and HD-DVD use the same source and compress it the same way, the end result is the same image quality.

So...I guess I will admit that there are certain cases where movies that are "digitally remastered" in high-def could be drastically different. However the large majority of movies available on HD are current movies where this is not the case.

[David]

I don't keep up with the issues the HD camp has with their players but i can honestly say that one of the samsung players that came out first had an issue with a sound filter. It ****ed up sound and some picture. It's the hardware. This whole time i've known that, and even poked at it. Gave you clues...

[spoonraker]

And as for David's post...

That is true, a crappy player can make a picture look different.

However, both formats have bad and good players, and since blu-ray and HD-DVD players are going to be produced, improved, and reworked for a LONG time to come, saying that Blu-ray has better image quality because of one specific player you experienced....well that's just a dumb argument.

[David]

That's only partially true...

When you are converting a non-high-def movie into an HD movie without the uncompressed source, then yes that is what happens.

However with current films what happens is the movie is shot. The raw, uncompressed footage is edited and saved as the final uncompressed movie. Then companies take it, compress it using the codec of their choice with the settings of their choice (bit-rate and resolution) and the compression settings are what determines if a film is considered HD. Since both Blu-ray and HD-DVD use the same source and compress it the same way, the end result is the same image quality.

So...I guess I will admit that there are certain cases where movies that are "digitally remastered" in high-def could be drastically different. However the large majority of movies available on HD are current movies where this is not the case.

Who are these companies?? do you think sony burns these? it's the movie studios that control everything.

[David]

And as for David's post...

That is true, a crappy player can make a picture look different.

However, both formats have bad and good players, and since blu-ray and HD-DVD players are going to be produced, improved, and reworked for a LONG time to come, saying that Blu-ray has better image quality because of one specific player you experienced....well that's just a dumb argument.


no it's not a dumb argument. it's a fact.. Even if you took the highest end player from both I assure you there will be variations. THe problem is you can't tell which is right because you don't know what the intended vision was.

[David]

Transformers coming out in HD was a last min thing. It almost made the dual cut but the biggest movie the year wasn't going go out in both formats if the HD camp had any say about it... money talks... it will be a good year or better before i can get a blu ray copy.

[Cotnerdude]

And as for David's post...

That is true, a crappy player can make a picture look different.

However, both formats have bad and good players, and since blu-ray and HD-DVD players are going to be produced, improved, and reworked for a LONG time to come, saying that Blu-ray has better image quality because of one specific player you experienced....well that's just a dumb argument.


no it's not a dumb argument. it's a fact.. Even if you took the highest end player from both I assure you there will be variations. THe problem is you can't tell which is right because you don't know what the intended vision was.
ITs to bad it doesnt say god under that title anymore david otherwise you could say you knew it the whole time

[spoonraker]

Regardless of who does what, the process is the same.

Raw, uncompressed footage is converted into "HD" format.

[David]

actually i'm pretty sure i stated in the beginning when predicted exactly your comment above...

you'd agree based off the logic (meaning i wouldn't have to go pull some source) and you'd say that dumb.

[Thunder]

Ask 100 people if superior and better mean exactly the same thing. 99 will say no. Your the only noob that will say yes.

You do realize that only the noobs will answer "no". Anyone who knows the english language will say yes.

[David]

Btw there is one imporant fact iv'e been leaving out of this for well before this started and i've mentioned it before (different thread)... You're right on many accounts but it's never made me wrong... ;)

[spoonraker]

David, after all this, the only thing you can say is that the specific movie you watched, on the specific players you used, there was a difference in image quality resulting in the Blu-ray movie, in your opinion, looking better.

Neither of us can prove that in all cases one is better than the other, which is what you have been preaching for god knows how long.

I'm glad that I have been able to finally kill this belief

[David]

Btw there is one imporant fact iv'e been leaving out of this for well before this started and i've mentioned it before (different thread)... You're right on many accounts but it's never made me wrong... ;)

Ask 100 people if superior and better mean exactly the same thing. 99 will say no. Your the only noob that will say yes.

You do realize that only the noobs will answer "no". Anyone who knows the english language will say yes.

I disagree.

[David]

David, after all this, the only thing you can say is that the specific movie you watched, on the specific players you used, there was a difference in image quality resulting in the Blu-ray movie, in your opinion, looking better.

Neither of us can prove that in all cases one is better than the other, which is what you have been preaching for god knows how long.

I'm glad that I have been able to finally kill this belief

You didn't kill ****. Don't act like you did something or you proved something to me... I've been in control this whole time... I've know what was up and how no matter what i was going to be right. I didn't have to go dig up links to prove i was right. I didn't need to keep going back and double checking what you typed... I was right from the very beginning and you still dont' get it.

