Next Generation DVD Format

The Brain

Defiler of Cornflakes
Joined
Jan 8, 2003
Posts
32,125
Reaction score
1
Points
38
Location
Over There ---->
Website
Visit site
http://www.winnetmag.com/windowspaulthurrott/Article/ArticleID/42976/windowspaulthurrott_42976.html
Microsoft Technology Approved for Next-Generation DVD Standard

Paul Thurrott
InstantDoc #42976
June 16, 2004

The DVD Forum steering committee recently approved the initial specification for High-Definition DVD (HD-DVD), a next-generation DVD standard. According to the specification, HD-DVD devices will have to support VC-9, the basis for Windows Media Video (WMV) 9, Microsoft's most recent video codec. HD-DVD will also support the MPEG-2 and MPEG-4 AVC (H.264) formats, according to the DVD Forum. The decision is a coup for the software giant, which is trying to establish its multimedia formats as industry standards.

HD-DVD isn't the only high-resolution, next-generation DVD format, however. A competing group will offer devices based on a technology called Blu-ray. But HD-DVD offers a number of advantages over Blu-ray, not the least of which is HD-DVD's backward-compatibility with today's DVDs. As a result, tomorrow's HD-DVD devices will play DVDs as well as HD-DVDs.

Thanks to VC-9's and WMV's compression capabilities, HD-DVDs will be able to play back more than 130 minutes of HD video encoded at 15Mbps. This capability played a major role in the inclusion of Microsoft's technology in the specification because at 23GB Blu-ray supports more capacity, and a second-generation 50GB Blu-ray standard is due soon.
 
Last edited:
Hehe.

I thought I was in a different forum for a minute there.:D

130 HD minutes. Sweet.
 
Can someone explain to me what the difference between DVD and HD DVD is going to be? How much finer can the resolution get, especially on a TV (even a plasma screen)?
 
hasbeen99 said:
Can someone explain to me what the difference between DVD and HD DVD is going to be? How much finer can the resolution get, especially on a TV (even a plasma screen)?
much better -- assuming you have an HD TV.
 
I'll have to take your word for it. I'm not about to drop ten large on an entertainment system just to get a few extra pixels per square inch. For that much money, the actors better be leaping off the screen and acting in my living room.
 
hasbeen99 said:
I'll have to take your word for it. I'm not about to drop ten large on an entertainment system just to get a few extra pixels per square inch. For that much money, the actors better be leaping off the screen and acting in my living room.
interlaced sucks. my job will be so much easier in just a few years once HD is THE way
 
TimTam said:
interlaced sucks. my job will be so much easier in just a few years once HD is THE way
HD is still interlaced. well, at least, it can be. HD is actually a few different signals, a few of them are interlaced and a few of them are progressive. it makes sense, but it's a bit confusing.

the progressive scan formats require TVs with frame buffers (to assemble the image before displaying it) which was a cost prohibitive idea at the time of HD's ratification. i'm glad they went with it, tho, cuz i agree, progressive is way better... tho less resolution.

the other cool thing about HD is the variable refresh rate. as i'm sure you know, film is shot at 24 frames per second and normally needs to go thru a conversion process to fill in the missing 6 frames (tv's refresh at 30 frames per second). they just duplicate a frame every now and again to fill in these frames. which equates to wasted bandwidth. by having a native 24 frames per second rate, you save about 15-20% of your bandwidth.
 
hasbeen99 said:
I'll have to take your word for it. I'm not about to drop ten large on an entertainment system just to get a few extra pixels per square inch. For that much money, the actors better be leaping off the screen and acting in my living room.

Drop $1000-1500 on a projector
Drop $2400 on a 42" Plasma

It doesn't have to cost that much...and it makes a huge difference if you actually watch TV. I'm going 4 months now with no TV, and it rocks.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Trending content

Forum statistics

Threads
158,340
Posts
2,824,038
Members
11,199
Latest member
garyfrank231
Back
Top