"Therefore, according to these rumors, those discs are very inefficient end thus expensive to produce." I should think that reporting rumor as fact would go against most journalistic instincts. Would it be so hard to actually check out these "rumors" before reporting on them? Also, regarding the Paramount deal, it's a known fact that they accepted $150 million to go HD-DVD exclusive - for a period of 18 months. Why is there no mention of that in your article?

One term.... F.U.D Spreading fear with unsupported speculation. Funny how it always has to be doubts about disc replication to try and belittle the success Blu Ray has been enjoying. Your article is approriately titled. Spin indeed.

David Vaughn is a damned liar. Your mag would do best to get rid of him.

Lets look at the "facts". The article that Shane referenced above is with an excutive from Sony DADC and they yield numbers he quoted were his, not mine. Second, there was a press release from October 2006, that state even different yield numbers from Sony DADC. Now we have the most current press release that says they have "improved" yields to a lower number than they reported on two separate occasions in 2006! Which numbers are we to believe? The ones from 2006 which were both from Sony DADC that didn't match up or the press release from this year that don't match last years yield numbers? So Rob Z, who is lying?

Mr. Vaughn, please remove your cranium from your rectum. Does anyone, other than those trying to find the smallest detail to derail blu-ray even care about yield rates? The FACT that blu-ray is outselling HD-DVD but a margin of at LEAST 2 to 1 (at least here in the US) should be enough to quell any argument regarding yield rates. Let's find something else to pick on, shall we?

Ray, yield rates will become more and more important as time goes on. Right now though, there isn't enough discs being sold on either format to really matter. Only 3.5 million discs have been sold COMBINED between the two, so a 3:2 advantage (60-40) advantage is only 700,000 discs. Contrast that with DVD, which sells hundreds of millions of discs per year! That is where yield rates matter. If either one of these formats are going to challenge DVD, then profitability will be a factor at some point. I also find it quite amusing that people on both sides of this "war" resort to name calling when something negative about "their" format is published. Neither format is without its issues at this point in the game.

By Ray -- Please refute what Mr. Vaughn has said regarding Sony's inconsistencies on yields rather than taking cheap shots. Ok? Also, The days of BD outselling HD-DVD 2 to 1 appear to be coming to a close. Have you taken a look at the Nielsen data the past four or five weeks? Also, It is NOT a KNOWN FACT that Paramount accepted $150 million to go HD-DVD exclusive. While I agree that incentives were given by Toshiba to Paramount in SOME FORM, this is certainly not something that the BDA is exactly innocent of. Do you think Target (no HD-DVD stand-alone players in store DESPITE being hundreds less than BD players) and Blockbuster (save for online rentals) weren't offered nice incentives to shun HD-DVD? I believe Shane and Dave are right to call BS when they see it on both sides in this war.

Mr. Vaughn, I couldn't agree with you more. The number of discs sold at this point (on either side) are just not enough to really matter. That's why I believe that at this point in time, yield rates are really a non-issue. With that being said, I still stand behind my earlier comments regarding the reporting of rumor as fact with respect to Shane's original post. He also neglected to mention the $150 million Paramount pay-off, which will mis-lead readers to believe that Paramount's switch was based on "replication" rates, versus interest rates. I'd just like to see some real honesty on both sides of the Hi-Def format issue. Now that would be a breath of fresh air.

re: "So Rob Z, who is lying?" What kind of publication is this where staff accuse a major CE vendor of lying? Ask Sony about the descrepancy if you feel there is one, but to publicly accuse them of lying is uncalled for. Mr Buettner - I believe you need to work with your staff on professionalism.

RCW ... In all honesty, I can't refute Mr. Vaughn's yield statistics. My point is, citing yield rates (again and again) as the sole nail in blu-ray's coffin is just getting a bit stale. Can we at least agree to move on to something else? With respect to the $150 million pay-off ... sorry, but that is a fact. Now, having said that ... it's also a fact that the BDA did pay Target some money for that deal as well. I can't say that about Blockbuster. Their CLAIM is that in test markets, blu-ray out performed hd-dvd. Is there any evidence to suggest something else? I agree with you that both Shane and Dave have a right to call BS ... but, let's not call BS on just rumor and innuendo ... let's do it on facts alone. Please. Thanks.

