<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss
version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
> <channel><title>Comments on: Joe Kane on Blu-ray</title> <atom:link href="http://www.hometheaterblog.com/hometheater/2006/07/joe-kane-on-blu-ray/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.hometheaterblog.com/hometheater/2006/07/joe-kane-on-blu-ray/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=joe-kane-on-blu-ray</link> <description></description> <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Jul 2011 18:40:00 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator> <item><title>By: Tom Sweet</title><link>http://www.hometheaterblog.com/hometheater/2006/07/joe-kane-on-blu-ray/#comment-782</link> <dc:creator>Tom Sweet</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sat, 28 Apr 2007 17:12:16 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.hometheaterblog.com/?p=440#comment-782</guid> <description>Blu-ray is a better technology, but politics and economics enter into the equation too.  I believe Blu-ray will be the clear winner, propelled primarily by the multitude of uses of these disks for data storage.  I own and watch some SD DVDs, for example, but I use DVD disks for computer storage of data such as photographs and other files.  I will purchase a 100GB Blu-ray disk for that purpose in the future.
Most of the discussion is focused on MPEG-2 versus VC-1 encoding, not on the disk technology itself.  I have seen some people argue the HD DVD has thicker plastic than Blu-ray, while others acknowledge Blu-ray uses a much tougher coating material.  Nobody questions whether Blu-ray will have higher storage capacity.
Sony and Microsoft compete in the entertainment marketplace, and Sony’s desire to use MPEG-2 encoding may have more to do with its competitive positioning with Microsoft than in the quality of video output.  Players will handle multiple decoding schemes, and even if Sony sticks with MPEG-2 encoding, other producers will easily make the switch to newer codecs.
There are actually many codecs that can be used within the standards.  For lossless compression, here’s a list http://www.compression.ru/video/codec_comparison/mpeg-2_2006_en.html
Alpary
ArithYuv
AVIzlib
CamStudio GZIP
CorePNG
FastCodec
FFV1
Huffyuv
Lagarith
LOCO
LZO
MSU Lab
PICVideo
Snow
x264
YULS.
Each codec has unique characteristics of file size, quality in certain conditions, etc.  The underlying Blu-ray disk provides a better platform for entertainment providers to use advanced encoding methodologies to deliver HD video.  Blu-ray also uses laser technology that allows for much higher capacity for data storage. </description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Blu-ray is a better technology, but politics and economics enter into the equation too.  I believe Blu-ray will be the clear winner, propelled primarily by the multitude of uses of these disks for data storage.  I own and watch some SD DVDs, for example, but I use DVD disks for computer storage of data such as photographs and other files.  I will purchase a 100GB Blu-ray disk for that purpose in the future.</p><p>Most of the discussion is focused on MPEG-2 versus VC-1 encoding, not on the disk technology itself.  I have seen some people argue the HD DVD has thicker plastic than Blu-ray, while others acknowledge Blu-ray uses a much tougher coating material.  Nobody questions whether Blu-ray will have higher storage capacity.</p><p>Sony and Microsoft compete in the entertainment marketplace, and Sony’s desire to use MPEG-2 encoding may have more to do with its competitive positioning with Microsoft than in the quality of video output.  Players will handle multiple decoding schemes, and even if Sony sticks with MPEG-2 encoding, other producers will easily make the switch to newer codecs.</p><p>There are actually many codecs that can be used within the standards.  For lossless compression, here’s a list <a
href="http://www.compression.ru/video/codec_comparison/mpeg-2_2006_en.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.compression.ru/video/codec_comparison/mpeg-2_2006_en.html</a></p><p>Alpary<br
/> ArithYuv<br
/> AVIzlib<br
/> CamStudio GZIP<br
/> CorePNG<br
/> FastCodec<br
/> FFV1<br
/> Huffyuv<br
/> Lagarith<br
/> LOCO<br
/> LZO<br
/> MSU Lab<br
/> PICVideo<br
/> Snow<br
/> x264<br
/> YULS.</p><p>Each codec has unique characteristics of file size, quality in certain conditions, etc.  The underlying Blu-ray disk provides a better platform for entertainment providers to use advanced encoding methodologies to deliver HD video.  Blu-ray also uses laser technology that allows for much higher capacity for data storage.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Tom Sweet</title><link>http://www.hometheaterblog.com/hometheater/2006/07/joe-kane-on-blu-ray/#comment-7122</link> <dc:creator>Tom Sweet</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sat, 28 Apr 2007 17:12:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.hometheaterblog.com/?p=440#comment-7122</guid> <description>Blu-ray is a better technology, but politics and economics enter into the equation too.  I believe Blu-ray will be the clear winner, propelled primarily by the multitude of uses of these disks for data storage.  I own and watch some SD DVDs, for example, but I use DVD disks for computer storage of data such as photographs and other files.  I will purchase a 100GB Blu-ray disk for that purpose in the future.
