http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/ Engadget HD Comments for http://www.engadgethd.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadgethd.com en-us Copyright 2009 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/Nov 6th 2007 4:10PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/Nov 6th 2007 4:50PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/
Check the text about halfway down this article in parenthesis.
http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/Disc_Announcements/Fox/Fox_Issues_Final_Specs,_Street_Date_for_Sunshine_Blu-ray/1130]]>Nov 6th 2007 4:48PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/
Oh well, at least there are fewer hardware profiles for Blu-ray than there are versions of Windows Vista.]]>Nov 6th 2007 7:47PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/Nov 7th 2007 9:07AMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/Nov 6th 2007 4:25PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/
This whole business of the BDA not requiring a whole lot is quite bothersome and I just don't see why they needed to require all the hardware up front.

I have to ask though, where the h*ll is managed copy?! Even if it's supposedly there, it doesn't seem to be available for either format, and it seems to be the biggest letdown of the HD formats.]]>Nov 6th 2007 7:03PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/Nov 6th 2007 4:35PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/Nov 6th 2007 4:43PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/Nov 6th 2007 4:51PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/
having said that, yeah, it would be really lame to pay $1000 for a bluray player that is not full featured. Unless it was a cheap 200 or 100 dollar thing its not cool that it isnt full featured.]]>Nov 6th 2007 6:58PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/Nov 6th 2007 4:42PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/Nov 6th 2007 4:47PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/Nov 7th 2007 7:27AMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/
Obviously, not. If you already have a Blu-ray standalone player that's not 1.1, 2.0 compatible, there is little reason to shell out another $400 (or more) for the PiP, or to wait for the web connectivity.

However, if there exists a player, which is fully featured, beyond anything on the horizon offered by the competition, AND it's cheaper, why not recommend that to new customers?

I just don't see the logic here? Would you seriously recommend to a random consumer, that they not only wait and spend MORE money on a semi-comparable piece of hardware instead of taking advantage of the advanced interactive features right now, for less money?!

How, in good conscience could anyone recommend a more expensive fully featured player that hasn't come out yet, when HD DVD has been offering all of this since day one? Sure, there is a 1.1 player on the way, but what web connectivity, or 2.0?

I realize that you weren't claiming this but your comment only applies to people that have already invested in a Blu-ray player. They aren't "handicapped" necessarily, but of course it all depends on whether or not they are aware of their players inability to utilize these features, along with their relative desire to use/view the features in the first place.

If you don't like the advanced features, that's perfectly fine, but a lot of people out there do, myself included. You might counter, saying that the features are somewhat trivial, and you would be partially right, some are, but surely not everything. It's important to remember that we are only in the infancy of HDM, and with the creation of the Advanced Interactivity Consortium you can bet that we've only seen the tip of the iceberg as far as advanced interactivity is concerned.

All I'm saying is this... why wait? Why wait on Blu-ray when HD DVD is here and now, cheaper, and offers the consumer a better overall user experience through all of the advanced interactivity/web content? ]]>Nov 6th 2007 5:34PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/"Amazing that the Blu-boyz will not admit to this being a handicap?"

How is it a handicap? I don't want PiP so to me, adding it is just fluff that I don't want. Like I said earlier, I buy movies to watch the movie not someone talking about the movie or some other unnecessary "feature"...]]>Nov 6th 2007 5:16PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/Yeah, you buy movies to watch movies. That's you. Believe it or not, there are people out there that enjoy extra features. They like seeing what went into making the movie or hearing the director's thoughts on certain scenes. Those features are not unnecessary just because you don't watch them. You are not the majority of people.
Disc players that are meant to play one format but don't support all the features of that format are absolutely handicapped (or whatever term you prefer)..especially when there's no way of upgrading them. That's like buying an XBox 360 that'll play Halo 3, but doesn't support any kind of online multiplayer. (ok..it's not exactly like that, but you know what i mean)]]>Nov 6th 2007 5:40PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/How do you know that you don't want the extras if you have never tried them?
I think they add so much, especially if it is a great movie, you want to make the experience last as long as it can.

You sound like my father who used to say, power steering, air conditioning, who needs it.
How can we live without them today, there not extras, there standard features.
He used to say it though because it makes the car to expensive.