Ray- Instead of instructing our writers to pull their heads out, do me a favor. Reveal one single instance in which I report a rumor as a fact. Everything that is unsubstantiated is directly attributed as such.

I agree on yields being rather uninteresting, and a bizarre topic of conversation, which I noted.

But if yields aren't a big deal, why is Sony making a point of talking to the press on such esoteric matters?

And Ray, if you really want to see some honesty on both sides of the war, as you claim, aren't you a little curious as to why Sony's own numbers on something so unimportant from this year and last don't match up?

And on the subject of Paramount and payola, Ray, can you tell our audience what incentives brought Paramount from being an HD DVD exclusive studio, which they originally were, to supporting Blu-ray for a year? Just curious.

D Williams- Throwing FUD? Like the liar, liar pants on fire you dropped on Dave? Nice work. And mature.

Zen, my point to Rob was that I have documentation that shows inconsistency with public statements made by Sony DADC, which is why Shane has labeled his blog as "Spin", which is what Sony DADC is doing right now. I wasn't saying Sony DADC was lying, I was saying that Rob was because he hasn't taken the time to do any research on the very public statements that Sony DADC has made in the past. Ray, it is not a FACT that $150 million dollars changed hands. This is a RUMOR at this point, but if you say something enough, some people may be willing to believe it. How much do you think the BDA gave in incentives to Warner and Paramount to be dual format supporters when both were initially HD DVD supporters? Anyone who thinks that "incentives" aren't being used on both sides is naive.

Shane, what I'd like to see is, as I said before, honesty on both side of the aisle. I'd also like to see fair and honest reporting on the issue ... not the Fox Network type of "fair and balanced" BS ... but true fair and honest reporting. Thanks. And truly, I hold nothing against either you or Mr. Vaughn. I refuse to believe that people can rise to the positions you hold without having integrity.

Ray, thanks for the compliment. I personally own both formats with players that I have bought at retail to not give the perception that I am favoring one format over the other. I enjoy both formats and would be happy if either one of them won. But at this point in time, to enjoy all of the HD releases, you have to own two players, plain and simple. As an early adopter and fan of HD media, I am willing to "pay to play"!

Ray- Sony made news this week in bringing up yield rates as part of a PR campaign on behalf of Blu-ray. And the numbers they provided didn't jibe with what was told to the press last year. If Sony puts this info in the press, it's news.

So, Ray if you want the yield story to go away, contact Sony and tell them to stop bringing it up.

Zen- Dave did not call anyone at Sony liars. Ray and Rob Z and brought the level of discourse here to a new low. Rob Z went so far as to call Dave "a damned liar," and Dave responded appropriately by reiterating that we were not the ones who provided contradictory information.

If you read Dave' posts here there is nothing Dave should be censured over. In fact, if I could remember how to get into the right part of our system Rob Z's comment would excised, as it is nothing more than name calling. And Ray, in spite of some his other reasonable comments did us no favors with the recto-cranial blast.

Fellas, disagree with us and say w

Ray- I appreciate your points. I think on the whole, we do fair and honest reporting on the format war. It's no end of amusement to me that whenever I report anything on one side supporters of the other scream bias.

And Ray, please do consider that both Dave and i speak to lots of people behind the scenes who give us information under anonymity as attributing these sources would affect the livelihood of these people.

Two more things: regular readers here know that we reported on the $150 million dollar pay off the day the news of Paramounts' defection broke. And we have referenced it often since. old news.

Be assured of this: "behind the scenes," there has been a lot of grumbling that the Blu-ray side would like very much to keep talk of Paramount's defection focused on that $150 million pay off and ignore some of the issues discussed in my post.

