Wal*Mart to support Blu-ray exclusively by June 1st, 2008

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by ninphan, Feb 15, 2008.

  1. ninphan

    ninphan Guest

    The dominoes continue to fall on a weekly basis since Jeff Bewkes took
    over the position of CEO of Time Warner and made the only decision
    that made sense; the future is Blu.


    NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- National discount retailer Wal-Mart
    announced Friday that it had decided to only sell Sony's Blu-ray hi-
    definition movie discs, and will phase out Toshiba's competing HD-DVD
    formatted discs over the next several months.

    Wal-Mart said that by June, its 4,000 Wal-Mart and Sam's Club stores
    would sell only Blu-ray discs and Blu-ray hardware players. Blu-ray
    and Toshiba's HD-DVD format are not compatible.

    "We've listened to our customers, who are showing a clear preference
    toward Blu-ray products and movies with their purchases," said Gary
    Severson, Wal-Mart's Senior Vice President of Home Entertainment in a
    ninphan, Feb 15, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  2. Wal-mart's late to the party... reliable sources indicate that Toshiba
    will announce the end of HD DVD support in a matter of weeks.
    The alMIGHTY N, Feb 15, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  3. So instead of sharing less than 1% of the total DVD market with HD,
    Sony will have it all to itself.

    mordacpreventor, Feb 15, 2008
  4. ninphan

    Mark Johnson Guest

    But you seem to forget, that Hi def DVD's are growing faster than SD
    DVD's did.
    Mark Johnson, Feb 15, 2008
  5. ninphan

    khee mao Guest

    myopic twit.
    khee mao, Feb 16, 2008
  6. ninphan

    Tony Guest

    He seemed to forget!
    Tony, Feb 16, 2008
  7. ninphan

    FDR Guest

    So maybe all the fanboys can stop their childish postings now.
    FDR, Feb 16, 2008
  8. ninphan

    Harry Guest

    It's over and starting to get redundant and just annoying.

    Looking forward to bitching about Profiles, failed Beta Ray drives, DRM and
    over priced movies.
    Competition is..was a good thing..people need to get that in their thick
    My PS3 still sits and does nothing most of the time so what a glorious win..
    Harry, Feb 16, 2008
  9. ninphan

    T.B. Guest

    "Harry" aka "shaw.net assclown" whined:
    Sez the Shaw.net assclown who spent weeks spamming about "betaray-LOL!
    Sucks to be you. HA!

    T.B., Feb 16, 2008
  10. ninphan

    ninphan Guest

    Sony, Universal, Paramount/Dreamworks, Toshiba, Philips, Harman
    Kardon, Panasonic, Pioneer, Samsung, Sharp, Denon, Marantz, 20th
    Century Fox, Walt Disney, Warner Bros., New Line Cinema, Weinstein,
    HBO, Digital Playground, Vivid, Adam and Eve, Lions Gate Films, Funai,
    Daewoo, Loewe, Hitachi, JVC, Microsoft, Sun Microsystems, Sigma, Burr
    Brown, etc., etc., etc.

    Pretty much everyone actually. Not so educated on matters of High Def
    are you? Either that or you're just FUD-mongering.
    ninphan, Feb 17, 2008
  11. ninphan

    ninphan Guest

    Must be tough not being able to read isn't it?

    Here is what I said:

    "HD DVD's bandwidth would never have allowed for a constant release
    schedule from all studios without dropping down to 720p and lossy
    Dolby 5.1."

    Now what part of that says "HD DVD's bandwidth would never have
    allowed for a niche status release schedule from 3 of the major
    studios without dropping down to 720p and lossy Dolby 5.1"

    Go ahead Lloyd, answer that question. You haven't refuted my statement
    at all, which is backed up by compressionists. If HD DVD had won and
    all studios were to release on that format with a release schedule fit
    for mass market adoption (ie - titles released per week) then they
    could never have done it with 1080p and lossless audio, without
    looking like crap. Only Blu-ray with its 18 Mbps advantage has the
    bandwidth to handle all major studios encoding and ramping up release
    schedule to hit mass market adoption acceptable levels.

    Now, take your foot out of your mouth.