Most of the discussion is focused on MPEG-2 versus VC-1 encoding, not on the disk technology itself.  I have seen some people argue the HD DVD has thicker plastic than Blu-ray, while others acknowledge Blu-ray uses a much tougher coating material.  Nobody questions whether Blu-ray will have higher storage capacity.
Sony and Microsoft compete in the entertainment marketplace, and Sony’s desire to use MPEG-2 encoding may have more to do with its competitive positioning with Microsoft than in the quality of video output.  Players will handle multiple decoding schemes, and even if Sony sticks with MPEG-2 encoding, other producers will easily make the switch to newer codecs.
There are actually many codecs that can be used within the standards.  For lossless compression, here’s a list http://www.compression.ru/video/codec_comparison/mpeg-2_2006_en.html
Alpary
ArithYuv
AVIzlib
CamStudio GZIP
CorePNG
FastCodec
FFV1
Huffyuv
Lagarith
LOCO
LZO
MSU Lab
PICVideo
Snow
x264
YULS.
Each codec has unique characteristics of file size, quality in certain conditions, etc.  The underlying Blu-ray disk provides a better platform for entertainment providers to use advanced encoding methodologies to deliver HD video.  Blu-ray also uses laser technology that allows for much higher capacity for data storage.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Blu-ray is a better technology, but politics and economics enter into the equation too.  I believe Blu-ray will be the clear winner, propelled primarily by the multitude of uses of these disks for data storage.  I own and watch some SD DVDs, for example, but I use DVD disks for computer storage of data such as photographs and other files.  I will purchase a 100GB Blu-ray disk for that purpose in the future.</p><p>Most of the discussion is focused on MPEG-2 versus VC-1 encoding, not on the disk technology itself.  I have seen some people argue the HD DVD has thicker plastic than Blu-ray, while others acknowledge Blu-ray uses a much tougher coating material.  Nobody questions whether Blu-ray will have higher storage capacity.</p><p>Sony and Microsoft compete in the entertainment marketplace, and Sony’s desire to use MPEG-2 encoding may have more to do with its competitive positioning with Microsoft than in the quality of video output.  Players will handle multiple decoding schemes, and even if Sony sticks with MPEG-2 encoding, other producers will easily make the switch to newer codecs.</p><p>There are actually many codecs that can be used within the standards.  For lossless compression, here’s a list <a
href="http://www.compression.ru/video/codec_comparison/mpeg-2_2006_en.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.compression.ru/video/codec_comparison/mpeg-2_2006_en.html</a></p><p>Alpary<br
/> ArithYuv<br
/> AVIzlib<br
/> CamStudio GZIP<br
/> CorePNG<br
/> FastCodec<br
/> FFV1<br
/> Huffyuv<br
/> Lagarith<br
/> LOCO<br
/> LZO<br
/> MSU Lab<br
/> PICVideo<br
/> Snow<br
/> x264<br
/> YULS.</p><p>Each codec has unique characteristics of file size, quality in certain conditions, etc.  The underlying Blu-ray disk provides a better platform for entertainment providers to use advanced encoding methodologies to deliver HD video.  Blu-ray also uses laser technology that allows for much higher capacity for data storage.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Nensy Cooper</title><link>http://www.hometheaterblog.com/hometheater/2006/07/joe-kane-on-blu-ray/#comment-781</link> <dc:creator>Nensy Cooper</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 07 Feb 2007 14:31:13 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.hometheaterblog.com/?p=440#comment-781</guid> <description>I see Blu Ray as the iPod of home entertainment. The iPod does not offer the highest quality, in fact you can easily tell that there is a significant drop in sound quality compared to other hard drive music players. Yet iPods are most popular because they offer the most non-technical specs... in other words the only thing the consumers see. </description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I see Blu Ray as the iPod of home entertainment. The iPod does not offer the highest quality, in fact you can easily tell that there is a significant drop in sound quality compared to other hard drive music players. Yet iPods are most popular because they offer the most non-technical specs&#8230; in other words the only thing the consumers see.