HD DVD vs Blu-ray Direct Comparisons 423
An anonymous reader writes "With today's release of three movies on Blu-ray, Warner Home Video has become the first studio to release movie titles on both high-def formats, making it finally possible to do an apples-to-apples comparison of the same titles on both formats . High-Def Digest has just posted reviews of all three titles — 'Training Day,' 'Kiss Kiss Bang Bang' and 'Rumor Has It' — comparing video, audio and extras to the previous HD DVD releases. Their verdict? Due to issues with image cropping, audio selection and supplemental features on the Blu-ray discs, the HD DVD versions win this first face-off."
Apples to Apples? Not. (Score:5, Insightful)
Earlier adopters are the only ones that will see these shortcomings in either format.
Once it matures, who's going to know the difference. After reading all three of these fluffy articles, I still have no idea which format is "better" because there was no control.
I choose Betamax.
Re:Apples to Apples? Not. (Score:3, Insightful)
They're using two different players. Doesn't that invalidate this test?
Unless there is a player out there that supports both formats, no. Mind you, it mind be far easier to build a machine to play either format than building a VCR that could play both VHS and Beta.
Re:Apples to Apples? Not. (Score:5, Insightful)
Moreover, doesn't the hardware's quality speak volumes about a formats potential in the market place? If the players don't work properly, who gives a flying f#@k about how great the format is? Especially since Sony will likely keep the price of blu-ray players artificially inflated b/c they're, you know, Sony.
Re:Apples to Apples? Not. (Score:5, Insightful)
In cases of monopoly this might make sense, but Sony is trying to lauch a new format here. Keeping the prices inflated (for any reason) is going to drive consumers towards HD-DVD.
Re:Apples to Apples? Not. (Score:4, Insightful)
This is SONY we're talking about. They don't know how to push a new format; They think that by pushing it at a high price it'll drive the format. They haven't learned any lessons in 20 years.
Re:Apples to Apples? Not. (Score:4, Insightful)
I think it's safe to say that Sony is the worst company in history when it comes to competance in launching new formats.
Re:Apples to Apples? Not. (Score:3, Insightful)
It would be a perfectly valid argument except that Sony has a long track record of shooting themselves in the foot in exactly this manner.
Re:Apples to Apples? Not. (Score:3, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VHS [wikipedia.org]
Re:Apples to Apples? Not. (Score:4, Informative)
codec support (Score:4, Informative)
AFAIK, all of the current BluRay titles were encoded with MPEG-2. I don't know about the current HDDVD titles.
Re:Apples to Apples? Not. (Score:4, Insightful)
What's frustrating about this test, though, is that there are so many differences between the players that it would almost seem necessary to go through a calibration routine with each player to ensure that the display device was properly calibrated for the source.
It'd also be nice to take the results of the test to the respective manufacturers and ask them about the output from each player and see if they have any feedback about the problems; the fact that the Samsung player is so new and that patches and firmware upgrades are likely probably makes an early comparison like this meaningless.
Re:Apples to Apples? Not. (Score:3, Insightful)
Though this is c
Re:Apples to Apples? Not. (Score:3, Insightful)
The biggest HD-DVD supporter among the studios fucks up a Blu-Ray release? That alone should invalidate this test.
Re:Apples to Apples? Not. (Score:2)
Thus I predict BD will fail due to its Sony link.
Re:Apples to Apples? Not. (Score:4, Informative)
In the end, I expect both formats to have equivalent picture quality for movies, save for player-specific issues or mistakes in the authoring.
Even the audio feature comparisons are moot as far as I'm concerned. Except for deliberate choices (leaving out an audio track) or mistakes in the authoring, I don't expect there to be a difference because both formats generally allow the disc producer to use the same sets of audio codecs.
The whole idea of A-B comparison is interesting, but because, as you state, they haven't isolated all the variables, it really isn't sufficient.
Re:Apples to Apples? Not. (Score:2)
The other interesting thing is that some features, such as the bookmarks for scenes, have nothing whatever to do with the medium on which the information is stored but just what the media packagers and media players want to do with various bits of information on that media.
However, a
And the winner is... (Score:4, Funny)
More concise (Score:5, Informative)
Training Day Kiss Kiss Bang Bang Rumor Has It
Re:More concise (Score:2)
Re:More concise (Score:2)
Based on this review, everyone should buy blue ray. In vhs vs betamax, the lower quality, larger capacity version won.
