getting ps3 or xbox360

[quads14589]

i might be getting the ps3 or xbox 360 beuase it is alot cheaper and some say that it is better. which one do you guys like more?

[TGW_400ex]

Not many people have the PS3 and there is barely any games out for it yet so its hard to compare them.

i would await a few months...the ps3 will be more available as will games. the game companies have not had the time to tap into the ps3's full power yet...the 360 is ahead of them in that dept...give it some time for a good true comparison

given the specs of the systems and what i have read (and read alot ) online. i think the 360 is and will be as powerful or more powerful as the ps3. no way i would pay that price they are asking, and who knows if blue ray will even stay popular, may end up like the umd format. ps3 does not have any exclusive games now either. this time i think it may finally be about the games , it should have been that way to start....so its all about preference now.

[MentalState]

IMO

the PS3 is better...I like the fact that I can install a hardrive from a laptop and gain another 250 gig of space...Plus you can partition the hard drive and install a seperate operating system like LYNUX...I also like the fact that my PSP syncs up to the PS3 to share files wirelessly...Also the Blue ray will take off they are installing it in there computers and all laptops....

So far things I have done with my PS3

Played some amazing games.(even if they are limmited now)

Used my PS3 to share files and Browes Internet via PSP..

Downloaded some games and movie trailers...

watched Talladega nights in 1080 High Def ( very nice)...

I also had used a xbox360 its just as nice but the menu is not that user friendly and the hard drive isnt as big..the money you would spend on the xbox getting it to par with PS3 would be greater than the 650 for the PS3... I have alot of sony components Comp,PSP,PS3 and lots of PS2 games...So it was a no brainer for me...

Oh.... Set up is alot easier with PS3 also...and on line gaming is free...

[jesshamner]

Thats going to be a tough decision no matter what. I hear that the developers are just now trying to use all the power that the 360 is capable of. If ps3 is the same way, it will be pretty cool too. I have always been a fan of both systems but I lean towards the xbox.

[1fastR]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MentalState
[B]IMO

the PS3 is better...I like the fact that I can install a hardrive from a laptop and gain another 250 gig of space...Plus you can partition the hard drive and install a seperate operating system like LYNUX...I also like the fact that my PSP syncs up to the PS3 to share files wirelessly...Also the Blue ray will take off they are installing it in there computers and all laptops....

So far things I have done with my PS3

Played some amazing games.(even if they are limmited now)

Used my PS3 to share files and Browes Internet via PSP..

Downloaded some games and movie trailers...

watched Talladega nights in 1080 High Def ( very nice)...

**360 has way more amazing games

**you can download games and movie trailers on the 360 also-not big deal

**and you could of watch the same hd movie on the 360 with the hd-dvd drive installed

the 360 is the only way to go-wait a couple years when the announce the winner of the counsole wars!!!!

[atvRiDa400ex]

from what i have seen the 360 owns all.

alot of kids say the wii is fun, but that looks so "retarded".

and as for ps3...wayyyyyy too much money!

Gears of War for the 360 is probably the best game out for it right now IMO

[Ron89]

I'm just sticking to the computer...I refuse to pay $600+ for something that is going to be obsolete in a few years... Computers will always have better graphics, you can upgrade them, and any really good game that comes out on a console usually comes out on the comp. You can even use 360 controllers on the computer. A crazy good computer is like $800 at most where a console that can't even come close is practically the same price. Thats just my opinion though! Have fun!

