DVDGuy’s Blog @ Digital Digest

If you are looking to buy a Blu-ray player right now, be careful, as not all Blu-ray players are created equally.

As this news article explains quite well, there are in fact 3 different classes of Blu-ray players – something that most people are unaware of. These classes, or “profiles”, describe the compulsory feature set that the player must support, unlike HD DVD, which has a single standard specification when it comes to things like extra features and Internet connectivity (it does have to different “levels” to describe hardware features like on-board audio decoding, and support for additional add-on storage). The earliest Blu-ray players are profile 1.0 (Grace Period Profile), then 1.1 (Final Standard Profile) and finally, 2.0 (BD-Live). Only profile 2.0 players will feature the same interactive and Internet enabled content that is supported by all HD DVD players from day one, but as the article points out, neither profile 1.1 or 2.0 is mandatory at the moment and players released now do not have to be certified for 1.1 compatibility until November 1st, 2007. Why did the Blu-ray group sell players without having a “Final Standard”, especially ones that costs way more than HD DVD players, one can only imagine (perhaps they were too busy trying to fit in the 3 levels of copy protection, and didn’t have time to work on the actual features of the players).

When profile 1.1 and 2.0 players rolls out, Blu-ray will have more persistent storage than HD DVD (most HD DVD players have 128 MB, whereas BD 1.1 requires 256 MB and 2.0 will have a full GB – the Xbox 360 add-on drive has 192 MB currently). Persistent storage is used to store things like bookmarks, downloaded content. HD DVD performance level 2 players will have the ablity for you to hook up additional storage devices (such as USB memory sticks) to use a persistent storage, which one might argue is a much better (and portable) solution than having internal storage.

So what will happen to people who own profile 1.0 players? Well, some of them can get a software upgrade which will add some of the new software interactive features (the PS3 being the easiest to upgrade, since it has the hardware to make it work). People who own 1.0/1.1 players might even be able to upgrade to 2.0 through software if their player has enough persistent storage, an Ethernet port and enough processing power (very unlikely though). If an upgrade is viable, the upgrading process is a firmware update, and if the player does not have Internet connection (very unlikely if it’s a 1.0 player, unless it’s the PS3), then it means downloading the firmware on your computer, burning to CD/DVD and then inserting the disc into the player … not exactly something that your average consumer will feel at ease with.

Is there a chance that future Blu-ray movies won’t play on your 1.0 or 1.1 player? Yes. Or at the very least, the extra features that require 1.1/2.0 will fail to work, or produce weird playback problems. The head guy over at Denon gave out a very definitive “maybe not” statement a couple of months ago regarding whether profile 1.0 players will play profile 1.1/2.0 movies. If people are really stuck with an 1.0 player that can’t be upgraded, they will have to buy a new 1.1 or 2.0 player to benefit from the full set of Blu-ray features, which is quite ridiculous since many of these 1.0 player are not even a year old yet.

One of the main reasons that Paramount quoted for dropping Blu-ray was the confusion over profiles – they had to test each title under each profile, but the need for 1.0 compatibility meant that titles might have to be limited in extra features. What they did was to produce the HD DVD version of the title first with full features, and then port that over to Blu-ray and remove features that didn’t work. Even then, it did not guarantee that the movie will work on all players, since there are so many versions out there. Their stance of dropping Blu-ray for 18 months make sense, the profiles would have been settled and the only players on sale by then would be profile 2.0 players. While HD DVD owners are enjoying the advanced features for titles such as Shrek The Third and Transformers, Blu-ray owners will be left there sitting and wondering if their player will work with future titles.

My advice? Don’t buy a Blu-ray player until profile 2.0 is available, or if you have to buy one now, buy the PS3 which may only need a software update due to it’s flexible hardware. If all this seems quite troubling, thanks to some very bad decision making from the Blu-ray group, then perhaps the settled specifications that HD DVD offers might suit you better. I have the HD DVD add-on drive for my Xbox 360, but I won’t be buying a standalone HD player until a dual-format (with Blu-ray profile 2.0 support) comes out, which seems to be at least a year away (and even then, it might be too expensive).