But while this review says Blu-ray has lower quality, we already know that it has larger capacity. What to do?
Actually, I can answer that question: Keep buying DVDs. Their quality is adequate, they're cheap, and they're easy to copy (important if you have young kids).
so glad to be an early adopter (Score:4, Funny)
Re:so glad to be an early adopter (Score:2)
Re:so glad to be an early adopter (Score:5, Insightful)
Almost all of the movie studios are releasing the first high-def DVD's without turning on the flag that will require the encrypted HDCP connection to view the high-definition picture. So, those of us that bought large-screen TV's a few years ago (before the HDCP interface was available) will be able to view the movies without being down-rez'ed to standard definition.
My guess is they are avoiding release of popular movies without this flag. But, they risk antagonizing people without an HDCP-enabled display if they release movies with the flag. So, how long do you suppose they will wait?
Re:so glad to be an early adopter (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:so glad to be an early adopter (Score:2)
So what do we make of this? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:So what do we make of this? (Score:5, Informative)
This has just recently been fixed, so discs should start appearing toward the end of the year with exactly the same encode as the HD-DVD, and the only remaining aspects will be the quality of the player, and any necessary culling of extra features or audio formats to make the film fit on a 25Gb BluRay instead of a 30Gb HD-DVD.
Re:So what do we make of this? (Score:2)
So here's a new one: why compare a single layer BR with a dual layer HD? Can't BR go to 50? Do the initial players not support dual layer disks?
Re:So what do we make of this? (Score:2, Informative)
BluRay does indeed go to 50Gb in the specs, but they're currently failing to manufacture dual layer discs on a commercial level, so all currently announced titles are only 25Gb at most. The first couple of batches have been more like 22Gb, because they daren't even go to the edge of that first layer, but they're starting to get braver.
Actually, the HD-DVD group recently announced that they're planning to introduce a t
Re:So what do we make of this? (Score:2)
Hold on I was sure the blueray was the bigger size?
Format capacities (Score:5, Informative)
The biggest CURRENTLY AVAILABLE format is HD-DVD:
BluRay: 25GB/layer * 1 layer = 25 GB
HD-DVD: 15GB/layer * 2 layers = 30 GB
Furthermore, the video encoding scheme used by HD-DVD is more efficient--BluRay is still encoded similar to standard DVDs though in a few weeks some BluRay discs using identically encoded video as HD-DVD will start showing up. I'm not all that certain studios will spend extra money to produce excluseinve content to take advantage of the extra 5GB on HD-DVD.
One thing that isn't discussed much is that although the two formats can use identically encoded video, IIRC they have different DRM schemes and different programming methods (for interactivity/menus). The reviewer was quite disappointed with the performance of BluRay for interactivity--its responsiveness was much poorer than that of the HD-DVD release, so much so that it more than erased the benefit of faster initial start-up of Blu-ray. Combine the inferior quality of these releases with the fact that there is less selection of BluRay players, and they cost much more than HD-DVD, and the smaller number of titles than HD-DVD, and BluRay has an uphill battle on its hands to escape the fate of becomeing the Betamax of the 21st century.
Take note that BluRay has the largest POTENTIAL size. I THINK current BluRay players are dual-layer capable, but even if they are this capability isn't well tested as there is no capability to mass-produce dual-layer discs yet. That'll take another year, at which time there will be an ample 20GB extra room on BluRay vx. HD-DVD. If BluRay can hang on for another year then this could be what it needs to come out on top. More importantly studios will have to actually take advantage of the space for meaningful exclusive content, and hardware vendors will have to bring down the price of BluRay players to be much closer in price to HD-DVD. Consumers will pay a premium for the extra capacity, but only a small one, and the quality had better improve from the current offerings.
In the end though, content will win this war. Given how things are shaping up BluRay will be second fiddle for a couple of years IMO. I don't know if either format will win total domination either--in another decade it won't matter how the bits are patterned on the little shiny plastic discs, because even today the little shiny plastic disc as a distribution medium is slowly going extinct. The kind of people who have HDTV sets today are also the kind of people who have digital cable or sattelite, and digital HTDV service offers video-on-demand and/or PVR digital recording. Just as iTunes and similar services are surging as CD sales flatten out and decline, electronic distribution of video content will change the industry.
