VUDU's HDX titles compare to Blu-ray's picture quality
Unfortunately for VUDU, when it comes to home entertainment, picture quality isn't everything. Among the remaining barriers to acceptance over Blu-ray is the fact that although the movies are encoded with Dolby Digital Plus, the box is only capable of letting you enjoy old fashioned Dolby Digital -- either way, a far cry from TrueHD or DTS-HD. Oh, and you still can't own HD movies. And HDMI is required for any HD viewing. The download speed is limited to 4Mbps, so even if you have a 20Mbps connection, you'll still have to wait four hours for an HDX title to download. On top of all that, the box costs $300 and is a one trick pony -- even Blu-ray players sell for less now and can upconvert DVDs.
Even with all of these caveats, we could still see this being the perfect solution for an HD movie junkie, but there's the relatively limited selection of HD and HDX titles to contend with. So while we're very happy to see Vudu make an important step in the right direction, we're still not ready to jump on in.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Mitchell @ Oct 16th 2008 12:33PM
Even if the speed was faster to download and let say the box cost the same amount as a blu ray player. Who in there right mind would rent movies for $4 a pop. With Netflix or Blockbuster you can rent 2/mo for $3.99/4.99 a month. So prices are half the price. Sure you have to wait 24 hours to get em but Vudu its what 8 hours?
Now through a $300 box on that with no HD Sound and limited selection GET OUT! Even if the quality is BETTER its still crazy
Mitchell
Galley @ Oct 16th 2008 12:53PM
Or better yet, 8-12 per month for $16.
scyber @ Oct 16th 2008 2:54PM
Well it says 4 hours at 4Mbps, so if you could download at 20Mbps it means you could download the movie in less than an hour. Which also means it would be faster the realtime and you could start watching instantly.
Ben @ Oct 16th 2008 2:56PM
scyber,
That is part of the problem, although we have a 20Mbps connection the fastest it will download is 4Mbps. It is my understanding that this max is imposed by Vudu not the speed of your connection.
scyber @ Oct 16th 2008 3:00PM
Ben,
I agree that the 4mbps limit is as serious limitation. But Mitchell start his comment with:
"Even if the speed was faster to download"
My point was that instant movie access might make $4 movies worth it.
extinctdoughnut @ Oct 16th 2008 12:51PM
I am growing tired of all this "we" talk.
Bob S @ Oct 16th 2008 12:57PM
We agree with you.
Larry @ Oct 16th 2008 1:15PM
It is good to see the picture quality is improving for downloads. My guess is the vast majority of people do not have the capability to use the higher sound codecs anyway. I assume a comparison between the download services is coming soonish?
Ben @ Oct 16th 2008 1:16PM
What type of comparison did you have in mind? We've already done a few, but never a true head to head between them all.
dj496 @ Oct 16th 2008 2:04PM
Nothing in 1080p will EVER compare to blu-ray until the audio is as good - and audio is HALF the movie experience, if not more.
And that's one of the reasons why discs are still the king of content - from a quality point of view. Disc formats are always where quality resides. Downloads are all about convenience. Until downloads become convenient *enough*, it won't be in a position to further ramp up the quality.
Compare CD to MP3. Lossless music downloads are hardly there yet, because they take up much more space and download time.
scyber @ Oct 16th 2008 2:58PM
I think you might be over-estimating the value the average consumer puts on audio quality. Certainly audio is important, but of the all of the people I know, only a handful actually have a 5.1 setup for their DVD equipment. And that technology has been around alot longer. So I am not sure that HD audio & 7.1 sound is that high on peoples priority list for the next gen video format.
dj496 @ Oct 16th 2008 3:12PM
Well then those people are missing out on half the movie experience, if not more. duh ;)
But that's beside the point. This post is simply about judging the quality of HD movie formats... I'm not sure I care about people who don't care as much about quality as I do. I'm sure they're nice people...:D
squiggleslash @ Oct 16th 2008 8:26PM
I'd be happy to have full-rate DTS on everything. DD5.1 though seems the poorest quality of all of the surround sound systems and so it seems disappointing they include it with everything.
mostly a lurker @ Oct 16th 2008 2:29PM
I find this all rather ridiculous. IMOHO, the HD is only worthwhile in screen sizes of over 65"- and preferably over 100". If you happen to be such a size queen (and I am,) ANY lessening of the quality ("we're hard pressed to see a difference" on what? a 22" or 50" monitor?) is a game killer. Save the streaming for lo-fi for now. I'll wait 'til its SNL*, not NOT READY for prime time players.
*by no means do I indicate w/ this pun that SNL was any kind of improvement on the NOT READY PLAYERS, give me Mr. Chase, Lorraine, Gilda, and the Muppets any day over any other cast.
Ben @ Oct 16th 2008 2:30PM
The testing was done on a Pioneer PDP-6010FD (60-inch kuro plasma) from an absurdly close viewing distance of like 5 feet.
We didn't say it looked better, we said it was comparable, which is a far cry from the non-HDX Vudu titles.