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Nensy Cooper</title><link>http://www.hometheaterblog.com/hometheater/2006/07/joe-kane-on-blu-ray/#comment-7121</link> <dc:creator>Nensy Cooper</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 07 Feb 2007 14:31:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.hometheaterblog.com/?p=440#comment-7121</guid> <description>I see Blu Ray as the iPod of home entertainment. The iPod does not offer the highest quality, in fact you can easily tell that there is a significant drop in sound quality compared to other hard drive music players. Yet iPods are most popular because they offer the most non-technical specs... in other words the only thing the consumers see.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I see Blu Ray as the iPod of home entertainment. The iPod does not offer the highest quality, in fact you can easily tell that there is a significant drop in sound quality compared to other hard drive music players. Yet iPods are most popular because they offer the most non-technical specs&#8230; in other words the only thing the consumers see.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Jamie Bryan</title><link>http://www.hometheaterblog.com/hometheater/2006/07/joe-kane-on-blu-ray/#comment-780</link> <dc:creator>Jamie Bryan</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2006 05:00:26 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.hometheaterblog.com/?p=440#comment-780</guid> <description>I think Blu Ray is better because why else would sony have gone for it... hd dvd isnt as good because its not in a playstation 3, Im cisco certified and I know my stuff </description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think Blu Ray is better because why else would sony have gone for it&#8230; hd dvd isnt as good because its not in a playstation 3, Im cisco certified and I know my stuff</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Jamie Bryan</title><link>http://www.hometheaterblog.com/hometheater/2006/07/joe-kane-on-blu-ray/#comment-7120</link> <dc:creator>Jamie Bryan</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2006 05:00:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.hometheaterblog.com/?p=440#comment-7120</guid> <description>I think Blu Ray is better because why else would sony have gone for it... hd dvd isnt as good because its not in a playstation 3, Im cisco certified and I know my stuff</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think Blu Ray is better because why else would sony have gone for it&#8230; hd dvd isnt as good because its not in a playstation 3, Im cisco certified and I know my stuff</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Ko Sha</title><link>http://www.hometheaterblog.com/hometheater/2006/07/joe-kane-on-blu-ray/#comment-779</link> <dc:creator>Ko Sha</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2006 00:49:45 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.hometheaterblog.com/?p=440#comment-779</guid> <description>“Sony’s claim that MPEG2 is equal to or superior to VC-1 clearly says they haven’t been looking at it, in a manner in which they can see it’
That is absolutely true at high bit rates (&gt; 25 MBps for HD).
I am Encoder and Decoder developer. </description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>“Sony’s claim that MPEG2 is equal to or superior to VC-1 clearly says they haven’t been looking at it, in a manner in which they can see it’</p><p>That is absolutely true at high bit rates (> 25 MBps for HD).</p><p>I am Encoder and Decoder developer.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Ko Sha</title><link>http://www.hometheaterblog.com/hometheater/2006/07/joe-kane-on-blu-ray/#comment-7119</link> <dc:creator>Ko Sha</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2006 00:49:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.hometheaterblog.com/?p=440#comment-7119</guid> <description>“Sony’s claim that MPEG2 is equal to or superior to VC-1 clearly says they haven’t been looking at it, in a manner in which they can see it’
That is absolutely true at high bit rates (&gt; 25 MBps for HD).
I am Encoder and Decoder developer.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>“Sony’s claim that MPEG2 is equal to or superior to VC-1 clearly says they haven’t been looking at it, in a manner in which they can see it’</p><p>That is absolutely true at high bit rates (&gt; 25 MBps for HD).</p><p>I am Encoder and Decoder developer.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: kvid</title><link>http://www.hometheaterblog.com/hometheater/2006/07/joe-kane-on-blu-ray/#comment-778</link> <dc:creator>kvid</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 01 Dec 2006 01:39:27 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.hometheaterblog.com/?p=440#comment-778</guid> <description>Two words: Memory Stick.