Re:So what do we make of this? (Score:2, Interesting)
Am I missing something?
disc capacity and codecs (Score:5, Informative)
AFAIK, both BluRay and HDDVD support the same three codecs: MPEG-2, H.264 (MPEG-4 AVC), and VC-1 (WMV9).
AFAIK, the current BluRay authoring software only supports MPEG-2 at this time, so the initial discs were encoded with MPEG-2... even though VC-1 and H.264 codecs have been on the market for several years...
AFAIK, the current HDDVD authoring software supports MPEG-2 and VC-1, and the initial discs have been using VC-1.
We won't be able to see a true Apples to Apple comparison until we can compare two discs that used the exact same codec at the exact same bitrate, or even the exact same H.264 / VC-1 data.
The real losers: (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Terrible Age (Score:2)
Same. If and when it stops becoming a valid option, I have pretty much resigned myself to not buying videos anymore.
Let's hear it for hollywood!
Re:Terrible Age (Score:2)
Hey, that would make a good EFF anti-DRM video!
Re:Terrible Age (Score:2)
I'll stick with downloading movies from the net, and watching them on my 19" CRT monitor.
Yesterday I watched a 1280 pixel wide Blade Runner, which had amazing quality (it was a 3.8GB
PlayStation 3 (Score:3, Insightful)
*When
Re:PlayStation 3 (Score:2, Funny)
PS3 is no longer a done deal (Score:4, Interesting)
PS3 may still turn out to be the biggest turkey in the universe of game consoles, or it might pwn everything. At 300$ at launch it would absolutely surely wipe floor with everything.
At 599$, with crippled version having no HDMI, nobody knows what happens yet.
My personal bet is that X360-Wii -combo will beat PS3 for the first year, until lot more games are ready, and Sony, after bleeding for a while, goes for broke and drops the price. HD DVD/Blu-ray fight will be an irrelevant sideshow, as the movies are way overpriced and offer no serious benefits unless you buy a super-expensive TV. Whoever first gets the standalone player price down and offers more *movie* features wins. Additionally, if, say, HD-DVDs DRM gets cracked first, and people can start making 'backups' of their HD content bit like you can muck with DVDs today, Blu-ray will insta-lose the fight right there unless they can counter with technical merits (none so far, the formats are almost identical) or price (not likely with sony).
What will be the "Matrix" of this generation? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What will be the "Matrix" of this generation? (Score:2)
I'm not sure I knew anyone who owned a DVD player in 1998.
Re:What will be the "Matrix" of this generation? (Score:2)
It's hard to think of a DVD that came out over 2 1/2 years into the format as "early in the life of DVD." But the first "special editions" that really got me excited were T2, 12 Monkeys, "A Boy and His Dog" (one of the first DVD's I bought), and the Brazil Criterion box set. And there was, of course, the Alien SE's (later eclipsed by the greatest DVD special edition set of all time--the Alien Quadrilogy box set)
-Eric
Re:What will be the "Matrix" of this generation? (Score:2)
Good god... you were actually willing to spend money on Aliens 3 and Resurrection? *shudder*
Re:What will be the "Matrix" of this generation? (Score:2)
Can anyone give actual perceived results of HD DVD or Blu-ray on an 'old' TV?
Re:What will be the "Matrix" of this generation? (Score:2)
Adding an even higher definition source will do nothing and may make things worse if the down-scale isn't done properly.
Re:What will be the "Matrix" of this generation? (Score:3, Insightful)
It doesn't take a video snob to notice the difference.
People who claim there is no difference simply have not seen the difference between DVD and a high-dev format. I don't mean pumping a DVD or cable into an HD T.V. and and stretching and zooming in on the picture. I mean actual HD programming from either an HD channel or a high dev movie format. The problem I think i
Re:What will be the "Matrix" of this generation? (Score:2)
It doesn't take a video snob to notice the difference.
True, but it takes a video snob to care.
Ha! My prediction comes true (Score:4, Interesting)
Or, at least, my prediction has further evidence. :)
I have a simple rule these days about deciding what formats to pick. I simply pick "not Sony" and I'm pretty much always right. Sony stuff seems to look good on paper, but the implementation ends up sucking.