Reverse scenario here, the product with more features, HD DVD is much cheaper.]]>Nov 6th 2007 7:26PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/They're called "Next Generation Optical Drives/Players" for a reason and I would consider the PiP, alternative camera angles and downloadable extras as part of that. No, they're not my "primary goal in life", but it's part of what I paid for...had I purchased a blu ray player, that is.]]>Nov 6th 2007 5:06PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/Nov 6th 2007 5:34PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/not to mention the people who get pissed because they were early adopters and now they can't take advantage of some features...and yes, those people do exist, even if they don't frequent the Engadget HD boards.]]>Nov 6th 2007 5:12PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/Does anyone know whether I'll be able to upgrade to 1.1 / 2.0?]]>Nov 6th 2007 5:14PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/Nov 6th 2007 5:14PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/
h4idol should have some insight for us, shouldn't he??? ummm where is he now???
]]>Nov 6th 2007 5:22PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/
First off, I wouldn't recommend any format to the "random" consumer, because the prices aren't ready. I understand that the prices for stand-alone are asking a lot, for the given features, but it's for an early adopter market.

When I recommend either format, to someone who is questioning a path, I have them dig into their own library list of movies, and see which ones come up exclusive, and also inform them of extra interactive features. If the shoe fits, they go to HD-DVD, otherwise I have my own personal choice for blu-ray.

Don't get me wrong, the interactive features are a key bonus for extended movie replay value. I just don't think it should be the main focal point in the sales tactic. Blu-ray went the higher storage higher bitrate rather than the "ah, just good enough" attitude. PQ remains very close, but as far as the future holds when bitrates increase and file sizes increase, there's a better road-map for blu-ray IMO. HD-DVD has become the lowest common denominator when authoring movies, they're winning in that dept., and 90% of the time they are just being ported to blu and there's this gripe of not having space, only exclusive BD titles are seeing justice. My arguement doesn't validate the fact that comparing profile 1.0 to 1.1 is going to meet that roadmap of the future (i went off on a tangent).

The pricetag is for the guy with the ego, the only handicap they face is paying the price for bragging rights to say "i have HD content and you don't". I bought a PS3 because I wanted to get back into gaming, and watch awesome Hi-Def content.]]>Nov 6th 2007 5:47PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/
ok, so you are one who would never use any of the extra features of the player, that's fine....Why then wouldn't a person purchase the player that costs the least amount of money to get the feature( playing movies) they want? Unless it was because of an impulse purchase and they feel the need to justify that purchase? and don't say it's because of the technical superiority of the player because HD DVD would be the one with that edge too. ]]>Nov 6th 2007 6:45PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/
Well said...if both formats are capable of 5 star ratings for video and audio on hidefdigest, then just go for the cheaper one!

Unless he wants to watch Disney movies :P]]>Nov 6th 2007 6:38PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/
Well.. 1 out of 2 ain't bad.]]>Nov 6th 2007 5:56PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/
"First off, I wouldn't recommend any format to the "random" consumer, because the prices aren't ready."

I'm not so sure about that. $199 for an HD-A3 (third gen Toshiba) sounds just right to me. I don't think that Blu-ray prices are low enough yet, but this again brings us to the issue of them lacking features that are present even on the cheapest HD DVD player. When a Blu-ray standalone drops below $200, will it be a 1.1/2.0 compliant piece of hardware, or will it simply be a 1.0 player? At that point it is up to the consumer to weigh their options, as it should be. The debate would be in that particular instance: Do I value 1080p more than I do advanced interactivity/web enabled features and downloads?

Surely the market will be split on those two things, but just how much remains to be seen. For the majority of people that don't have 1080p sets, the decision will be a clear one, at least in my opinion.]]>Nov 6th 2007 6:12PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/
With regard to the "lowest common denominator" in the authoring department, that isn't clear. Although HD-30 is certainly less storage space than BD-50, most Blu-Ray discs are BD-25. Also, due to pooling the total usually ends up being closer to 22GB to keep yields at acceptable levels. So when a movie is authored for both formats, the lowest common denominator is often Blu-Ray.]]>Nov 6th 2007 7:18PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/Still, for pure gaming, I recommend the 360 to friends right now. it's got a great library, and the multiplayer support through live is unmatched on any other platform. But don't count the ps3 out just yet- it's still fighting, and if developers can figure out how to really exploit the cell/rsx combo, it could have some games that you won't see easily replicated on the 360. ]]>Nov 6th 2007 9:01PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/
If you didn't hit the link to read the CNET article, here it is:
http://asia.cnet.com/reviews/home_av/others/0,39037627,62034159,00.htm
Here's another:
http://www.audioholics.com/news/industry-news/sony-blu-ray-specification-deadline