Plus, PQ isn't everything and we still prefer Blu-ray.
TrentD @ Oct 16th 2008 8:15PM
HD is only worth it on a screen 65" or bigger? Are you nuts?
Or maybe you just have 20/400 vision...but even from 13 feet, my 42" plasma looks far better on BD than it does with DVD.
scaught @ Oct 16th 2008 3:18PM
What are the overall sizes of the movies? Only because with more Internet providers imposing download limits. I see this piece of tech as dead in the water.
nathan @ Oct 16th 2008 5:24PM
Very true. Especially since it is a bit-torrent like system, where you are not only downloading, but also "uploading" to other Vudu users. Your usage could skyrocket if you are watching a few HDX movies each week.
nathan @ Oct 16th 2008 4:04PM
I am SO close to buying a Vudu just for the HDX movies.
I love the price of Netflix, but I have been waiting for weeks or months for some titles. Great price and quality is nice -- if it's available. Too often the Blu-ray movies aren't. I was hoping their "blu-ray" adder cost was going to be substantial enough that it meant they could buy enough Blu-ray titles to keep up with demand. A dollar a month? Yeah, that will help. I'd gladly pay $10 more a month if they actually had all the movies I want to rent in stock and ready to ship.
So this new Vudu quality level is VERY appealing. I'm watching on a 10 ft wide screen with a 1080p LCOS projector, so I see every problem with a video source. And it sounds like if Ben was pleased on the Kuro at close distance, this is in the realm of acceptable on my system. I *am* disappointed they still don't make use of Dolby Digitial Plus. Heck, it can just downconvert for those with DD-limited receivers. And while DD+ is not as good as lossless, it is SO much better than conventional DD, I could be okay with it for rentals.
Plus they've got cool catalog titles like Harold and Maude, and Chinatown, and I'm all about high quality catalog titles, in addition to new releases -- both of which are hard to rent on Blu-ray either because catalog titles haven't been released (yet?) or new releases are "long wait" though all the conventional outlets.
cwnyc @ Oct 16th 2008 6:00PM
Even if the picture quality is near Bluray quality, 4 hours download time is just insane. A reply from an earlier thread of the same topic called for activating one's cell phone ahead of time to initiate the download process. However, another guy replied that the whole draw for downloading services is the convenience, which I totally agree with. Think about it, planning 4 hours ahead of time to download a movie is NOT more convenient than going to BlockBusters or even going to a real movie theater! This is crazy!
squiggleslash @ Oct 16th 2008 8:32PM
It could be more convenient depending on your requirements and the way you run your day. If you're planning to see a specific movie at a specific time - and that's not unusual, you might want to see a recent release on a Saturday evening - then the download route works pretty well. The download route also works well if it's likely to involve a larger library than any B&M store is ever likely to have.
At this point, downloads with a rental element and B&M rentals are more or less complementary services. In time, as bandwidth improves, and as the business models improve, I don't see why they shouldn't become more convenient and more useful.
TrentD @ Oct 16th 2008 10:55PM
You have two choices - if you want premium quality, wait four hours for HDX. If you just want it quick, select the regular HD option. For best quality, it's better than buying and waiting for a BD to be delivered from Amazon, and for okay quality, it's quicker and better than a rental.
=) @ Oct 17th 2008 1:49PM
Seriously? Engadget is claiming there's no Digital Plus in Vudu?
Yes there's Dolby Digital Plus on Vudu. It's one of the key selling points. I should know. I work for 'em!
And yes, SOME movies are available for purchase in HD. Give it time. More will be available.
Ben @ Oct 17th 2008 2:05PM
You may want to straighten out your PR people then because they told us that the only way to get audio out of the Vudu was with toslink or HDMI and since the Vudu doesn't do HDMI 1.3, the Dolby Digital Plus gets down-mixed to Dolby Digital.
USC217 @ Oct 26th 2008 8:49AM
The box does not output Dolby Digital Plus. Again, the box does not have the hardware to output Dolby Digital Plus. Perhaps a future box will ,but that ain't happening with box. This may lead to why the box is now being discounted at Best Buy. If the box outputted Dolby Digital Plus I would be the first one in line a Best Buy to get one!
Got-a-Vudu @ Nov 4th 2008 10:51AM
So I fell for all the hype of HD and bought a Vudu...seemed like a good idea (everything else I own is HD and 7.1 set-up). Now I'm not super happy that I have to wait 4 hrs for a HDX movie. My wireless network says it's broadcasting at 54Mbps and my computer receives it at that. When I test my system on Vudu.com or even by myself on my PC I see that I am streaming at way over 4Mbps however my Vudu box only says it is receiving 1Mbps from it's own wireless kit. What gives? I realize I'm not incredibly tech savvy so any help on why I can't, at a min, receive 4Mbps download to my Vudu would help...or how I can ramp this up. Part of the entire sales pitch revolved around the fact that I would be able to download HD instantly. What gives?