Update: Seeing as this relatively old blog entry has just been linked in a few places, I thought it prudent to post an update, as since this post I have purchased a PS3 for Blu-ray playback. The main reason I chose the PS3 as my Blu-ray player of choice is that it had the potential to be upgraded to Profile 1.1, 2.0 and beyond (Profile 1.1. compatibility was released as a firmware update a few weeks after I purchased the machine). There’s no technical reason why it can’t be upgraded to 2.0, and Sony has been quite vocal on getting 2.0 support on the PS3 sooner rather than later. This is why the PS3 is still and will most likely for a while, be the Blu-ray player of choice (the advanced nature of the hardware means faster loading and responsiveness than all other standalones, so there’s another bonus too). Just make sure you get the official Blu-ray remote, as playing back movies using the wireless gamepad is a bit of a pain. More information and Blu-ray buying tips in my new Blu-ray and HD DVD Buyer’s Guide.

HD DVD Combos

During the unfortunately short lived Amazon “Buy 2 HD DVD/Blu-ray movies, get the 3rd free” promotion, I purchased 3 HD DVD movies (300, The Departed and Happy Feet … with the discount, it was even cheaper than buying the DVD versions of these movies locally). What made me want to buy the US version of these discs (remember, HD DVD is region-free, so any disc sold will play anywhere, unlike Blu-ray) is that they are all combo discs – HD DVD on one side, DVD on the other. These are not available here in Australia, so I was interested in getting my hands on one of these discs and see what it was like. I did run into a problem with the Happy Feet HD DVD side, in that it would not play in my Xbox 360 HD DVD player, but it was easily solved by using tissue paper to clean the disc (it looked slightly oily to me). Anyway, the DVD side worked fine and the single disc widescreen DVD versions of these films were present (300 and The Departed were without extra features, but Happy Feet had the same set of features as the HD DVD side).

But I can’t help but feel it’s all a bit gimmicky, and that do I really need the DVD version of the film? If I were to, say, travel and want to play the movie on my notebook (which only has a DVD drive), I suppose this could be handy. But I suspect the HD DVD side won’t like the wear and tear associated with flipping the disc over and having fingerprint smudges all over the place as the disc is being handled. Buying the HD DVD only version, and then getting the DVD version when it goes on sale seems to make more sense to me. Or if they made a 2 disc set, one disc is the HD DVD version and the other is the DVD version, then I could go for it (assuming they keep it at the same price). Or if the studios were really keen on promoting HD DVD, then they can forgo the DVD version of the film at release, and then only issue the HD DVD combo version for the first few weeks (they would have to lower the price to at least be competitive with other DVD new release titles). This would (albeit, artificially) lift the sale of HD DVDs, but I think it’s good for the consumer too (again, assuming the price is right), because they would have a HD DVD verison of the film ready to watch when they go down the HD route in the future, and all without spending any extra money.

In any case, Warner are re-issuing all their combos as HD DVD only versions now, and with the associated price drop too. The extra price that is put on these combos means that Blu-ray movies appear to be cheaper, and that can’t help the HD DVD camp.

My Wii is bigger than your Xbox

 I’m sick and tired of hearing people comparing Wii and Xbox 360/PS3 sale figures. Let me first say that I own a Wii and a Xbox 360, and I’m looking at buying a PS3, so I’m not biased towards any of the consoles (well maybe slightly biased against the PS3). While it is true that all 3 consoles are so called “next-gen” systems, to put the Wii in the same bracket as the Xbox 360/PS3 is ridiculous. The Wii is aimed at an entirely different gaming demographic, and the games released on it demonstrate this fact. Hardcore gamers are not likely to be captivated by the graphics and gameplay of the Wii. Plus, the Wii is selling at an entirely different price range, although the Xbox 360 Core package is starting to compete at the same price range. Comparing the Xbox 360 to the PS3 is fair (even though the PS3 is priced much higher), since both consoles attempt to do pretty much the same things. Comparing the Wii to either of the other consoles is like comparing a VW Beetle to a Hummer … I’m sure one sells a lot better than the other too.