$ony is worse than M$ when it comes to standards. Their licensing fees are aweful. That is what killed beta; JVC invented an inferior standard to avoid paying $ony fees and licensed it relatively cheap to every else.
So history if going to repeat itself and HD-DVD will win out. </description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Two words: Memory Stick.</p><p>$ony is worse than M$ when it comes to standards. Their licensing fees are aweful. That is what killed beta; JVC invented an inferior standard to avoid paying $ony fees and licensed it relatively cheap to every else.</p><p>So history if going to repeat itself and HD-DVD will win out.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: kvid</title><link>http://www.hometheaterblog.com/hometheater/2006/07/joe-kane-on-blu-ray/#comment-7118</link> <dc:creator>kvid</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 01 Dec 2006 01:39:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.hometheaterblog.com/?p=440#comment-7118</guid> <description>Two words: Memory Stick.
$ony is worse than M$ when it comes to standards. Their licensing fees are aweful. That is what killed beta; JVC invented an inferior standard to avoid paying $ony fees and licensed it relatively cheap to every else.
So history if going to repeat itself and HD-DVD will win out.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Two words: Memory Stick.</p><p>$ony is worse than M$ when it comes to standards. Their licensing fees are aweful. That is what killed beta; JVC invented an inferior standard to avoid paying $ony fees and licensed it relatively cheap to every else.</p><p>So history if going to repeat itself and HD-DVD will win out.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: B.Greenway</title><link>http://www.hometheaterblog.com/hometheater/2006/07/joe-kane-on-blu-ray/#comment-777</link> <dc:creator>B.Greenway</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 10 Sep 2006 04:04:51 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.hometheaterblog.com/?p=440#comment-777</guid> <description>It seems like even the iPod isn’t as popular as it once was. Maybe brand names in general are on the wane; perhaps we’ll see a much needed return to quality over vanity. http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1869042,00.html </description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It seems like even the iPod isn’t as popular as it once was. Maybe brand names in general are on the wane; perhaps we’ll see a much needed return to quality over vanity. <a
href="http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1869042,00.html" rel="nofollow">http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1869042,00.html</a></p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: B.Greenway</title><link>http://www.hometheaterblog.com/hometheater/2006/07/joe-kane-on-blu-ray/#comment-7117</link> <dc:creator>B.Greenway</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 10 Sep 2006 04:04:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.hometheaterblog.com/?p=440#comment-7117</guid> <description>It seems like even the iPod isn’t as popular as it once was. Maybe brand names in general are on the wane; perhaps we’ll see a much needed return to quality over vanity. http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1869042,00.html</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It seems like even the iPod isn’t as popular as it once was. Maybe brand names in general are on the wane; perhaps we’ll see a much needed return to quality over vanity. <a
href="http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1869042,00.html" rel="nofollow">http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1869042,00.html</a></p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: ml</title><link>http://www.hometheaterblog.com/hometheater/2006/07/joe-kane-on-blu-ray/#comment-776</link> <dc:creator>ml</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sat, 09 Sep 2006 23:46:18 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.hometheaterblog.com/?p=440#comment-776</guid> <description>I am slightly biased toward HD-DVD&#039;s only because I&#039;m mostly a pro-Microsoft person.  But I can&#039;t help but think that the format war can still result in a Blu Ray victory.
I see Blu Ray as the iPod of home entertainment.  The iPod does not offer the highest quality, in fact you can easily tell that there is a significant drop in sound quality compared to other hard drive music players.  Yet iPods are most popular because they offer the most non-technical specs... in other words the only thing the consumers see.
The majority of consumers will never know that Blu Ray uses MPEG 2 instead of a higher, more efficiant codec.  All they will see is the 50GB or 100GB marker on the product label, compared to the 30GB on the HD DVD label.  And most people, not knowing the difference in video quality, will most likely select the more capacity.
