Forums >Gears and Wears>Blu Ray or HD?
Don't buy a Wii unless you want to use it as a Wii. A wii can't play DVDs nor Blu Ray discs. You can get a special disc that allows you to stream Netflix content over the internet. The Wii isn't capable of HD resolutions. If TV/movies are what you want buy a Blu Ray play that has built-in Netflix support.
A Wii can play DVDs, just not straight out of the box. It takes some hacking, but very simple hacking. Second the Wii doesn't play HD it only play ED (480p), so that is a bigger reason not to use a Wii for HD.
I've got a fever...
I say don't buy blu-ray and instead by a dvd player that can upconvert to HD. In fact, by a receiver that up converts everything to HD.
Up-converted DVDs do look really good on a high-def TV, but you're not getting a true HD picture (okay, technically you are, but data are duplicated to get 1080 lines out of a 480 lines signal), so it depends on how badly you want a "real" HD picture. I'm not saying it's a bad option -- it's what I doe because I'm not in the mood to buy discs that won't play in my mini-van or other portable DVD players. I have HD from cable, and even the best quality DVD up-converted to 1080p doesn't look as good as an actual 1080i broadcast.
Upconverting is sort of like burning MP3's to a CD -- even though CD output is at 44.1kHz x 1411 kbps, the source material limits the quality of what you hear.
$50 will get you an up-converting DVD player, $150 will get you a Blu-Ray player. The problem with Blu Ray is that the discs are more expensive than DVDs, and are not backwards compatible with DVD players. So at the moment, I'm happy with my HD cable, and doing up converted DVDs. This will probably all change when the "Lost" Blu Ray box set comes out.
MTA: Trent still hasn't clarified his vague query. Officially, I vote yes for High Definition (not HD-DVD), but can currently live without Blu Ray. However, I wouldn't go back to standard def cable. HD is just too delicious, especially during football season. And speaking of delicious, the Food Network is actually kind of awesome in HD. Yum.
On your deathbed, you won't wish that you'd spent more time at the office. But you will wish that you'd spent more time running. Because if you had, you wouldn't be on your deathbed.
Dave
In addition to the great picture of Blu-Ray (less compression than broadcast HD content generally), well mastered Blu-Ray disks have audio tracks that can REALLY improve over DVD sound.
You need a good receiver and speakers to appreciate the difference but I'm no audiophile and I can easily hear the difference between the Dolby 5.1 track on a DVD/Blu-Ray and one of the PCM or other HD audio tracks on a Blu-Ray.
Might not be reason enough to buy it but it sure enhances my experience watching movies. Now if only I had a better subwoofer....
I ran a mile and I liked it, liked it, liked it. dgb2n@yahoo.com
The shirtless wonder
However, I wouldn't go back to standard def cable. HD is just too delicious, especially during football season. And speaking of delicious, the Food Network is actually kind of awesome in HD. Yum.
I'm sure you are aware of this but HD is available without satellite or cable. I think a lot of people still don't realize this and complain about upgrading to hd cable. They could just plug in an antenna to their TV and enjoy a great picture for the major networks.
run.therowes.net
Up-converted DVDs do look really good on a high-def TV, but you're not getting a true HD picture (okay, technically you are, but data are duplicated to get 1080 lines out of a 480 lines signal), so it depends on how badly you want a "real" HD picture. I'm not saying it's a bad option -- it's what I doe because I'm not in the mood to buy discs that won't play in my mini-van or other portable DVD players. I have HD from cable, and even the best quality DVD up-converted to 1080p doesn't look as good as an actual 1080i broadcast. Upconverting is sort of like burning MP3's to a CD -- even though CD output is at 44.1kHz x 1411 kbps, the source material limits the quality of what you hear. $50 will get you an up-converting DVD player, $150 will get you a Blu-Ray player. The problem with Blu Ray is that the discs are more expensive than DVDs, and are not backwards compatible with DVD players. So at the moment, I'm happy with my HD cable, and doing up converted DVDs. This will probably all change when the "Lost" Blu Ray box set comes out. MTA: Trent still hasn't clarified his vague query. Officially, I vote yes for High Definition (not HD-DVD), but can currently live without Blu Ray. However, I wouldn't go back to standard def cable. HD is just too delicious, especially during football season. And speaking of delicious, the Food Network is actually kind of awesome in HD. Yum.
My reasoning had more to do with blu-ray being a medium that won't last too long. Why do I say this? Because everything will be on our computer anyway. I don't even watch DVDs anymore. In fact, I noticed that I wasn't watching some of my favs, just because I had to actually put a dvd in, so I converted them to avi. Like you said though with DVD you are only getting 480 upconverted to 1080. The picture isn't going to look as good, but most people wouldn't even realize, unless they were looking for it.
Yeah, antenna is my back-up plan if the cable goes out. I can get all my local channels in HD via a set of old school rabbit ears plugged right into the TV set. Not a bad option if you have an HDTV, but don't want to shell out for cable.