HD-VMD

Just like the world needs another blog like this one, the world also needs another HD format. Seriously, “**** off” is  what I say to the marketing people who thought another HD format would be a great idea. Do they really think people will buy yet another HD media player? Do they really think that the major studios, all of them have already backed HD DVD or Blu-ray (or both), will back yet another media format? (so far, HD-VMD’s content providers include VCL, Lazy Town, Eros Entertainment and Channel Nine here in Australia … not exactly the big names in movies)

Back when DVDs first came onto the scene, there were tons of other competing formats, some still based on CD technology. All of them failed, badly, and rightly so. I just can’t see any other outcome other than total failure for HD-VMD, or any other new HD media formats, especially when neither HD DVD nor Blu-ray, even with all their financial muscle and studio support, can be considered much of a success.

In my previous blog, I talked about a possible end scenario for the HD wars, albeit a fairly optimistic one. In this blog entry, I will look more at the present.

Neither Blu-ray or HD DVD has much of a foothold on the PC market as yet. This is not surprising when the cheapest HD DVD reader drive is actually an Xbox 360 accessory, and when the cheapest writer drive is, well, anything but cheap. And don’t get get me started on blank media – $18 for 25 GB works out to be about $0.72 per GB, 3 times more than DVD media (and an expensive brand of DVD media at that).

I have to say that HD DVD might have an advantage here, because their single layer media has less capacity than Blu-ray’s (as strange as this argument might seem). 15 GB, 30 GB and 45 GB seems like sensible sizes for storage media to me, the smaller size of the single layer media making things a bit more flexible, and seem like a more natural increment going from DVD storage to HD storage. 25 GB, 50 GB and 75 GB just seem a tad too big for my liking, and the prices will reflect that as well. Backups aside, I think I will find it very difficult to even find 50 GB worth of stuff to fit onto a single disc, let alone find the will to fork out $35 for the pleasure (not when, for double this amount, I can buy myself a 250 GB HDD). I’m also weary of putting so much stuff onto a single disc – if it gets damaged, rots or goes missing, losing 25 GB worth of stuff just because your dog has found a new chew toy will be a disaster. But being able to carry around 75 GB worth of stuff in a single disc is tempting I have to say, something that HD DVD will struggle to achieve unless it produces a 5-layer media …

CDs and DVDs all came out with reader-only (ROM) drives for the PC market long before writer drives took over (and many like me still have both ROM and writer drive on the same PC, to enable easier disc to disc copying). The writer drive delay was necessary from a technical point of view because writer drives and media were developed much later, but also made sense from a marketing point of view in that reader drives costs less and can be a good way to introduce people to the new media format. Sony’s strategy seems to skip the ROM drive altogether, and skip straight to writer drives. This could work to strengthen their grip on the format wars, or it could backfire and make the prices of these drives so high, that nobody is looking at them seriously. HD DVD writer drives are still rare, but it’s no surprise that the Xbox 360’s HD DVD reader drive is selling well, and many use it as a PC reader drive too. For me at least, I’m happy with my DVD writer/external HDD combo, but I would like a cheap BD/HD ROM drive to play with for the time being.

Tech savvy people will also want dual format readers, because future proofing is important, and nobody wants a piece of hardware that is useless in 3 years time, and certainly not two reader drives in the same PC.

To get me (a fairly early adopter of these kind of things) to buy a BD/HD drive for my computer, I think at the very least, these criteria have to be met first:

• Has to at least read both BD/HD formats
• Has to be able to write to all kinds of DVD media
• Under $200 for a BD/HD writer drive, $100 for a BD/HD read-only drive
• If buying a BD/HD writer drive, 15 GB HD media to drop below $4, 25 GB BD media drops to below $6

I say companies like Lite-on should forget about BD/HD writer drives for now and concentrate on dual format reader + DVD writer drive combos – if the cost is only slightly higher than standard DVD writers, I can definitely see people opting for these drives in their next computers instead, which would be a victory for both HD formats.