Again, look at the iPod.  It is not the cheapest 20Gb player, yet people still buy it.  There are other 20Gb players that are cheaper and of higher quality but thats not what the people see.  The people see the label.  And as much as I want HD DVD to come out on top, this will be a tough battle. </description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am slightly biased toward HD-DVD&#8217;s only because I&#8217;m mostly a pro-Microsoft person.  But I can&#8217;t help but think that the format war can still result in a Blu Ray victory.</p><p>I see Blu Ray as the iPod of home entertainment.  The iPod does not offer the highest quality, in fact you can easily tell that there is a significant drop in sound quality compared to other hard drive music players.  Yet iPods are most popular because they offer the most non-technical specs&#8230; in other words the only thing the consumers see.</p><p>The majority of consumers will never know that Blu Ray uses MPEG 2 instead of a higher, more efficiant codec.  All they will see is the 50GB or 100GB marker on the product label, compared to the 30GB on the HD DVD label.  And most people, not knowing the difference in video quality, will most likely select the more capacity.</p><p>Again, look at the iPod.  It is not the cheapest 20Gb player, yet people still buy it.  There are other 20Gb players that are cheaper and of higher quality but thats not what the people see.  The people see the label.  And as much as I want HD DVD to come out on top, this will be a tough battle.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: ml</title><link>http://www.hometheaterblog.com/hometheater/2006/07/joe-kane-on-blu-ray/#comment-7116</link> <dc:creator>ml</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sat, 09 Sep 2006 23:46:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.hometheaterblog.com/?p=440#comment-7116</guid> <description>I am slightly biased toward HD-DVD&#039;s only because I&#039;m mostly a pro-Microsoft person.  But I can&#039;t help but think that the format war can still result in a Blu Ray victory.
I see Blu Ray as the iPod of home entertainment.  The iPod does not offer the highest quality, in fact you can easily tell that there is a significant drop in sound quality compared to other hard drive music players.  Yet iPods are most popular because they offer the most non-technical specs... in other words the only thing the consumers see.
The majority of consumers will never know that Blu Ray uses MPEG 2 instead of a higher, more efficiant codec.  All they will see is the 50GB or 100GB marker on the product label, compared to the 30GB on the HD DVD label.  And most people, not knowing the difference in video quality, will most likely select the more capacity.
Again, look at the iPod.  It is not the cheapest 20Gb player, yet people still buy it.  There are other 20Gb players that are cheaper and of higher quality but thats not what the people see.  The people see the label.  And as much as I want HD DVD to come out on top, this will be a tough battle.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am slightly biased toward HD-DVD&#8217;s only because I&#8217;m mostly a pro-Microsoft person.  But I can&#8217;t help but think that the format war can still result in a Blu Ray victory.</p><p>I see Blu Ray as the iPod of home entertainment.  The iPod does not offer the highest quality, in fact you can easily tell that there is a significant drop in sound quality compared to other hard drive music players.  Yet iPods are most popular because they offer the most non-technical specs&#8230; in other words the only thing the consumers see.</p><p>The majority of consumers will never know that Blu Ray uses MPEG 2 instead of a higher, more efficiant codec.  All they will see is the 50GB or 100GB marker on the product label, compared to the 30GB on the HD DVD label.  And most people, not knowing the difference in video quality, will most likely select the more capacity.</p><p>Again, look at the iPod.  It is not the cheapest 20Gb player, yet people still buy it.  There are other 20Gb players that are cheaper and of higher quality but thats not what the people see.  The people see the label.  And as much as I want HD DVD to come out on top, this will be a tough battle.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: B.Greenway</title><link>http://www.hometheaterblog.com/hometheater/2006/07/joe-kane-on-blu-ray/#comment-775</link> <dc:creator>B.Greenway</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sat, 29 Jul 2006 02:46:42 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.hometheaterblog.com/?p=440#comment-775</guid> <description>Well Pepe, Sony Pictures senior vice president of advanced technology, Don Eklund said:
&quot;Advanced (formats) don&#039;t necessarily improve picture quality. Our goal is to present the best picture quality for Blu-ray. Right now, and for the foreseeable future, that&#039;s with MPEG-2.&quot;
If the Senior VP of Sony Pictures advanced technology says &quot;for the foreseeable future, that&#039;s with MPEG-2&quot; What else are we left to believe? </description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well Pepe, Sony Pictures senior vice president of advanced technology, Don Eklund said:</p><p>&#8220;Advanced (formats) don&#8217;t necessarily improve picture quality. Our goal is to present the best picture quality for Blu-ray. Right now, and for the foreseeable future, that&#8217;s with MPEG-2.&#8221;</p><p>If the Senior VP of Sony Pictures advanced technology says &#8220;for the foreseeable future, that&#8217;s with MPEG-2&#8243; What else are we left to believe?</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