Re:Ha! My prediction comes true (Score:2)
Not that I wouldn't have either...
Not Surprised (Score:5, Insightful)
Until Sony actually finds their brain and starts using modern compression techniques(y'know, ones that aren't a decade old), this will only continue. Really, MPEG-2? H.264 and the HD-DVD VC1 completely blow MPEG-2 out of the water with regards to quality/space. The Blu-Ray discs' extra space might make it closer when they start making dual-layer discs, but that's far away, and unless they also switch compression, HD-DVD will still be better.
And what does all this mean? Nothing of course. If the public actually sees fit to buy these clunkers in droves, then whoever has advertising wins. I do hope they both flop, but that's an argument for another day.
Re:Not Surprised (Score:2, Informative)
US Has a History of Losing Standards (Score:4, Insightful)
We chose x86 over PPC
We chose VHS over BetaMax
We chose 8VSB over OFDM (for HDTV Broadcasting)
We chose CDMA over GSM (only just now starting to change)
And now we will probably end up with BluRay because of some gaming console... (PS3)
Re:US Has a History of Losing Standards (Score:3, Informative)
Re:US Has a History of Losing Standards (Score:2)
Re:US Has a History of Losing Standards (Score:2)
Re:US Has a History of Losing Standards (Score:2)
Re:US Has a History of Losing Standards (Score:3, Informative)
We chose x86 before PPC existed. We stuck with x86 for a variety of reasons, including very good performance, wide availability of systems, ability to run old software, and reasonable price. PPC wasn't and isn't clearly better (at least not in every regard.) RISC didn't prove to be better than CISC when transistor budgets rose, and decode units started taking up a tiny amount of die space. RISC also tends to take more space for the instruction stream, so CISC makes better use of in
Re:US Has a History of Losing Standards (Score:3, Informative)
Re:US Has a History of Losing Standards (Score:4, Informative)
Source [telegeography.com]
HD DVD Promotion Group in action! (Score:2, Informative)
So what would you expect? A better Blu Ray release?
It's still apples vs oranges (Score:2)
At the decoding, were there any noise-filter used?
How could the author called his monitor a HDTV reference when it's only capable of 1366 x 768 (which is not full HD but more like half-HD, full HD is 1920x1080)
coedcs (Score:2)
There is no winner (Score:2)
VHS vs Betamax (Score:4, Insightful)
The Blu-ray vs HD-DVD debate leaves out the very important aspect of existing DVD players and recorders. The market isn't really demanding a newer prettier picture quality or better sound or additional features that don't already exist on regular DVDs. With DVD-R camcorders now catching on in the consumer market, there's an even more compelling reason to stick with the older technology. It's an added feature the neither new format supports.
I predict that Blu-ray and HD-DVD will go the way of DAT and SACD. There may be a new format in the future but it's too soon and not advanced enough to take over the market. There will be a niche market for them just like Laserdisc for the true videophiles but that's all.
DVD? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:DVD? (Score:2)
I think that would be the fairer test -- rather than comparing Blu-Ray to HD DVD directly, compare each to a "standard" DVD. Of course, what makes this difficult is the fact that the players are all going to vary so much. You need a test rig that could take the direct output of the disk read and put it through some kind of standard processor, so th
Re:DVD? (Score:3, Insightful)
Now, if you go out and buy a 50" monitor from Best Buy along with the cheapest player they carry of each type, plug
What is needed is blind testing. (Score:3, Insightful)
What is important is not which is technically the best, bu
Re:What is needed is blind testing. (Score:3, Insightful)
But the studios quit making VHS because Blockbuster quit stocking them. Blockbuster quick stocking them, because people quit renting them. People quit renting them, years after DVDs were introduced, because the price of DVD players finally was cheap enough for the average person to afford.
Until that ha
Re:DVD? (Score:3, Interesting)
Have you watched any OTA HD? HD-DVD looks better than OTA HD, if that comparison helps you any.
Do yo
Interesting, but still early, results (Score:2)
HOWEVER... that said,
Wow! Sign me up! (Score:3, Funny)
Training Day
What?
Kiss Kiss Bang Bang
Who?
Rumor Has It
Wazzat?
These are their flagship release titles? Oh, I can't wait until these formats crater.