[Warnerade]

Originally posted by 1fastR
[QUOTE]Originally posted by MentalState
[B]**360 has way more amazing games

**you can download games and movie trailers on the 360 also-not big deal

**and you could of watch the same hd movie on the 360 with the hd-dvd drive installed

the 360 is the only way to go-wait a couple years when the announce the winner of the counsole wars!!!! You gotta be kidding me dude....You can NOT have the same veiwing from the 200$ waste of money HD-DVD player for the 360...That thing doesnt even have HDMI output...and if you want HD..obviously you want the best. which is what HDMI is...That alos means its true capabilities only go up to 720p and 1080i...with 720p being the better of the 2, and 1080p being the best...too bad it wont go that high. If you want HD veiwing...Blu-Ray is the way to go, there is a LOT more titles out on blu-ray, and they are still just tapping into its true potential, with a long way to go before they get to its true potential, especially in gaming.

the comment about the games jsut baffles me...Of course it has better games, its beem out for over a year! I love when fools like you compare all the 10 LAUNCH games, to the 100+ 360 games that have had a much longer time to develop and make into a great game. In one year, come back to this thread and see if you even agree with your own statement, I bet you wont.

I am not saying the 360 isnt good...hell, I have one...but I also picked up a PS3 a week later....I like games for both consoles, and buying a pS3 sure beats the hell out of paying 1000 bucks for a Sony Blu-Ray player.

[MOFO]

Originally posted by NacsRacer027
You gotta be kidding me dude....You can NOT have the same veiwing from the 200$ waste of money HD-DVD player for the 360...That thing doesnt even have HDMI output...and if you want HD..obviously you want the best. which is what HDMI is...That alos means its true capabilities only go up to 720p and 1080i...with 720p being the better of the 2, and 1080p being the best...too bad it wont go that high. If you want HD veiwing...Blu-Ray is the way to go, there is a LOT more titles out on blu-ray, and they are still just tapping into its true potential, with a long way to go before they get to its true potential, especially in gaming.




I think you need to check your facts before posting...

Right now HD-DVD is winning in terms of quality from a true A/V point of view. I'm sure down the road it will become a Ford vs Chevy battle as Blueray improves its technology and compression techniques. As of a month ago, they also had more titles than Blueray. HDMI is not the only way to send a true HD signal. Component, DVI or HDMI. I have $100 sitting in my hand that says you would NOT notice the difference if I had you look at a TV and tell me if it was using HDMI. If my memory serves me correct, HDMI is not the only way of transferring 1080P either. That limitation is set by YOUR TV, not the player.

So your saying that Blueray will win, just like Beta or all of the other failed Sony media's from the past? Blueray is nice for computer and game's, due to size, however HD-DVD is winning the true A/V tests.

Do you actually understand these technologies and how they work? Seriously, do you? How the disc's are made and how the players are designed?

"The A/V comments on this board baffle me..."

[jesshamner]

Originally posted by NacsRacer027

the comment about the games jsut baffles me...Of course it has better games, its beem out for over a year! I love when fools like you compare all the 10 LAUNCH games, to the 100+ 360 games that have had a much longer time to develop and make into a great game. In one year, come back to this thread and see if you even agree with your own statement, I bet you wont.


Back when it was just the ps2 and the xbox, this was ps2 fans' campaign against xbox. Now that the tables have turned, the ps2 fans want to complain about it being unfair? I agree that it is retarded to compare by number of games though.



I think the xbox's ability to update games and online play is great! Does ps3 have that? I don't really know a lot about it at this point.

[Warnerade]

I like the way xbox live is setup a lot more than PS3...it is nice to get notifications whenever you get a new friend request, message, or someone you know logs on. I have always thought playstation had better games than the xbox, and in the past, they did, atleast in my opinion, but now, they are making the new games for both consoles pretty much but there will still be a few defining titles for each system (killzone2, gears of war..etc)

as for you mofo...your right, I probably couldnt tell a difference between the HDMI cable or the DVI cables...I was just stating a fact...IF I had a 1080p TV..and bought an HD DVD player, I would want HDMI...simply becuase it is the best, if you spend all the extra money for a 1080 tv..why wouldnt you want the best? My TV only goes to 720, quite frankly, I'm happy with it. I never said the 360 cant not go up to 1080p, because there is a setting for it and I have played on a 1080 tv before. The HD-DVD player is stated that it will only play up to 720p and 1080i..It wont go into 1080p mode. It also ONLY plays HD-DVD's...that can get pricy when shopping for movies to watch.