And I would reiterate that Sony's choice to make this a point of discussion in the last week could mean there is s

Shane and Mr. Vaughn, I admit my "cranium/rectum" comment was way out of line, and for that, I apologize. I'm not an "insider" and can't nor won't claim to have information that supports or detracts from either format. I too have both formats. I also prefer blu-ray over the HD-DVD format. In my opinion, the blu-ray picture is sharper, has more color vibrancy and overall better sound than HD-DVD. What HD-DVD has over blu-ray is some films that won't appear on blu-ray for some time, if ever. Hence, owning both formats. I'm sure that "behind the scenes," there are a lot of things going on that the average person (me included) don't know about. That's why we rely on you, the media, to provide us with information ... but information that's accurate ... honest ... and unbiased.

Ray

I agree that some of the PCM mixes that I have heard on Blu-ray have been outstanding, but that's not to say that using the same elements and utilizing a TrueHD or DD+ (1.5 Mbps) mix with the same elements wouldn't produce the same great sound utilizing HD DVD. Double blind tests using the same audio elements would be required to see PCM sounds better than TrueHD or DD+. It is the same with the video...both are 1080p, although Blu-ray has additional bandwidth that they can use in the encoding process which makes encoding difficult scenes easier to do. But given the same film utilizing maximum bitrates on both formats, I doubt in a blind test that people would be able to see a difference. In fact, one studio did such a test and their findings were that both looked equally good.

I feel quite safe in letting our readers read any of the material on this site, including and of my Blog entries and the responses to them and decide who is accurate, honest, and unbiased and who isn't.

As a movie fanatic I would like to say that, in my opinion, I think that the first element that will decide this so called format war is going to be price of dedicated players. I think that up to today, Blue Ray advantage has been mostly in part due to many kids and as well as some adults buying the Playstation gaming stations with Blue Ray players. The surge of Blue Ray disks sales after the Playstations release gives hints to that effect, a surge that overcame the initial lead by HD DVD due to been the first out of the gate sort of speak. But as more and more general shoppers who tend to be the ones buying the dedicated players jump to the next generation of high definition video price will be the deciding factor, and I agree with the ones specifically saying that the magic number of dedicated HD players selling for less that $200 is going to be the tide breaker in this war. At this moment in time HD DVD seems to be closer to making that a reality, while Blue Ray looks to be far behind in that respect.

Shame this site is now touting David Vaughan as some sort of HD DVD messiah keeping Blu-ray on its toes when he has not been able to prove a single thing he has stated on disc replication, only that he "hopes someday he'll be able to reveal his sources" Yes, well I think I'll take solace in the fact that over 610,000 copies of Casino Royale are in people's homes across this planet and over 220,000 copies of "300" are in people's houses all on BD50 discs. I'll also take solace in the fact that Blu-ray has beated DVD to the 100,000 copies sold title mark in time taken, the 200,000 copies mark and will no doubt beat DVD to the 1,000,000 copies sold mark, which for those unaware was two and a half years. DVD launched in March 1997 and the first title to hit the million mark was "The Matrix" released on September 21st, 1999. Oh sweet facts, how great thou art.

Anti-Vaughn-

Dave Vaughn's title here is "Contributing Writer." We don't actually have an "HD DVD Messiah" on staff currently but if you want to send in your resume feel free.

As a sneak peek, my next Blog is going to be about the outlandish behavior of format fanboys who act as though they have a vested financial interest in one of these formats or the other (which for the record, I do not!).

I mean, seriously Anti-Vaughn, you really find some sort of emotional satisfaction in how many BD50's are in people's homes?

Dude, that's just weird!

Mr. Vaughn is a movie reviewer, journalist, and self-proclaimed insider (from Vacaville ;) ) who *covers* Universal, Warner Bros., and Paramount studios. His knowledge about the intricacies of BD50 replication and future *problems* is about as intuitive as his statements regarding Cinram that he made to me on the old Insider’s companion thread that we used to have. Some mods here may be able to resurrect some of his naïve posts in that regard. His communications with anyone at perhaps Technicolor or Panasonic are at a low level of management. I think it [B]no coincidence [/B]that Mr. Vaughn surfaced as a self-proclaimed “reluctant” insider on another forum right around the time (or immediately after ?) the Paramount *decision* was announced, which admittedly I think was the only blow to Blu-ray this year…….and in the long run, I believe that it will turn out to be more psychological than physical damage.