Idiotic, pointless review (Score:5, Insightful)
What is there to compare here? The format of the media storage is completely irrelevant to the quality of the movie. The movie is encoded in a binary, compressed codec. The combination of the codec, the compression level, the decoder in the player, and the quality of the components in the player - these are what determine the quality of the movie.
And since both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray support the same codecs, it is almost totally dependant on the player. The disc format of the movie doesn't make any difference whatsoever.
What a stupid article. Why not write an article comparing a movie viewed in a white to a movie viewed in an black house? It would have about the same difference on image and sound quality.
no thanks (Score:2)
Carrot and stick. (Score:2)
Isn't this all really about enhanced DRM and content protection using the lure of higher definition -- that most of use won't really notice past a few feet, or care about after a few beers? Kind of a "ignore the man behind the green curtain" (Wizard of Oz) kind of thing?
Aren't these new players are designed to thwart fair use and be disabled remotely. What are we willing to give up for the bright and shiny pictures? Are we all fish? Until my current pla
the telling comment... (Score:4, Insightful)
Okay, so due to issues WHICH HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE FORMATS THEMSELVES, HD-DVD won. This means nothing.
Porn will decide ... (Score:4, Insightful)
My wager is that they'll go HD-DVD, which means the rest of us will too, despite Sony's best efforts.
Training Day wasn't the first HD-DVD, btw, Island Fever 3 with Tera Patrick was.
Slow menus? What the heck? (Score:3, Interesting)
The reviewer said something to the effect of DVD being OK, but I disagree. Every DVD menu that I've ever seen on any player already trends towards the slow side. I understand taking a moment to load new content, but what's up with taking a second to register the pressing of the "up" or "down" button?
Why, in 2006, does every piece of consumer electronics feel (and often look) like it's being powered by a Nintendo Entertainment System, with some sort of auto-delay-on-input circuit added for extra measure? I understood it in 1996, but ten years later and if anything it's worse; every generation seems to get slower and slower. My TiVo Series 2 is actually a little slower than my Series 1, which I thought was impossible. My Comcast cable box when I tried it last year had multi-second response times for everything. My cell phone can't seem to do anything in less than half a second, except input text. For every DVD player I've ever seen (except the PS2), you can see it drawing the menus and stuff to the screen. Come on! You can't draw text to the text in less than half-a-second? My Commodore 64 seemed to manage that feat, even when running in BASIC!
I realize that not all consumer electronics are going to act as snappy as my computer, but must it feel like I'm doing everything over the web with a 9600 dial-up connection?
Comparison interesting but not entirely accurate (Score:3, Informative)
Both Blu-Ray and HD DVD support both VC1 and MPEG2/AVC, if I'm not mistaken. They are comparing the encoding on a specific movie, but imply that it's inherent to the format.
Unfortunately, due to disc space limitations, Warner has elected to drop the [TrueHD Dolby Digital] track altogether on the Blu-ray release. [...] But more troubling is that Warner has also dropped the Dolby Digital-Plus track off of this Blu-ray release
Disc space limitations on Blu-Ray? 25GB on a single layer is really not enough (compared to 30 on a dual-layer with HD DVD) that two audio tracks had to be dropped? Something is fishy here.
BlueRay vs HDDVD vs DVD? (Score:3, Informative)
When I first walked in to the store, and saw the big scren tv playing its movie, I wasn't wowed, I did NOT say: "Damn, that's clear, that can't be a DVD! Is it BlueRay? HDDVD? I gotta find out more!"
I just assumed it was a regular DVD, and didn't give it much thought. I didn't have the slightest idea that I was looking at a BlueRay presentation until I noticed the blue ray logo on the advertising signage underneath.
This is a miles away from when I saw my first DVD, when I was literally amazed. Especially because at that time I mostly watched rented VHS, which were always somewhat worse for the wear.
Factor in the premium for the HD player and the movies themselves. ($46 bucks for movies I would typically pick up for under $20, often under $15)
So, will I get one? Yeah, eventually, when the price comes down to around 200-300, the format war is settled (or rendered irrelevant by cheap dual-mode players), and title availability is high. My first impression left me disctinctly underwhelmed. Paying *that* much more for soemthing that doesn't look even half *that* much better just isn't worth it to me.