Why not spend a few extra bucks and get a toshiba HD-DVD player? It has HDMI...IS capable of playing in 1080p...and will also play a regular DVD, not only that..it will upconvert the quality into 720p...which means you can get HD viewing out of a regular 19.99 priced DVD...

I just personally like blu-ray...I have faith in it...I have seen some trailers for games coming out, advertised that the games will look just like, if not better than the trailer...

If blu-ray falls through..oh well, **** happens...but I will still have both consoles to choose from and play a different variety of games...

[Guy400]

Eric, you beat me to it...

I've got a 360 right now and had planned on buying a PS3 until Sony announced it's price tag. Call me what you will but both machines are gaming consoles to me and I don't have any intentions on using it as my movie player despite what technology wins out over time. I want to wait another 6 months for a price drop and to see if one technology makes any serious gains on the other but I'm leaning about 90% towards HD-DVD for the cost factor alone. A Blu-Ray player is $1000 right now so maybe in 6 months they're down to $700. There are already HD-DVD players under $500!

[Warnerade]

Guy..at Best buy I saw the Sony blu-ray players were marked down to 700 bucks already...I am not sure if that was a sale or sony already marked prices due to selling next to none. Its all just personal preference I suppose..well....im gonna go back to playing my investment on this lovely friday evening

Originally posted by NacsRacer027
Guy..at Best buy I saw the Sony blu-ray players were marked down to 700 bucks already...I am not sure if that was a sale or sony already marked prices due to selling next to none. Its all just personal preference I suppose..well....im gonna go back to playing my investment on this lovely friday evening

Sure...Rub it in. You'll be seeing me tonight with my own personal Beat a PS3 bat.

[Warnerade]

Originally posted by MrMan
Sure...Rub it in. You'll be seeing me tonight with my own personal Beat a PS3 bat. I was actually talking about my 360...I dont like any of the ps3 games out right now, lol..launch titles ar enever the greatest, frnakly I wish I would have waited to get it. Resistance is a really good game....but gets old after you beat it once.

[Ralph]

Originally posted by MOFO
I think you need to check your facts before posting...

Right now HD-DVD is winning in terms of quality from a true A/V point of view. I'm sure down the road it will become a Ford vs Chevy battle as Blueray improves its technology and compression techniques. As of a month ago, they also had more titles than Blueray. HDMI is not the only way to send a true HD signal. Component, DVI or HDMI. I have $100 sitting in my hand that says you would NOT notice the difference if I had you look at a TV and tell me if it was using HDMI. If my memory serves me correct, HDMI is not the only way of transferring 1080P either. That limitation is set by YOUR TV, not the player.

So your saying that Blueray will win, just like Beta or all of the other failed Sony media's from the past? Blueray is nice for computer and game's, due to size, however HD-DVD is winning the true A/V tests.

Do you actually understand these technologies and how they work? Seriously, do you? How the disc's are made and how the players are designed?

"The A/V comments on this board baffle me..."

I think the betamax/other sony media argument is beaten to death all over the internet.

Betamax was ages ago. As far is i know Sony is responsible for the Compact disc which didnt fail.

Sony was also smart and now has a major head start on HD-DVD. Sony was able to put close to 400,000 blue ray players in peoples homes with just the ps3. Thats quite the head start. And for gaming Blue-Ray is BETTER. With the lifespan of these things and the way they grow over the years your gonna want maximum capacity. Look at how bad launch ps2 titles were 6 years ago and how far they have gone today. With that kind of improvement i wouldnt be suprised to see 60 gig games, Hell i expect them.

As far as the cell being too hard to program for. It could still be better in the long run. It might be hard now but become the norm and take off years for now. It has so much room for improvement and i cant afford to buy a new system every 2 years and i know the ps3 is one to last.

For 500$ you get equal storage as 360 wich cant be upgraded to the extend the ps3 can. You also get tons of more features. Free online play and the luxury of a BD player.

