> but the first deck is the most basic of the bunch while the latter one handles BD-Live interactivity
Wait, so the low end version doesn't?
A NEW Blu-ray player is being released that isn't Profile 2.0?
This is another thing the BDA has to fix, on top of BD+ and the issues you covered in your comment: CE manufacturers pushing obsolete players. It does BD no good whatsoever if the basic principle "Every Blu-ray disc can play in every properly set-up player" is not followed.
Profile 1.1 isn't obsolete no matter how many times you claim it is. I am not aware of any BD Live enabled disc that does not play in non-BD Live players. Perhaps you wish to hook up your player to the internet, but not everyone does. This would be true in western countries and even more so in China.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
squiggleslash @ Dec 30th 2008 4:09PM
> but the first deck is the most basic of the bunch while the latter one handles BD-Live interactivity
Wait, so the low end version doesn't?
A NEW Blu-ray player is being released that isn't Profile 2.0?
This is another thing the BDA has to fix, on top of BD+ and the issues you covered in your comment: CE manufacturers pushing obsolete players. It does BD no good whatsoever if the basic principle "Every Blu-ray disc can play in every properly set-up player" is not followed.
DrXym @ Dec 30th 2008 6:56PM
Profile 1.1 isn't obsolete no matter how many times you claim it is. I am not aware of any BD Live enabled disc that does not play in non-BD Live players. Perhaps you wish to hook up your player to the internet, but not everyone does. This would be true in western countries and even more so in China.
chefgon_ign @ Dec 31st 2008 7:23AM
I'm pretty sure they've planned all along for BD Live to be optional forever.
BD may have had bigger discs and better support, but dammit HD DVD really had it figured out when it came to universal standard features.