Outside of having money thrown at you, I just can't understand why in the world anyone would support BD from the start when you knew they weren't able to support firmware updates on profile 1.0, and hoping to get that a proper firmware patch updates a PS3 to profile 1.1 or possible profile 2.0? On top of that, people who want BD still have to shell out $400 - $500 just to get a "low-end" BD player that probably still will be only profile 1.0. All of us here are fairly well informed, so if one of us went out to buy a BD player, we would know to ask for a profile 1.1 unit. If you want BD to succeed, is it right to let the uninformed be your lambs and let them get slaughtered by getting burned like this? You might answer "so what? F*** them!" But will that lead to longevity of the platform?

And don't try to throw BD so called "superior" specs around. Many of us have already exposed it as being nothing more than window dressing:

http://blog.hometheatermag.com/geoffreymorrison/0807061080iv1080p/

]]>Nov 6th 2007 6:08PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/Nov 6th 2007 6:34PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/
A 1080p Blu-Ray and a 1080p HD DVD are basically identical, anyone saying they can tell the difference is lying.

The only arguement should be which one has better movies, and that's a matter of personal opinion.

Great movies are available on both formats, it's a shame that Sony and Toshiba couldn't have worked this out before it got to this point.]]>Nov 6th 2007 6:51PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/
It's a little more complicated than that. I think most dual-format HD releases do use the same video stream, so they should have identical output unless the players are doing something stupid.

There are some movies released on both formats that don't get the same encoding and there is some difference, but usually it's pretty subtle.

One site I like to look through is this one:
http://hd-discs.mbmg.de/

Even the much maligned MPEG-2 seems to hold up pretty well.]]>Nov 6th 2007 7:19PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/Nov 6th 2007 6:55PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/
"This player supports BD-ROM Profile 1 only. Playback of later versions of BDs other than BD-ROM is not guaranteed. Since the Blu-ray Disc specifications are new and evolving, some discs may not play depending on the disc type and the version..."

You have to be a complete moron to support Blu-Ray. Why on Gods earth would you want to spend all that money on a player when you know it is not going to conform to future Blu-Ray standards? How can people support that standard? It might be the stupidest thing I've ever heard of. Especially when there is a completed format that has all of the features in place that Blu-Ray is 'hoping' to bring in the future and is only $200.

At least Sony warns people though right?]]>Nov 6th 2007 7:14PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/
Studio support IS a feature, and a far more important one than PIP.]]>Nov 6th 2007 7:27PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/
Only if you read the fine print.]]>Nov 6th 2007 7:33PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/
That maybe true, but we are talking HD players here and not gaming consoles]]>Nov 6th 2007 10:01PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/Nov 6th 2007 9:43PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/By Susanne Ault -- Video Business, 11/6/2007
NOV. 6 | The HD DVD format significantly pumped its installed base over the weekend, as dueling store clearances sold an estimated 90,000 Toshiba players, according to sources close to retailers.

That tally covers Friday to Sunday sales of Toshiba’s second-generation HD-A2 model, which Wal-Mart and Best Buy sold for about $99 on Nov. 2. That’s $200 less than Toshiba’s $299 list price and $100 off widespread retail pricing of $199.

The $99 players made up most of the 90,000 units sold, a source said.

Within three days, Toshiba corralled nearly as many sales as the best-selling stand-alone Blu-ray Disc player has sold since its launch. Sony’s dominant Blu-ray set-top, the $499 BDP-S300, has shipped about 100,000 since it bowed this summer.

However, the Blu-ray format still retains the largest overall installation base, due largely to the millions of PlayStation 3 hardware sold.

In fact, the 90,000 figure for HD-A2 sales could be even higher, as it doesn’t appear to include all retailer information. The figure does span consumer activity on HD-A2s at Wal-Mart, Best Buy and Circuit City, among others.

Best Buy also shaved $100 off Toshiba’s $299 third-generation player, the HD-A3, Friday through Sunday. At deadline, a Best Buy spokesman did not provide updated sales on the HD-A3.