I agree with you about the lifetime of Blu-Ray, and physical media in general. I still go the disc route because I don't watch movies on my computer. My smallest TV is 59", so the choice between Hulu and a DVD isn't a choice. I know that there are computer-to-TV network-type solutions (Apple TV, Roku, etc.) but to be honest, it all seems needlessly complicated when Netflix is dropping a disc in the mail every other day. I'm a little old school about physical formats, I guess. I have thousands of pictures on my computer, but I really prefer to leaf through a photo album. I have thousands of songs on my computer, but I miss having the CD (and really miss having the vinyl -- love LP cover art).
Still, it's true that physical formats will give way to bits on a drive. Which is fine, and I will keep up with that. But I always worry that if civilization enters another Dark Age, the folks on the other side will know more about everyone who lived 500 years ago than they will about us, because we don't write anything down. Digital formats suck as long term archival material. Remember that when the zombie apocalypse comes.
I agree with you about the lifetime of Blu-Ray, and physical media in general. I still go the disc route because I don't watch movies on my computer. My smallest TV is 59", so the choice between Hulu and a DVD isn't a choice. I know that there are computer-to-TV network-type solutions (Apple TV, Roku, etc.) but to be honest, it all seems needlessly complicated when Netflix is dropping a disc in the mail every other day. I'm a little old school about physical formats, I guess. I have thousands of pictures on my computer, but I really prefer to leaf through a photo album. I have thousands of songs on my computer, but I miss having the CD (and really miss having the vinyl -- love LP cover art). Still, it's true that physical formats will give way to bits on a drive. Which is fine, and I will keep up with that. But I always worry that if civilization enters another Dark Age, the folks on the other side will know more about everyone who lived 500 years ago than they will about us, because we don't write anything down. Digital formats suck as long term archival material. Remember that when the zombie apocalypse comes.
I don't use Hulu, so I have no idea about that. But I do know Netflix streams movies to your computer. I use avi or mkv so I don't really know much about streaming movies. Everything is sent to my 41" screen. In fact, my TV is more of a computer monitor, since I don't use it for much else. I use a harmony remote or my laptop to control that computer. It is all really nice in the end, but I wouldn't expect anyone else to figure out how to set it up.
rectumdamnnearkilledem
But I always worry that if civilization enters another Dark Age, the folks on the other side will know more about everyone who lived 500 years ago than they will about us, because we don't write anything down. Digital formats suck as long term archival material. Remember that when the zombie apocalypse comes.
We'll still have the scrapbooks... (my mom is way into scrapbooking and it just seems like such a waste of paper and adhesive to me)
I get this. I feel bad that I haven't kept much of a journal or baby book for my kid. Most written record of his development has been in blog-form...which has changed providers a handful of times.
This reminds me that I need to back-up our last couple of years of photos. I don't trust any HD not to shit-out and take our photographic memories with it (at least the high res stuff...the stuff uploaded is probably pretty safe, but not of printable quality, of course).
Which brings up the discussion of CDs/DVDs...and how archival are they really? I've heard recommendations to dupe everything every 5-10 years, since no one really knows how stable those discs are. At least this was the recommendation around Photography message boards a few years back.
Getting the wind knocked out of you is the only way to
remind your lungs how much they like the taste of air.
~ Sarah Kay
FYI - that article is from 2006. HD DVD has been dead for over a year.
The biggest problem with Blu-Ray players is that they take a while to load the disc. This can be frustrating for an older or non-technical user (who will often think there's a problem). A regular upconverting progressive scan DVD will provide fantastic picture quality, they just won't be able to play blu-ray discs (which still aren't real popular).
Disclaimer: I'm a Home Theater product rep for an electronics company so I have a bit of a biased opinion.
If I were looking to purchase all new stuff, I would definitely get a Blu-ray player over an upconvert DVD player. The Blu-ray player does a much better job of making regular DVDs look HD. I would also make sure I got something I could connect to my home network. Blu-ray players will eventually kill the Blu-ray disk format. My company's Blu-ray players and some TVs have app stores with Netflix, Vudu, Pandora, CinemaNow, YouTube, and all sorts of other goodies. And the ones my company makes works with DLNA so you can stream mp3, jpg, and most video formats from your PC to your player.
As far as 3D goes, it ain't for everyone. People who love, Love, LOVE to get completely immersed in TV will like it. People with a touch of ADD probably won't like it.
I don't half-ass anything
"I have several close friends who have run marathons, a word that is actually derived from two Swahili words: mara, which means 'to die a horrible death' and thon, which means 'for a stupid T-shirt.' Look it up." - Celia Rivenbark, You Can't Drink All Day if You Don't Start in the Morning
Many of the so-called "$50 upconverting DVD players" don't do much else than scale the video up to 1080p--they just don't have the horsepower to do anything really worthwhile. The TV will probably have its own scaler that's just as good. More expensive upconverters will do some beautiful things, but just make it easy and get a Blu-Ray player.
The quality on most BD-ROMs will beat even the best cable/OTA HD due to bit-rate. What's worse, is that a few OTA stations multiplex, resulting in a lower bit-rate = lower quality. Some cable providers, and especially satellite, recompress their HD signals to fit more channels, also resulting in much lower quality. If you start comparing a BD-ROM movie to one aired on a cable HD stations, you'll be surprised.
And if you have kids, Disney and others offer combo packs for a few extra bucks that give you a BD-ROM and a DVD in the same package. DVD for the car, BD-ROM for home.