I do not for one moment believe that he is an unbiased or “neutral” investigative reporter based upon: 1. Scrutiny of his past postings on AVM$ or this forum, until he was no longer welcomed here after he repeatedly broke the roles by disrespecting both paidgeek and myself. Hell, he pushed the Blu-ray replication doomsday scenario both on this forum and AVM$ with as much or more vigor as the recent *doomsday transfer theory* of Bram Stoker’s Dracula was pushed by another individual. That aint reporting. That’s an agenda.;) 2. His studio *sources* are either from HD DVD exclusive studios or one equal opportunity provider (WB). And in regards to Alan Bell, I think that the best thing from the Blu-ray perspective was his leaving WB and going to Paramount but, nobody ever mentioned it much on the forums (if at all?) at the time, because few had even heard of Alan Bell back then.

In fact, if I read what David Vaughn says anywhere and close my eyes, I would swear that Dr. Bell or his assistant was speaking to me rather than David Vaughn. It should be interesting to see what type of reporting and what theories will be floated after 18 months or so.

Shane - you talk about your next article being about fanboys, yet your article and particularly your title reeks of it. "Vaughn is kind of the new guy around here, and he's just immersed in all things format war. Dude has his ear to the ground on this stuff." Well, dude, you certainly don't have your ear to the ground and you obviously accept everything at face value. Hey, I've got a planet to sell, only $20k and it's yours. Interested?

Which of these quotes is correct?

Exec. Vp & Gen. Mgr. Mike Mitchell said-"Yields are averaging 80% on single-layer 25-GB media -- about the same rates quoted on our May plant tour. Yields are “ever so slightly less" on dual-layer." (Consumer Electronics Daily Oct. 25, 2006)

Ed Gehrich, director of engineering at Sony DADC “We have some machines running into the 90s, but I’ve tried to show a realistic average yield" (www.oto-online.com Also October 2006)

The huge increase in Blu-ray production can be attributed to gains in production yields. The BD-25 now has a consistent yield rate of around 85%, while the more difficult to produce BD-50 are consistently between 75% and 79%. (October 2007 Press Release from Sony DADC).

All are from Sony DADC, but I am wondering which ones to believe?

Insider- You refer to David Vaughn as being biased and not being neutral, and of "disprespecting" yourself and Paidgeek, who is a well known employee of Sony Pictures (and a heckuva nice guy, and one of the most knowledgeable people in the industry if reports of his true identity I've received are accurate).

Anyway, since bias is an accusation that keeps coming up here, do you care to reveal exactly who you work for and what affiliations you and your employer have in the format war?

If I were alive today I'd be 67 and I'd be releasing all my previous albums remastered into 24/96 5.1 PCM on Blu-ray Disc. Give Blu a chance - it's the better format and does NOT have production issues.

John- I'm sure you mean to say you would be supporting Blu-ray, as long as Yoko says it's OK?

You guys are good to leave this stuff posted. Some people apparently feel the same way sitting behind a keyboard as they do behind a steering wheel: common courtesy be damned, anything goes. Yet no one has refuted David Vaughn's observation of the puzzling pattern of Sony's statements. Has the format war--which most people on the planet haven't even heard of--really reduced people to this?

Compson,

While I don't prefer to receive personal attacks, I think leaving them here makes a very good point to show the immature and somewhat pathetic behavior that some show in this "war" that I agree, 99.9% of the public could give a damn about. As you have noted, not one person has given a plausable explanation as to the actual topic of discussion in Shanes Blog, namely, why did Sony bring this up in October of 2007? Why have their yields improved from "in the 90's" in 2006 to 85% in 2007? These aren't rumor's as some fanboys would call them, they are statements from Sony DADC directly!