Your mileage will, of course, vary.
Re:Who the hell is buying this crap? (Score:4, Insightful)
15 years ago I had a room mate that refused to buy audio CD's because he figured something was bound to replace it soon. I suppose now that iTunes is available he's waiting on the next big thing to supplant it. I never felt that was a good way to base my purchases on.
Re:Who the hell is buying this crap? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is different because these are two competing technologies. Not buying CDs because something better will come out is just ignorant because there is no alternative. CDs were clearly the go ahead platform, whereas blu-ray and hddvd is undecided. One will eventually go away leaving the other the winner... thus the VHS/Betamax analogy.
http://religiousfreaks.com/ [religiousfreaks.com]Re:Who the hell is buying this crap? (Score:3, Insightful)
Go back to listening to tapes for a while and you'll see. Want to listen to a song in the middle of the tape? Bah. Fast forward, hit play every few seconds to see where you're at, fast forward some more, oops passed it, rewind... ehh.. screw that.
Plus the quality of the sound, the amount of space they holds, the fact that they don't get warn out from over use (unless you scratch the hell out of
Re:Who the hell is buying this crap? (Score:3, Insightful)
I wonder if either one of them will become a 'winner'. I know these can hold much more content, true HD quality, but, I'm just wondering how many of Joe Consumers out there are gonna flock to this?
I mean...DVD, is spread far into the general market. And I think the general public is quite happy with it. I dunno if HDTV or the HD dvd's are really presenting a compelling incentive to the avg. non-techie con
Re:Who the hell is buying this crap? (Score:3, Informative)
It also does not have the quality of standard cd's either....that's why I'm not interested in purchasing them...
Re:Who the hell is buying this crap? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Who the hell is buying this crap? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Who the hell is buying this crap? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Who the hell is buying this crap? (Score:3, Informative)
Let's not forget all sorts of crippling DRM, which is probably one of the main reasons movie execs are drooling over this crap. And this time, it's not just a joke like CSS. Lest we forget, according to Wikipedia HD DVD [wikipedia.org] has sophisticated audio watermarking, HDCP downconversion, and other crap. Blu Ray [wikipedia.org] is just as bad, with "dynamically-changing keys for the cryptographic protections", HDCP, digital watermarking, and so forth.
I think I'll stick to plain
Re:Who the hell is buying this crap? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Who the hell is buying this crap? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Who the hell is buying this crap? (Score:4, Informative)
Independently of how "helpful" it is, though, the hi-def is nice for the same reason it's nice in movies: it just looks better, and gives you more detail. And widescreen lets you see more of the product.
I mean, it's not like you can't follow what's going on in a VHS copy of Lawrence of Arabia. But god does it look better on hi-def widescreen (or 70mm projection if you get a chance).
Similarly, seeing all the fog players blow out on a cold day, the condition of the grass, dirt stains on the uniforms after a slide, etc don't help you follow the action any better but they do make it "feel" more immediate and make it more fun to watch.
Seeing a great film cut to pan-and-scan is just silly, you miss 30% or so of the visuals. Somewhat similarly, widescreen lets you see more. You can follow positioning and motion away from the ball, and really get a feel for team strategy instead of just following the action of whoever has the ball at the moment..
Nobody remembers Betamax (Score:3, Insightful)
Besides, don't underestimate the "ohhh, shiny" effect.
Re:Nobody remembers Betamax (Score:3, Informative)
First off, if you had a Beta I/II player, you couldn't play Beta III tapes.
Then, on the Beta machines I had access to, you had to physically switch to Beta I or Beta II to whatever tape you were going to watch, not a biggie but annoying.
The tape lengths were also confusing as L-750 didn't translate easily to parents as how many shows you can record on it as VHS did with the 2/4/6 HR tapes.
On
DVD+- (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Winnar (Score:2)
Like I've been saying, it's VHS and Betamax all over again, even with Betamax losing.
Except with VHS, there was no codec to speak of.
The current BluRay discs are encoded with MPEG-2, possibly on a 25 GB single layer disc.
The current HDDVD discs are encoded with VC-1 (WMV9), which is a much better codec, and are possibly using a 30 GB dual layer disc.
We won't know which is better until BluRay starts using a better codec. Which should be AnyTimeNow. Both Blu