    Sure, with only three studios, one of whom (Paramount) has the least
    robust release schedule of all averaging 30 titles per year, releasing
    on HD DVD they are capable of doing 1080p encodes with a few lossless
    audio tracks here and there, whoopity doo!!
    ninphan, Feb 19, 2008
  12. ninphan

    ZVR Guest

    Only Blu-ray with its 18 Mbps advantage has the
    Clean the foam around your mouth, boy. Then post.

    Both BR and HD-DVD exceed BY FAR the bandwidth levels required for true HD,
    and while it may be true that BR potentially offers more, that means nada in
    the real world - at least for high-definition movie playback. The only thing
    that did matter, was the marketing machine behind BR and all the Sony
    maneuvers and under-handed tactics... that plus the fact Microsoft never
    really got behind HD-DVD. The rest is history. This war was never about
    specs in the first place, you moron.
    ZVR, Feb 19, 2008
  13. ninphan

    ninphan Guest

    Thanks for showing your ignorance on the matter.
    The specs do not "far exceed" the bandwidth levels required for "true
    HD" (whatever that means, are you throwing audio specs out the
    You have no idea how often Microsoft got involved with titles like
    Troy Directors Cut to allow them to still look good with that sort of
    running time and one lossless audio track.
    If all studios were to release on HD DVD with a release schedule
    befitting that of a mass market adopted product, HD DVD would not be
    able to stick with 1080p24 and lossless audio without a very
    noticeable drop in quality.
    You bring nothing to the table to refute anything that is being said.
    Take a look at what happened to the overall quality level last Summer
    when Universal started trying to release numerous titles per week - it
    went down, badly. Microsoft weren't able to help out with that many
    titles at once.
    Obviously your idea of what TrueHD should be is drastically different
    than what most people's is. You probably recommend EDTV's to people
    thinking that's true high def too don't you?
    And I'm the moron?
    You should spend some time chatting with compressioninsts before you
    make any more ignorant and unresearched statements.
    ninphan, Feb 21, 2008
  14. ninphan

    ninphan Guest

    TrueHD would need a disc capable of about 400 Mbps bandwidth transfer
    and 300GB storage.
    ninphan, Feb 21, 2008
  15. Provide a link to a technical specification that says this.
    Lloyd Parsons, Feb 21, 2008
  16. If we're talking mass market adoption, though, lossless audio isn't
    really a concern. Mass market consumers listen to audio through their
    television speakers.
    The alMIGHTY N, Feb 21, 2008
  17. ninphan

    ZVR Guest

    The specs do not "far exceed" the bandwidth levels required for "true
    You keep harping about losless audio, the fact of the matter is that no
    TrueHD or DTS-HD MA soundtrack so far has exceeded 5 Mbps. Which in HD-DVD's
    case leaves another 25 Mbps (roughly) for video. It is also a well known
    fact that reference video quality can be achieved with VC1 at no more than
    20 Mbps PEAK - there is more than one reference PQ title showing this!!!

    So stop touting the BD bandwidth - it is not needed, PERIOD.
    And you know this... how?? Post a solid reference to this, let's see it, Mr.
    "Irrefutable Proof".

    Better yet, don't bother - as in the past, you're probably going to post a
    link to some blog nobody heard of, where the PS3 fanboys meet to marvel at
    the Sony technological prowess.
    More bullshit. What's the release schedule got to do with the price of tea
    in China?! Noticeable drop in quality my ass. Do you have specific examples
    to back up that assertion? (retorical question of course)
    Lol, and you do?? All your posts are blanket statements about how BD is
    great and HD-DVD is inferior, with a lot of fabrications thrown in for good
    measure. You either are on Sony's payroll or so dumb as to buy into
    everything you hear from them.
    You really are an idiot. Setting aside the whole "Microsoft involvement"
    argument for which you have no proof, I will actually take the time and
    educate you about the realities of releasing in HiDef.

    See, people that actually know what that is about, understand that the
    "compression" process itself that you're so worked up about, only accounts
    for a minimal part and effort in the entire workflow. The source material
    has to be cleaned up, sometimes frames have to be restored, artifacts
    eliminated, color has to be processed, audio re-equalized, and so on, and so
    on. Once you achieve a pristine, reference quality source, you feed that to
    the compressor and voila, you have the final product in no time.