I find the above fixation on what Sony DADC proclaimed in 2006 and 2007 as regards to yield rates somewhat strange. It's quite possible that the "in the 90's" comment may very well have been off the cuff as opposed to a more accurate "85%" figure coming out in 2007. I won't denigrate Mr. Vaughn on his observation, but unless these figures are official and signed off on by Sony, they are just quotes and ballpark figures thrown out by execs without backup.

Claude,

These were not "off the cuff" remarks. One was from a specific interview about production of BD and HD DVD discs. If the numbers he said are incorrect, then he either wasn't prepared and made up the number (which proves Shane's point), intentionally misled the panel, or was accurate.

The second quote from October of 2006 as well was with another Sony DADC executive specifically dealing with replication. Again, he knew what the subject was going to be about and the same scenerio applies above...made up, misled the reporter or was accurate.

You can try and spin this any way you like, but the fact is that Sony DADC has been very inconsistent in their public statements in regard to yields on BD discs. So the question remains...Which numbers are correct? 2006 or 2007?

At the risk of continuing a debate not worth continuing, Claude, are you kidding?

Just quotes? This is information disseminated directly to the press by Sony. How much more official does that need to be?

And if they are issuing statements to the press that are "off the cuff" the onus for the accuracy of those statements remains with Sony, not the press for reporting it.

Well, it certainly looks like the fan-boys have dropped in.... I am very glad that your publication has been very neutral on the "war". It's amazing how some people react when you point out the very real current flaws in the BD format. Before the formats were introduced, I was 100% for BD over HD. Since then, they have done pretty much everything possible to drive me away as a customer. It still does have the POTENTIAL to be the technical superior format, but they haven't got there yet. My solution to this dilemna will be purchasing the upcoming Samsung dual-format player that will meet 1.1 profile.

Shane & David - I'm not trying to defend the Sony execs who were interviewed and the difference in their quoted numbers, but having worked for large corporations my whole life, I see this all the time. Why doesn't one of you follow-up with Sony and see if you can get the real answer? On a sidenote, most of these threads that deal with Blu-Ray and HD-DVD here and on other Forums quickly degrade into name-calling, supporting one side or the other, or both (format neutral). It's very sad.

I've e-mailed Sony DADC asking about the press releases referenced above. If I get an answer I will post it here or send it to Shane and David. Since I'm just an audio/videophile they may not respond. We shall see.

One last thing. Tyler - Out of curiosity, what has the BD format done to drive you away as a customer? I'd really like to know.

Claude- I don't really care if Sony or Blu-ray's PR team has a reason that they offered contradictory information. At this point would a third set of numbers actually add any clarity to this?

To me it's far more interesting that Sony felt compelled to speak publicly about this at all, and when it did so it contradicted itself compared to last year.

My original Blog post, which we've gotten far away from, was actually intended to pose something of a tone of amusement that something so obscure is a regular topic of conversation online.

I know people in post production, and I know lots of people behind the scenes on both sides. And while I get lots of information from all of them, I don't consider myself an expert here.

But there are people who log on here who sure talk in certainties like they're experts.

And even funnier to me are the people who clearly favor one format over the other who charge us with bias, and even people who have professional vested i

Damn character counter failed me again! Said I had six left!

The last sentence was: there are people who have professional vested interests in one format or the other who charge others with being biased.

And there are obviously people who read one Blog post of mine outside of the context of the last two years of coverage I've provided on the format war and claim the same.

Shane - Actually, after all this, I'd really like to know what the real story is. So, even though you don't care, I'll let you know IF I ever hear anything. I love Ultimate AV and even more when it was a print magazine. Of all the publications out there the guys who write here and for Home Theater as well as Stereophile are professional and write excellent reviews. I've lived and breathed this stuff for over thirty years now and sometimes wonder if it's healthy or not. I don't always agree with what is written and conclusions drawn, but that's ok. We all have our own views. I'm hoping that this format war ends soon so that we can all get to discussing the equipment and software instead os each other!

Another point in my piece was this issue has become politicized, part of the PR spin that comes from both camps.

In this climate I don't know if any info I get from either camp is the "real story."