Toshiba and the HD DVD Promotional Group also declined comment.]]>Nov 6th 2007 9:57PMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/
BD is blowing HD-DVD out of the water, regardless of BDJ spec. BDJ 1.0 is complete. 1.1 and 2.0 add unimportant features which most people don't care about. If it was so important, why isn't HD-DVD
doing any better in the war? Only thing keeping HD-DVD alive is Transformers - otherwise, without this "hit", the war would have been over long ago. Michael Bay is working on Transformers 2 and since he favors BD over HD-DVD, there's no doubt that he'd let Transformers 2 slip by and downgrade to an HD-DVD release like the first one did.]]>Nov 7th 2007 12:15AMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/Transformers last night on my 100" wide 2:35:1 screen with anamorphic lens and 1080p DLP front projector, 7 channel B&W speakers, dual Velodyne sub, dual Buttkickers in the sofa Home Theater. It looked and sounded better than my local theater thanks to that lousy HD DVD format.

Yes, Profile 1.0 is complete, just like a Ford Model T. I would love to know that I spent $800
or more on a stand alone Blu Ray player that has no internet connectivity, no dual video image capability, no internal decoding or bitstream output of some of the advanced audio codecs, no persistent memory and no way of upgrading.

Blu Ray has a 9:1 advantage in number of players due to the PS3, but only a 2:1 advantage in disc
sales. Not sure if that's a big win.

The fact is, HD DVD has great titles, great features, great video and sound quality and is by far the best value proposition. HD DVD is on the
third generation of hardware while Blu Ray is still
delivering Profile 1.0.

Sony, the author of the Blu Ray Profiles, rushed the BDP-S500 out to market right before the October 31 deadline to avoid compliance with Profile 1.1.

I agree that the available movie titles should be the most important feature(along with hardware cost), and I like the HD DVD exclusives better,
plus it's region free, so I can buy European imports of many titles only available on Blu Ray
in the U.S. Blu Ray is not region free and its
DRM promises to be even more restrictive in the future.

]]>Nov 7th 2007 1:43AMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/
"Only thing keeping HD-DVD alive is Transformers"

The only thing keeping BD alive is the PS3. So what? HD has Transformers, BD has the PS3 on their respective sides.

"without this "hit", the war would have been over long ago"

Uh...you mean 3 weeks ago when Transformers came out? You must be like 12 years old or something for 3 weeks to be a long time.

"without this "hit" ... Michael Bay is working on Transformers 2 and since he favors BD over HD-DVD, there's no doubt that he'd let Transformers 2 slip by and downgrade to an HD-DVD release like the first one did."

Why you diss his movie and then use his support for BD as support for your argument? Do you care what Michael Bay thinks or don't you? Because the "General masses" don't give a f*** what Michael Bay thinks]]>Nov 7th 2007 1:51AMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/
BD blowing away HD-DVD? Ok then, show us the proof. Give us one or more websites that supports the sh*t that you are shoveling out.
Honestly if you just gotta circle jerk someone, do h4Idol. And do it in private, please.
]]>Nov 7th 2007 2:44AMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/Nov 7th 2007 11:27AMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.betanews.com/article/How_HD_DVD_Got_its_Groove_Back/1194405684

I love it how the blu boyz say BR is blowing HD DVD away.
Were they asleep last weekend when the nation went mad and bought 100,000+ HD DVD players?
My tip is , Walmart will do this another 2 times at least between now and Christmas, so we should be able to add another couple of hundred thousnad players to the install base.
Blow as hard as you like about profile 1 meaning nothing and you are happy to pay 4 times the price for the cheapest player, because come Christmas 2007 the HD war will have permanently changed direction and blu ray will become yet another sony niche market product.
Oh, and do you really think Warner will let their future be guided by a failing gaming console?
Not a chance, by the time PS3 is a major player, this war is over.BR's software sales lead is temporary, the only people who don't know that are the BR fanboys :)]]>Nov 7th 2007 6:00AMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/
]]>Nov 7th 2007 10:06AMhttp://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/11/06/blu-ray-standards-profile-1-0-vs-1-1-vs-2-0/
http://www.emedialive.com/articles/readarticle.aspx?articleid=11397#iij]]>Nov 7th 2007 10:11AM