Re: Blu-Ray v. HD-DVD
- From: <normanstrong@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 09:09:55 -0700
"Tarkus" <karnevil9@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:fawq7d316ya7.dlg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> On 7/14/2005 8:30:45 AM, normanstrong@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
>> It isn't really a question of which one is cheaper to manufacture. Both
>> formats will be cheap enough. The real question is, what will be the
>> impact
>> on the factory cost of new DVD players--players that have to handle DVD's
>> as
>> well as Blue-Ray. Consider the range of formats facing the consumer
>> today--without Blu-Ray:
>>
>> DVD
>> DVD-R
>> DVD-RW
>> DVD+R
>> DVD+RW
>> DVD-RAM
>> CD
>> CD-R
>> CD-RW
>>
>> And all these formats filled with mp3, wma, or other audio protocols.
>> And
>> let's not forget JPEG, Kodak Picture CD, mpeg4. Have I forgotten any?
>
> DivX.
Of course! Strangely enough, I just bought a Lite-On recorder that will do
all the above except DVD-RAM. It also plays VCD and SVCD and has a big hard
drive. I was skeptical about the recordable DVDs with audio files, so I
made a DVD+RW disc with WMA VBR files at the highest compression rate
offered by dbpoweramp. Not only did the Lite-On play them, but they didn't
sound too bad. A rough calculation showed that I could put 260 hours of
music on one disc using this type of compression!
Norm Strong
.
- References:
- Blu-Ray v. HD-DVD
- From: normanstrong
- Re: Blu-Ray v. HD-DVD
- From: Tarkus
- Blu-Ray v. HD-DVD
- Prev by Date: Re: Blu-Ray v. HD-DVD
- Next by Date: Re: How long does copy take you?
- Previous by thread: Re: Blu-Ray v. HD-DVD
- Next by thread: Re: Blu-Ray v. HD-DVD
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