The only sense in which I care about the format war being over is if it becomes apparent to me that the pundits are right, and that neither format can be successful enough with the mainstream to survive with both formats competing.

I don't mind buying and owning two players, which is what I've done. My wife knows which player the discs from the red boxes go into, and which player the ones in the Blu boxes go into. That's good enough in my house.

And yeah, I sure own a lot of Blu-ray Discs for someone who's allegedly biased against the format. Puh-leeze (that wasn't aimed at you Claude, but at the people who have logged on here and read this one piece and now believe this to be an HD DVD fan site).

Claude, to answer your question: a) started off using BD-25, giving less performance than HD-DVD. Many movies still made on BD-25 today. b) started off with inferior transfers, it appears this has been fixed in general. c) utterly screwed things up by rushing to come to market only 3 months after HD-DVD. It is LUDICROUS that it is taking 1.5 years after launch to still only partially match HD-DVD on interactiviy. And unlike HD-DVD, the first THREE gens of players cannot be upgraded with firmware for this and are, IMO, partially obsoleted. It is likely that the first two 1.1 profile players will be dual-format players...how embarrasing for BD is that? d) Fox using DTS-MA, which no player can decode even in the 3rd gen players. In general, poor audio implementation compared to HD-DVD. e) bad BD-J implementation - POTC taking 1-2 minutes to load, silly. Who knows how many more future titles will do this? f) finally, the BD's pure BS and FUD campaign against HD-DVD. It has truly sickened me.

Like I said, I was 100% for BD before all this started. I saw the higher capacity, the higher bit-rate, identical interactivity, and possibly only a slightly higher cost. Since the launch, they have soured me for the reasons I posted above. The upcoming dual-format Samsung player looks like the first complete (or complete enough) player coming out and it also plays HD-DVD in full capacity. Perfect, I can enjoy all HDM without worying about "blue vs red".

Tyler - you da' man!

Tyler - You have some good points especially the rush to get a player out (Samsung) and the initial poor transfers. However, there is nothing wrong with BD-25 as long as it's a good transfer. Interactivity is subjective. I personally could care less. PQ and AQ is it for me. As to load times, my PS3 loads VERY quickly. No issues. It's also quite possible that DTS-MA could very well be in a future fimware update. There have been some bumps and bruises....same on the HD-DVD side, but it's not as bad as you make it out to be. I personally have no intention of buying an HD-DVD player because I don't want to explain it to the real boss...my wife! Of course I will if Blu-Ray somehow fails, but it doesn't look like that will happen.

Tyler,

The only thing I would disagree on is that the audio on BD is every bit as good as the audio on HD DVD and sometimes better. Uncompressed PCM is a space hog, but it does sound pretty damn good.

Claude- interactivity issues are not subjective in the sense that it's a pure and simple fact that Blu-ray is lagging far behind here.

All of the standalone players currently in release, even the third-gen players, are not only not compatible with upcoming interactivity, the entire playback experience of BD-J titles is saddled with horrendously slow load times, lock ups and in some cases new movies not even playing.

What's worse in my opinion, is that recent problems have apparently been caused by BD+, which is not an interactivity feature to my knowledge, but an additional layer of copy protection that doesn't benefit consumers at all.

Comparing HD DVD 's hiccups to what's happening with Blu-ray is not appropriate in this regard. Toshiba's first and second-gen players are all compatible with all of the new HD DVD features. HD DVD players are getting better and faster while interactivity is added. Blu-ray playback is currently getting worse for all players but the

Shane- I have not had any problems playing any discs with my PS3 including the FF2 which I just purchased last week. I haven't timed the load time, but it is VERY fast. No problems with lockups. I feel for the folks who have these problems. I'm just happy I bought a PS3. Having said that, I will most likely buy a standalone BD player in the future and of course I'm hoping all this is figured out so I am not crying. I still don't care about extras or interactivity. I loved Superbit DVD's. If a standalone player can be updated by firmware download, then baring any hardware prevention issues, hopefully these problems can be worked out for those people out there. The growing pains of early adoption. Heck, my Sony KV-34XBR800 TV is incompatible via HDMI(PS3) to DVI even though the set is HDCP compliant! Works fine with my Directv HR20. I'm using Component because of this.