    Obviously when a studio like Universal (any of them, for that matter) tries
    to release on an aggresive schedule, they won't spend the same amount of
    time on the source material as when they were releasing only half that
    volume. Moreover, problems with the source material will be a lot more
    apparent with titles from the back catalog - like last summer.

    So STFU fanboy, and stop talking about things that obviously exceed your
    intelect level.
    ZVR, Feb 22, 2008
  18. ninphan

    ninphan Guest

    Oh dear, if you would bother actually reading you would see where I've
    mentioned sources already.
    Amir Majidimehr who was in charge of the HD DVD team at Microsoft has
    already mentioned on several occasions how his team has helped out on
    numerous titles which have been reference. He also stated to Richard
    Casey from R&B Films in a thread about Nature's Journey that only
    Microsoft can acheive the best possible results out of VC-1.
    I pointed to Universal's release schedule last Summer when they tried
    to bump up their # of titles per week to show where quality suffers
    when this happens.
    Why do you choose to pretend that I'm not backing up my statements
    when all you have to do is read my posts to see where I've made
    reference to evidence of this? Are you just so foolhardedly
    emotionally attached to HD DVD that you choose to only read the parts
    of my posts that you disagree with, then reassemble them in an
    incoherent manner?
    If you're going to insult someone's intellect, at least spell
    properly, it makes you look like far less of a hypocrite.
    The release schedule has nothing to do with the price of tea in China,
    but use cliche's if you think it makes you look smarter. Anyone
    operating on more than one or two brain cells can see that when it
    comes to authoring and encoding bandwidth DOES matter and it has
    everything to do with how ready a format can be for mass market
    Now I know how a kindergarten teacher or autism therapist must feel.
    You talk about "facts" regarding dts-ma and TrueHD when you have no
    idea what you're talking about. The 24/96 TrueHD track on the Dave
    Matthews and Tim Reynolds Blu-ray Disc has peaks in excess of 9 Mbps.
    Try to understand the nature of TrueHD and the packets it sends for
    timing before you make erroneous statments. TrueHD has a higher
    headroom than dts-ma.
    No it is not a well known fact that VC-1 can acheive reference results
    at 20 Mbps peaks, it is well known that VC-1 acheives maximum
    performance at around 24-26 Mbps AVERAGE bandwidth. The titles that
    have acheived reference status have been titles that MS has worked on,
    like King Kong and The Matrix for example. Again, you completely
    ignore what's important here and that is that this has occurred when
    there have only been a few titles released per week.
    Earth calling Mork, come in please. Am I getting through to you at
    all? I am not on Sony's payroll and the only one I see making blanket
    statments is yourself.
    ninphan, Feb 22, 2008
  19. ninphan

    ninphan Guest

    You don't need a technical specification - mathematics will work for

    1920 * 1080 = 2073600 number of pixels
    2073600 * 24 = 49766400 (8-bit color)
    49766400 * 24 = 1194393600 (24 frames per second)
    1194393600 / 8 = 149299200 convert to bytes/sec
    149299200 / 1024 = 145800 convert to KB/sec
    145800 / 1024 = 142.3828 convert to MB/sec

    That's 1100 Mbps you would need for uncompressed 4:2:0 1080p24
    ninphan, Feb 22, 2008
  20. ninphan

    ZVR Guest

    He also stated to Richard
    More fabrications about compression, etc.

    For the last time (and I have a feeling it's gonna be lost on you anyway),
    compression is NOT the most challenging issue when releasing in HiDef. See
    my previous post. You tilt the conversation towards specs, bitrates and
    other bullshit all the time, because that is the ONLY argument you BD people
    have. In the real world nobody gives a rat's ass about "specs", it's the end
    result that matters, and there have been several blind tests already that
    proved without the slightest doubt that when VC1 encodes are used on the
    same source, BD cannot be discerned from HD-DVD.

    Having said that, it is clear you are a lost cause (I knew that already, I
    wasn't posting for you, don't you worry), so I'm gonna let you "win" this
    one too. Judging by the amount of posts you have all over the web on this
    topic, clearly this is your full-time job so enjoy it. In the meantime some
    of us have real lives to live. Buh-bye and good riddance, fanboy.
    ZVR, Feb 22, 2008
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.