Hardware is the difference. Doesn't matter how you cut it or try to play it off as one example. There will always be difference even between blu ray and blu ray (smaller yes, but some)

[David]

Btw there is one imporant fact iv'e been leaving out of this for well before this started and i've mentioned it before (different thread)... You're right on many accounts but it's never made me wrong... ;)

Ask 100 people if superior and better mean exactly the same thing. 99 will say no. Your the only noob that will say yes.

You do realize that only the noobs will answer "no". Anyone who knows the english language will say yes.

I disagree.


If i were to advertise my product as better than so and so's would it get the same attention if I said it was superior???? No as spoon said. Superior is a fancer word to taken in a way of being ranked above better. Doesnt' matter what the dic. says it's how it's taken.

[spoonraker]

all you did was prove that you are great at covering your own ass and that's all I have to say in this thread

[David]

:lol: No... I just knew what was up the whole time.. Thats why i could blow off all your data because it didnt' matter.

Thats why i kept telling you to quit worring about the tech specs because they mean nothing... Thats why i agreed with you there was nothing special between the disk.

You see the point of this was picture. I said if we used the same screen but i never said anything about player. I knew where i was going with this from the very beginning. This has been my game...

[David]

10 pages of me pulling your chain and getting you worked up.

[David]

and just like i predicted you wouldn't give me my dues...

[Thunder]

If i were to advertise my product as better than so and so's would it get the same attention if I said it was superior???? No as spoon said. Superior is a fancer word to taken in a way of being ranked above better. Doesnt' matter what the dic. says it's how it's taken.


You do realize that only the noobs will answer "no". Anyone who knows the english language will say yes.

So basically the general public are noobs, because they perceive the word "superior" to be greater than the word "better" despite the fact that they are synonymous with each other

[spoonraker]

No your game has been to keep your arguments vague and lacking evidence,
then when I prove you wrong about every single thing you use the players as the trump card because you know that I am not going to dig up enough technical detail about them to prove that it doesn't make a difference when comparing two similar models...

I just hope for your sake that they don't invent HD-DVD/Blu-ray combo drives :lol:

[David]

you could say that... but if the greater mass believes or assumes the value of the word superior is ranked above better, then webster should change their wording in the def.

you know i'm right if you think about it... think about advertisment that you see and hear... better... how much better???? It's superior... Oh... wow.. i'll take 2.

[Thunder]

you could say that... but if the greater mass believes or assumes the value of the word superior is ranked above better, then webster should change their wording in the def.

you know i'm right if you think about it... think about advertisment that you see and hear... better... how much better???? It's superior... Oh... wow.. i'll take 2.

No what I do know is the general public is retarded. Thats why people can sell turbonators and "LIFETIME NEVER HAVE TO REPLACE OR SHARPEN RAZORS!"

[spoonraker]

Superior is a better word than better, but better is the superior word in the context of this sentence.

[Thunder]

Its also why Fox can make a killing off a show named "Are you smarter than a 5th grader?"

[spoonraker]

hahaha

[Thunder]

Just look at her

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj3iNxZ8Dww

[Thunder]

If you polled 100 people like her, then of course 100 would say "Superior is different than better!"

[spoonraker]

I believe that blu-ray is the better format because most US americans belive that superior, and uhm, south africa such as....

[David]

No your game has been to keep your arguments vague and lacking evidence,
then when I prove you wrong about every single thing you use the players as the trump card because you know that I am not going to dig up enough technical detail about them to prove that it doesn't make a difference when comparing two similar models...

I just hope for your sake that they don't invent HD-DVD/Blu-ray combo drives :lol:


See you just don't get it and thats why i wouldn't pull my "trump card" as you state it... I won.. we were talking about the end product the whole time. You got stuck on only half the equation. I told you think outside the box. I gave you hint after hint.... so you could figure it out... So now your going to leave as "well i was right, you just didn't play fair".. :rolleye:

[Thunder]

I believe that blu-ray is the better format because most US americans belive that superior, and uhm, south africa such as....

ROFL

ROFL
ROFL
ROFL
ROFL
ROFL
OMG
ROFL

[David]

You said if i proved you wrong you'd be the first to admit... Funny a page later.. you haven't admited ****. You know i'm right. You can't deny it... get over it.

[spoonraker]

Actually if I were to choose to continue the image quality debate, I would say that the player is a non-issue.

However, unlike you, I'm not willing to state my opinion without evidence. And since I don't want to take the time to compare and contrast the hardware inside the two top HD-DVD and Blu-ray players, I'm going to just stop debating for now. I will accept the fact that by forcing me to dig up way more evidence than I want to, you have won this debate without having to present a single bit of your own evidence.