Claude: Whether or not YOU care for the interactivity features, the fact is that BD has completely blown it on this. Some studio have held up releases because of this. Your lack of concerns about playback issues are mostly due to your use of the PS3 instead of a "proper player". There is NO way that I'm going to put a game machine in my equipment rack to play movies...especially with Sony's dumb decision to give it a bluetooth remote. I do find your BD-25 comment pretty amusing, given that one of the constant BD marketing pitches is greater capacity than HD-DVD. :)

David: Well, I would certainly agree that lossless PCM is awesome, however, it doesn't sound any better than TrueHD or DTS-MA which is much more efficient. The problem is that with Fox, the ONLY lossless option is DTS-MA, which no player can decode (at least the new BD-P1400 can send it over bitstream). BD is better than HD-DVD in having more lossless audio releases I believe. That is a nice plus in their column. Shane: Yes, the increased DRM and region coding of BD, yet another negative. If BDs were primarily played back on computers, I'm sure we'd discover another "rootkit" disaster from Sony....

Tyler - What does that comment mean? It doesn't even make sense. The PS3 IS a "proper player". We all have our own needs and desires and I really thought long and hard about putting the PS3 in my rack, but I have not regretted it. It's been great. It's a superior product. As to Bluetooth...it makes no difference to me because I've found that my family doesn't use the universal remote I bought and would rather use the remote(s) that came with the equipment. It may not suit YOUR needs, but it works for us. As to BD-25, we are talking about good PQ which CAN be had on a BD-25 not greater capacity. Shane - This thread has gone way off topic. On a side-note, I did receive an atomatic e-mail reply from Sony DADC and the Press person is out of the office to return in a couple days. I did forward my inquiry to her stand-in.

Guys- I'm about to run out the door but wanted to respond to some of this.

The PS3 is unequivocally a proper player. However, using it isn't exactly the same as a standalone player, which a lot of enthusiasts will prefer. The remote is a little different, etc., and some of the menu choices are a bit different too.

But the PS3 is by far the fastest, most reliable BD player out there, and it appears to have all the hardware necessary to be compatible with even Profile 2 requirements.

It is currently the only BD player I recommend spending money on without qualification. Especially the $399 model.

And it's a bitchin' looking piece of kit that I actually like showing off in my rack- I have it standing vertically and it draws a lot of oohs and ahhs!

Claude is on the money that BD-25 is capable of excellent picture quality, but let's face it, "we have 50GB and they don't" is Blu-ray's story.

Claude- Just curious. Sony has already offered contradictory information. Why is a new response going to be regarded by you as having value? To me it would become a question of deciding which of three numbers I should regard as valid instead of only two.

Shane - It is bitchin isn't it! I would like Sony to tell me what the "valid" numbers are out of curiosity more than anything. It may not be of value, but I'd like to see it.

Sorry, it's just a matter of taste to me. I'm not using a game machine in my home theater..and I do have a universal remote. :) When I said "proper player", it was a matter of form factor and usability than denigrating the superior performance of the PS3. Why is it that the PS3 can do MUCH more than BD standalones that cost $1000? I thought the research showed that PS3 cost Sony $7-800 to build? Regarding the BD-25, as Shane said, the BD group has CONSTANTLY used greater capacity as one of its major advantages...anyway it's nice having a civil debate on this subject unlike at avsforum..

Tyler - I had the same taste as you and really sweated over my choice as I'm not much of a Gamer, but I don't regret it. To answer your question, the PS3 is essentially a computer. It's a VERY powerful computer with a Cell processor. This capability is not available in the standalones. This really gives it a leg up especially in this day and age of constant change and firmware updating. My neighbor works in the software end of the computer industry and his company bought the PS3 for him to use at home for computer modeling purposes! Believe it or not that's all he has used it for and says it's the most powerful machine he has ever used at home. He has Linux loaded on it.