Games: Metal Gear Solid 4, Half Life 2: Episode 2, Killzone and many many more. I played Gears of war and its nothign but hype. Yeah its fun but the main backbone to the game is just a great marketing move by microsoft.

I personaly like both systems. I think the x360 sucked on launch. I have always enjoyed sports games on playstation and the games are just whatever floats ur boat. I personaly like ps3 more just because of Socom 4 coming out.

So yeah, there is some bias in my post but not too much. I am no tech guru either.

From my point of view you can lay ps3 and xbox side by side and when you bring them both to the same level starting with the xbox premium system and the ps3 core it will take quite the loot to get the 360 up to par with ps3. (HD-DVD Player, Li Battery for controller, charging kit)

The ps3 is so universal it keeps costs down way. When someone goes to buy a 360 headset to game online they go and buy the microsoft one. The ps3 guy on the otherhand just syncs up his Blue tooth headset and is ready to go.

Some Bias yes, do i honestly feel ps3 is better yes.

One last example. Microsoft is the kind of company that makes you buy a 20 dollar adapter to watch dvds. Sony includes it off the bat. That adapter is useless and just another way for microsoft to suck the money out of your pocket. Ive never seen sony do that and im confident that when i pay for the system i wont spend another 200-300 dollars just in hidden costs...

[MOFO]

Originally posted by Ralph
I think the betamax/other sony media argument is beaten to death all over the internet.

Betamax was ages ago. As far is i know Sony is responsible for the Compact disc which didnt fail.

Sony was also smart and now has a major head start on HD-DVD. Sony was able to put close to 400,000 blue ray players in peoples homes with just the ps3. Thats quite the head start. And for gaming Blue-Ray is BETTER. With the lifespan of these things and the way they grow over the years your gonna want maximum capacity. Look at how bad launch ps2 titles were 6 years ago and how far they have gone today. With that kind of improvement i wouldnt be suprised to see 60 gig games, Hell i expect them.





Beta vs VHS is a valid arguement... Beta was superior to VHS, but still failed because Sony is greedy! They always attempt to create and sell their own media while forcing the consumer to purchase it... ie DAT, mini disc, their own memory sticks for camera's...the list goes on and on.

I hope you know that HD-DVD is capable of holding large amounts of data, just as Blueray (just add layers...)so storage really is not an issue. Again, I could give two craps about gaming, just as a large part of the A/V community does. You talk about Sony getting a head start by putting 400,000 units out there...LMFAO! I bet a third to half of those people don't even own an HDTV, let alone have it connected properly. Yea, lets target that market - I'm sure those people will become big Blueray supporters! :rolleyes:

The PS3 might help a tad with Blueray winning the battle, but it is FAR, FAR from being the system that saves Blueray! In the end its still a gaming system that will not become a standard piece of A/V equipment. Maybe the next generation will be...

Until a media win's or the players that support BOTH technologies comes down in price I'll sit back and watch the show... At this point I dont care which media win's - they are both capable of producing quality A/V sources... which is the only item I am concerned with. Battles like this only hurt the consumer in the end and slow down the progress of technology.

[Ralph]

Originally posted by MOFO
Beta vs VHS is a valid arguement... Beta was superior to VHS, but still failed because Sony is greedy! They always attempt to create and sell their own media while forcing the consumer to purchase it... ie DAT, mini disc, their own memory sticks for camera's...the list goes on and on.

I hope you know that HD-DVD is capable of holding large amounts of data, just as Blueray (just add layers...)so storage really is not an issue. Again, I could give two craps about gaming, just as a large part of the A/V community does. You talk about Sony getting a head start by putting 400,000 units out there...LMFAO! I bet a third to half of those people don't even own an HDTV, let alone have it connected properly. Yea, lets target that market - I'm sure those people will become big Blueray supporters! :rolleyes:

The PS3 might help a tad with Blueray winning the battle, but it is FAR, FAR from being the system that saves Blueray! In the end its still a gaming system that will not become a standard piece of A/V equipment. Maybe the next generation will be...