If you consider that a victory than go ahead and celebrate, but once combo-drives come out, it's game on.

[David]

So how do you make an image without a player???

it's funny you guys making fun of anyone who ranks the word superior above better, but you don't understand what the word image means. You can't get an image without a player.:rolleye:

Also the fact that someone who makes himself out to be an expert in every post (and hasn't denied that he is not an expert) wouldn't understand how hardware no matter what makes a difference in the image. Seriously you don't stop amazing me.

[Thunder]

I believe that blu-ray is the better format because most US americans belive that superior, and uhm, south africa such as....

QFL

(quoted for laughter)

[spoonraker]

So how do you make an image without a player???

it's funny you guys making fun of anyone who ranks the word superior above better, but you don't understand what the word image means. You can't get an image without a player.:rolleye:

Also the fact that someone who makes himself out to be an expert in every post (and hasn't denied that he is not an expert) wouldn't understand how hardware no matter what makes a difference in the image. Seriously you don't stop amazing me.

Like I said. I'm not willing to go as far as breaking down the hardware inside of two players so that I can prove that both reproduce the image the same way...so...I'm not going to say it.

You won, enjoy it.

[David]

Even if you broke down the hardware it wouldnt' matter. Quality differences configurations, additional features, firmware etc all add up. There are things called patients. Because of those things are always made differently even though they are the same, Flat panel tv, computers, cars, blenders you name... If it was so easy to make things the exact same way to get the same results... Thunder wouldnt' need a Ford rear end.

[spoonraker]

Even if you broke down the hardware it wouldnt' matter. Quality differences configurations, additional features, firmware etc all add up. There are things called patients. Because of those things are always made differently even though they are the same, Flat panel tv, computers, cars, blenders you name... If it was so easy to make things the exact same way to get the same results... Thunder wouldnt' need a Ford rear end.

you got me there

[David]

:)

[spoonraker]

By the way David, are we still friends? :lol:

[David]

Go **** yourself.

[spoonraker]

:(

[David]

:rofl:

[spoonraker]

If anything...I should thank you for keeping me thoroughly distracted while the Cowboys lost :(

[David]

:woot:

[spoonraker]

The Cowboys were thought to be the superior team, but they could have played better today, so they lost. :lol:

[David]

You can mock it all you want... you know if you polled random sample to rank the words, Superior would be above Better even with a neither option.

[Alley]

We could set up a poll and see what SCR members think about the difference of the words superior and better?

[spoonraker]

nah, the user base here is too small and to non-neutral...but...results will be posted in due time

[David]

That won't work.. it might... but SCR member will hit google before thinking it's a trick question. If they hit google and realize the word better is used in the definition of superior they will realize it's the same. If you asked everyone at old chicagos or whereever the dinner is.. you'd get a different result.


The way the word superior is used is why it's ranked above better regardless of what it means.

[David]

For example..

Superior Court. Something everyone knows.. What is the superior court?

It's the highest level..

When you use x wax you get superior results... not better results.

[spoonraker]

Are you talking about the Supreme Court? :lol:

[Thunder]

For example..

Superior Court. Something everyone knows.. What is the superior court?

It's the highest level..

When you use x wax you get superior results... not better results.

All you keep doing is proving how naive the general public is. Seriously, 20 of your posts later, what you are conveying is not different from the first time.

[David]

Are you talking about the Supreme Court?

lmao just wait until the results of the actual random person poll come back


ROFL... i was sitting here trying to come up with more example of the word superior and some how put that together. :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::r ofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[spoonraker]

I think you need to take a nap David lmao

[Thunder]

Superior court.. wow lol

[David]

well **** a duck.. it was just the google answer.. **** GOOGLE.

http://webster.com/dictionary/superior

http://webster.com/dictionary/Better

[David]

Superior court.. wow lol


You missed it too. :lol:

[David]

I think you need to take a nap David lmao


probably.. if you think i've posted here... :rofl: all i've done for 2 days is toss snow balls at everyone to get more posting.

between hacking the board and posting... thats all i've done the last 2 days.

[Thunder]

Superior court.. wow lol


You missed it too. :lol:

I skipped over the post initially and was informed of such a gaffe haha.

[spoonraker]

Oh believe me I know how that goes, remember I'm a programmer. Once your eyes get glazed over you should probably just not give your opinion on anything because your brain is pretty much shut down by that point.

[David]

don't lie.. you read my post.. you ****ing quoted it..

[spoonraker]

He has a point ahmad

[David]

Oh believe me I know how that goes, remember I'm a programmer. Once your eyes get glazed over you should probably just not give your opinion on anything because your brain is pretty much shut down by that point.


pretty much.