Claude- I would be very surprised if the real numbers weren't what was recently quoted. to me the story was interesting in that the same numbers were given before, but also that production has ostensibly ramped up a lot since last year, but yields apparently aren't.

And Claude is 100% correct- it's all the Cell. And the Cell isn't even available for Sony standalones.

Sony sold over 100 million PS2s. They are anticipating the same kind of success over the long term with the PS3. All their resources and money is there.

Think about what kind of processing power you need to do all of the things required for real-time gaming at 1080p resolution! And the Cell took years to develop- there apparently isn't anything else like it. And get this- guess who was one of the co-developers, along with IBM? Toshiba! Does that tell you how long ago development on that started?

On FF4, I'm getting 35-40 seconds on the PS3 to the first Fox logo/menu. Not great, as long as it doesn&

As long as it doesn't get worse. I'm actually surprised how long some of these BD-J discs take to load even in the PS3 given that it can load a non BD-J disc in less than 10 seconds.

And I think that bodes poorly for standalone players- if the PS3, with all of its processing power takes that long to load these discs, I fear for what will happen when more interactivity starts to appear on Blu-ray.

I think that these two to three minute load times are unacceptable for second and third-gen standalone players.

This is significant for two reasons. One, Tyler isn't alone in not wanting a game console. Two, I think there's some truth to Blu-ray Disc sell through not being 1:1 with PS3 penetration. If it were, Blu-ray would be outselling HD DVD by a lot more than 2:1.

In comparison, BTW, with the second and third-gen Toshiba players the most recent web-enabled titles load in 25-30 seconds. Not perfect, but again, anything in the 30-40 second range works for me.

Reps from Warner have stated that they did not expect the PS3 or any other gaming device to be the saving grace for Blu-Ray or HD movies in general at a conference a few days ago. I agree Shane, that I am also puzzled by some of the things people are pre-occupied with in this "war." For example, my mother went to Amzon.com to pre-order Star Trek TOS: S1 on HD-DVD for me as a Holiday Gift. Out of interest, she read some of the reviews and could not believe why..... 1) People have formed an opinion when they haven't seen it, and the product won't street until 11/20/07 2) People are writing in reviews not to buy it because Trek TOS "shouldn't be in HD" and that Paramount was paid 150 mil to drop BD. She asked me why would anyone looking to purchase this set in HD care about any of this stuff. My mother is not familiar with either HD-DVD or Blu-ray, but even she noticed the ranting/nonsense in the "reviews." I smiled and told her that she MUST drop by AVS s

Neutral insiders have recently reported from multiple sources that yields are as low as 40-50% currently. Where this matters is Blu-ray currently has 300 titles released and available for purchase, 70% of all these are actually on 25g discs not the 50g promoted by Blu-ray as there standard.

Where's my popcorn! When does one actually have the chance to watch the fall of civilization as demonstrated in this thread. Ahh, the internet. Spreading rudeness, porn, and fat kids around the globe. I see threads like this EVERYWHERE. No matter the discussion. From fan club boards to car enthusiast board. It's so much easier to an a$$ when you're simply a digital persona. Online we become our true selves...cavemen. Carry on.

Well, no comment back from either person at the Sony BDA. Oh well. Shane - I agree on what you say concerning load times and certain people not wanting a "game system" even though the PS3 is much more than that. Fortunately even the 30-40 sec load times don't bother me because my family is usually running around getting drinks, popcorn, ect. In fact, most of the time they ask me to pause after it's started because they are not ready! Blu-Ray player manufacturers are going to have to address load-time issues especially as the general public begins buying players. No question about that.

Claude- I totally agree- I don't know if you saw my other post, but 30-40 second loads are acceptable, but 2-3 minutes with the standalones is not.

Richard- I agree- I hate the Internet.

age of conan gold aoc gold AGE OF CONAN gold aoc gold wow gold world of warcraft powerleveling wow power leveling world of warcraft power leveling cheap wow gold cheap aoc gold world of warcraft gold wow power leveling