Until a media win's or the players that support BOTH technologies comes down in price I'll sit back and watch the show... At this point I dont care which media win's - they are both capable of producing quality A/V sources... which is the only item I am concerned with. Battles like this only hurt the consumer in the end and slow down the progress of technology.

What about CD's? Why didnt they fail.
But the 400,000 people know they have a blue ray player and when they see the blue ray logo in the store they're gonna buy the blue ray version instead of dvd. HDTV hooked up right or wrong or not at all. if they are that dumb than they are dumb enough to buy hd dvd and watch it non hd. So thats 400,000 people that would now most likely buy BD over HD-DVD... that was my point.

I have read about the tripple layer high density dvd's and its interesting. And like gaming or not. but this thread is gameing centered.

In the XBOX360 to PS3 battle ps3 is better. BlueRay is better than regular dvd's and u cant argue that. For gameing, the 360 will doubtfully ever have HD-DVD Games because of the thousands of dvd powered 360's out there.

As far as this argument. Im done with it. We could beat it to death and we still wont chang eachothers minds. I think they are both great and the average gamer would prob like the 360 more because of the easy to learn point & shoot em up games like halo gears of war etc.

Im going to get food and piece my apartment back together....

[quads14589]

well i bought a xbox 360 premium

i got a super mintendo and ill play mario all day long before ill get some PS3 garbage :D

to me video games r just about having fun...i dont think halo 2 is that fun, unless your with a TON of people and everyone gets into it...other then that, id rather play mario or sonic anyday!

[MOFO]

Originally posted by Ralph


As far as this argument. Im done with it. We could beat it to death and we still wont chang eachothers minds. I think they are both great and the average gamer would prob like the 360 more because of the easy to learn point & shoot em up games like halo gears of war etc.

Im going to get food and piece my apartment back together....

LOL, I think you and I are the only ones that actually know's the systems. I think we disagree because I see the PS3 as a replacement of the current day HTPC and your more on the gaming side. Oh well, one of these days a system will come along and meet all of our criteria. I do have to admit, the PS3 is very close as it currently sits... :)

...this may surprise a few, but I'm a huge PS3 fan from a gaming point of view. There is NO way you can compare 360 games with current PS3 games and determine which unit has the best hardware. Wait a few months... when the developers finally take full advantage of the PS3 hardware... it will be in a league of its own.

[Ralph]

Originally posted by MOFO
LOL, I think you and I are the only ones that actually know's the systems. I think we disagree because I see the PS3 as a replacement of the current day HTPC and your more on the gaming side. Oh well, one of these days a system will come along and meet all of our criteria. I do have to admit, the PS3 is very close as it currently sits... :)

...this may surprise a few, but I'm a huge PS3 fan from a gaming point of view. There is NO way you can compare 360 games with current PS3 games and determine which unit has the best hardware. Wait a few months... when the developers finally take full advantage of the PS3 hardware... it will be in a league of its own.

Metal Gear Solid:eek2: just for starters. They have always been amazing games and i dont expect any less this time around.

Well im bout to go take a bus and fail my calc final. Wish me luck

[JForestZ34]

Originally posted by NacsRacer027
...That alos means its true capabilities only go up to 720p and 1080i...with 720p being the better of the 2, and 1080p being the best...


I hate to tell you but 1080i is better than 720p. But your right 1080p is the best, but that format hasn't come out yet. If someone is looking at 2 TV's one with an HDMI cable and another with High-Def component wires you won't notice a difference in picture quality. All the HDMI does is give you audio and video in one cable. As for the the $150 they want for the cable the High-Def wires do the same thing for cheaper money.


James

[MOFO]

Originally posted by JForestZ34
I hate to tell you but 1080i is better than 720p. But your right 1080p is the best, but that format hasn't come out yet.

James


1080P is out for HD/DVD and Blueray and the new TV's today finally support it. For awhile you could buy a 1080P TV but it would not accept a true 1080P input. All they would do is upscale the signal coming in to the display. Just recently they started selling TV's that take a true 1080P input (via HDMI in most, if not all cases).

1080i is better than 720P? That is debatable. With a progressive image each line is updated at the same time. With the interlaced image, its updated every other cycle. For images or video with fast motion (ie sports), 720p is better IMO - your going to see a much smoother video. As for resolution, I highly doubt you would see the difference. The bigger difference will be noticed viewing a progressive signal vs an interlaced signal. Why type of display are you using to make this statement? (DLP, LCD, Plasma, CRT, CRT Projection..etc)

It seems that so many people are focused on resolutions and what the panel can display. The part that just about everyone over looks is the quality of the input signal. If you were to see a 720P TV showing an upcompressed video signal vs a 1080P TV showing our current broadcasted compressed video, the 720P will look 10x better. The focus needs to be put on our video delivery sources (cable, satellite, OTA...etc).

I could go on and on, but I'm already off topic... :D

[JForestZ34]

Originally posted by MOFO
1080P is out for HD/DVD and Blueray and the new TV's today finally support it. For awhile you could buy a 1080P TV but it would not accept a true 1080P input. All they would do is upscale the signal coming in to the display. Just recently they started selling TV's that take a true 1080P input (via HDMI in most, if not all cases).

1080i is better than 720P? That is debatable. With a progressive image each line is updated at the same time. With the interlaced image, its updated every other cycle. For images or video with fast motion (ie sports), 720p is better IMO - your going to see a much smoother video. As for resolution, I highly doubt you would see the difference. The bigger difference will be noticed viewing a progressive signal vs an interlaced signal. Why type of display are you using to make this statement? (DLP, LCD, Plasma, CRT, CRT Projection..etc)

It seems that so many people are focused on resolutions and what the panel can display. The part that just about everyone over looks is the quality of the input signal. If you were to see a 720P TV showing an upcompressed video signal vs a 1080P TV showing our current broadcasted compressed video, the 720P will look 10x better. The focus needs to be put on our video delivery sources (cable, satellite, OTA...etc).

I could go on and on, but I'm already off topic... :D



I 100% agree with you. We are running 10to1 compression on our system, in Central Jersey. I we were to knock it down to 5to1 the quality would be alot better.


James

[bwamos]

Originally posted by Ralph
So thats 400,000 people that would now most likely buy BD over HD-DVD... that was my point.

To hijack this onto anlther though process..

In reality what's 400,000 units in this market??? Seriously.

Last year 37,000,000 DVD players were sold in the US alone. That's 37million units sold to an already saturated market. Who didn't already own a DVD player in 2005?

It's like saying.. but Kawasaki put 5 units of this model on the ATV floor before Honda & Yamaha shipped their 10,000 units.

IMHO Sony's Blueray will fail for 1 reason. The same reason the PC overran the Macintosh.

Sony will keep a chokehold on the proprietary license to the Blueray technology. HD-DvD will be cheaper to produce, manufacture, and in turn cheaper sales on titles and equipment 1 year down the road.

It would be like having the YZF450 retailing for $6000, and the TRX450R w/ a set of holeshots retailing for $10,000 and no aftermarket will be allowed to be produced without paying heavy royalties to Honda.

Oh, and I like the Nintendo Wii. ;)

[Ralph]

Originally posted by JForestZ34
I hate to tell you but 1080i is better than 720p. But your right 1080p is the best, but that format hasn't come out yet. If someone is looking at 2 TV's one with an HDMI cable and another with High-Def component wires you won't notice a difference in picture quality. All the HDMI does is give you audio and video in one cable. As for the the $150 they want for the cable the High-Def wires do the same thing for cheaper money.


James

Also, with the digital cables. IMO Majority of people who even considers buying $150 cables besides having the name on the cable is a joke.

Just about ANY 15 dollar HDMI or DVI cable will do you up solid. This one right here will serve up majority of ps3 gamers because alot that have hd capable tv's use DVI. http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10231&cs_id=1023104&p_id=2661&seq=1&format=2

[Ralph]

Originally posted by bwamos
To hijack this onto anlther though process..

In reality what's 400,000 units in this market??? Seriously.

Last year 37,000,000 DVD players sales were sold in the US alone. That's 37million units sold to an already saturated market. Who didn't already own a DVD player in 2005?

It's like saying.. but Kawasaki put 5 units of this model on the ATV floor before Honda & Yamaha shipped their 10,000 units.

IMHO Sony's Blueray will fail for 1 reason. The same reason the PC overran the Macintosh.

Sony will keep a chokehold on the proprietary license to the Blueray technology. HD-DvD will be cheaper to produce, manufacture, and in turn cheaper sales on titles and equipment 1 year down the road.

It would be like having the YZF450 retailing for $6000, and the TRX450R w/ a set of holeshots retailing for $10,000 and no aftermarket will be allowed to be produced without paying heavy royalties to Honda.

Oh, and I like the Nintendo Wii. ;)

Its not really a fair call to compare sales of the dvd player and the HD-DVD and BD Players. In the first 6 out of 7 Months Xbox360 was released PS2 outsold the 360. [Source (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060611-7030.html) ]Are you telling me PS2 is better than 360? New technology takes time to settle in.

The amount of BD units they have in homes right now is a pretty good head start and they will continue to sell them as fast as they can make them for another month of two.

The microsoft HD-DVD player add on is not bad but if people complain about PS3's price then they prob wouldnt consider dishing out another $200. For a Chunky/ 2 Piece HD-DVD Player.

Im gonna go ahead and flood this thread with some more information.



In terms of audio/video compression, Blu-ray Disc and HD DVD are similar on the surface: both support MPEG-2, VC-1, and H.264 for video compression, and Dolby Digital (AC-3), PCM, and DTS for audio compression. The first generation of Blu-ray Disc movies released used MPEG-2 (the standard currently used in DVDs, although encoded at a much higher video resolution and a much higher bit rate than those used on conventional DVDs), while initial HD DVDs releases used the VC-1 codec. Due to greater total disc capacity, the Blu-ray Disc may choose in the future to utilize a higher maximum video bit rate, as well as potentially higher average bit rates . In terms of audio, there are some differences. Blu-ray Disc allows conventional AC-3 audiotracks at 640 kbit/s, which is higher than DVD/HD DVD's maximum, 448 kbit/s. Nevertheless, Dolby Digital Plus support is mandatory for standalone HD DVD players at a maximum of 3 Mbit/s, while optional for BD players and support up to a higher bitrate of 4.736 Mbit/s.[44]

Both HD DVD and Blu-ray Disc support the 24p (traditional movie) frame rate, but technical implementations of this mode are different among the two formats. Blu-ray Disc supports 24p with its native timing, while HD DVD uses 30p timing for 24p (replacing missing frames with "repeat field flags"). Decoders can ignore the “flags” to output 24p.[45] There is no impact on picture resolution as a result of this, although repeated frames have been known to introduce subtle motion artifacts, especially in moving camera shots.[citation needed]
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc#Blu-ray_Disc_.E2.80.93_HD_DVD_comparison

[Ralph]

Also, I cant wait to go back to cartiges in my Video Games:p

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_Versatile_Card

Sorry to take this thread kinda off topic. Ive always been interested in this and altough there is some arguing im still learning more.

In Reality. Lets face it. In 2 years you will have a BD/HD-DVD player in your home that does both and who else knows what. Science is amazing and BD/HD-DVD isnt even new technology. Think of it more like smaller handwritting.

At the rate we are discovering things in a couple years your gonna laugh at 60gigs of storage.

And soon after that your gonna be puzzled by the youth and whatever else they will have by then that we wont beable to understand like our parents.

My Parents used to crowd around the radio to catch their favorite show. :)

QUESTION for MOFO:
What are the movie theaters doing? Ive heard talk about them switching to hdd's in the future instead of the goofy old reels. What are they brewing up?