First Look at HD-DVD Drive

[JNasty4G63]

1. There's no HDMI in the HD-DVD add-on, so when all the studios activate ICT, you're screwed.

When they throw the switch for the ICT, we'll be using a new Xbox. Current time frame for the ICT activation is in late 2009, or early 2010. So, I wouldn't worry about that one bit. By the time they start using it, we will be able to buy HD-DVD and Blu-Ray players for under $100 that will have many more features than the Xbox can manage. So, the ICT is really a moot issue.

2. Where can you find a TV that's compatible with 1080p from component cables?

Well, many HDTVs also have a VGA input. And MS has confirmed that the VGA cable will be compatible. So, either use the VGA on your HDTV, or the VGA on a PC monitor, and you'll have your 1080p output. Until the update happens, and we find out FOR SURE whether or not the Xbox has digital video out, and is capable of an HDMI out, we won't know for sure their thoughts on getting 1080p fully.

3. There's new BD movies coming from Warner Bros (among others) using the superior codecs.

Yea, and initial word is, they are the same. I mean, VC1 is VC1, no matter what the media its on. I really just want someone to come out with a hybrid player, and get it over with. They both use the same HD video codecs (H.264 and VC1), and the same lossless audio codecs (TrueHD and DTS-HD). So, its really up to the studios as to which looks better.

Just like with DVD. I mean, DVDs are all the same, but there are certainly some real good ones, and some real bad ones. Just up to the movie studios to get good transfers and good audio mixing to take advantage of the media. I just hope it all sorts itself out soon, I'm sick of the mess.

Hilg

 

[KENJIusa]

Owned?

IGN : Does the Xbox 360 have the internal bandwidth between CPUs and graphics processors necessary to move a full 1080p image? There's a big difference between 1080i and the 3GB/s of 1080p.

Microsoft: No Comment.

 

[Digital-Nitrate]

Current time frame for the ICT activation is in late 2009, or early 2010.

I agree that it is very unlikely that the studios will use ICT in the near future, but just to be clear on the facts, there is no such current time frame.

The studios have the legal right to use ICT at any time they like. There have been rumors of an "agreement" between some of the studios and the backers of HD DVD & Blu-ray not to use ICT for the next couple years, which only makes sense, but there is no legal time frame, and no studio has ever confirmed this so-called agreement.

They may never use ICT, and they may use it tomorrow, but there certainly is no legal time frame where they must wait before using it. That's pure speculation from the rumor mill, no matter how much sense it makes.


BTW: As per the FCC rule 15.123 of Title 47 CHAPTER I (47 CFR 15.123. 2005) since July 1 on 2005 (over a year ago) all new 36"+ HD (720p/1080i/1080p/+) "digital cable ready" displays must incorporate either HDMI or DVI interfaces equipped with HDCP. The ruling actually went into effect on July 1, 2004, but only required 50% of implementation for a manufacturer’s product line. However, most manufacturers included HDMI or DVI w/HDCP for all their 36"+ models.

This same ruling also required all digital cable ready 25"-35" displays to include HDMI or DVI w/HDCP by July 1, 2006. And by July 1, 2007 even HDTVs smaller than 25" must include HDMI or DVI w/HDCP.


The target market for HD DVD and Blu-ray movies due to the significantly higher costs of the hardware and software is understandably much more likely to own recent HD displays, then consumers who currently do not have much or any interest in either HD format. Thus the reason why industry analysts have largely agreed that the vast majority of the target market for HD DVD and Blu-ray already own, or plan on owning a display with HDMI or DVI w/HDCP. If this is the case, and the studios fear future bootlegging, then they could quite easily decide to activate ICT for all HD titles within months, not years.

I don't personally see this happening, but let us not suggest that it isn't possible, and that some sort of legal time frame prevents them from doing it.

 

[Jeremy Ricci]

$199 Add on HD-DVD drive w/no support for games = failure.

 

[JNasty4G63]

...but just to be clear on the facts, there is no such current time frame.

Um, I don't recall ever saying that it was FACT about the timeframe. But, lets hear the facts from The All Knowing One himself, to get our story straight....

There have been rumors of an "agreement" between some of the studios...

...but there is no legal time frame, and no studio has ever confirmed this so-called agreement.

They may never use ICT, and they may use it tomorrow

That's pure speculation from the rumor mill, no matter how much sense it makes.

If this is the case, and the studios fear future bootlegging, then they could quite easily decide to activate ICT for all HD titles within months, not years.

I don't personally see this happening, but let us not suggest that it isn't possible, and that some sort of legal time frame prevents them from doing it.

So, after all that, I didn't really see any "facts" in there, except for some specs and FCC guidelines for displays. The FACT is, no one really knows. I'm just speculating, and you are just speculating. I didn't claim to know a set date, or say that it was certain to happen. All I said, and I still say, is that all things being the way they are, I HIGHLY doubt we will see the switch on the ICT thrown for at least 2-3 years. I'm saying late 2008 at the EARLIEST in my opinion. But, hey, what do I know. Apparently nothing, right???

Hilg

 

[Digital-Nitrate]

$199 Add on HD-DVD drive w/no support for games = failure.

100% agreed, especially when you'll probably be able to buy Toshiba's 2nd gen HD DVD for less than $400 which does output 1080p, does have HDMI, and many additional performance & feartures that the Xbox drive wont.

Xbox won the first battle with an early release. However, with HD DVD nearing death row due to the tremedous lack of industry *support and dismal *sales of HD DVD players. And if game developers follow through with superior games that require the capacity and performance of Blu-ray, then Xbox will quickly find itself on the outside looking in.

* Over 170 companies in the electronic industry support Blu-ray, including all the major DVD player manufactueres with the obvious exception of Toshiba. In addition, Blu-ray is supported by every major film studio with the exception of Universal.

** Toshiba originally anticipated sales of over 650,000 HD DVD players by the end of this year. So far they have sold ~50,000 players most of which all sold over three months ago. On their current sales pace, there will be less than 100,000 HD DVD players sold worldwide by the end of the year.

Um, I don't recall ever saying that it was FACT about the timeframe.

Then reread your statement:

"Current time frame for the ICT activation is in late 2009, or early 2010."

That is a statement of fact. If it was an opinion, then why even mention a "current time frame", and where do you say "I believe...".

Here is another fact for you... there is no such thing as a "current time frame for the ICT activation". It doesn't exist. So even if you said "I believe it will happen by late 2009, or early 2009." - It wont because no such time frame exists. It is up to each studio to decide if and when and how often they want to use ICT.

But, hey, what do I know. Apparently nothing, right???

Apparently, or at the very least you may want to consider a change in the way you express your opinions, so they do not look like statements of fact... or not get so defensive when someone points it out.

 

[Tornado]

Here is another fact for you... there is no such thing as a "current time frame for the ICT activation".

That doesn't mean it won't happen, which is what you are saying as fact. Truth be told, I personally beleive that this push for BD/HD-DVD was mostly for the backing of more DRM, so I'm assumiong ICT will be activiated quite soon, and sure as hell before MS dumps support of the 360.

 

[Digital-Nitrate]

That doesn't mean it won't happen, which is what you are saying as fact.

That is not at all what I said or am saying. In fact, I quite clearly said any studio can use ICT at any time. And I specifically said I don't PERSONALLY feel they will any time soon. The first statement is fact, while the second is clearly an opinion.

Here is the exact quote in case you miss read it:

I don't personally see this happening, but let us not suggest that it isn't possible, and that some sort of legal time frame prevents them from doing it.

 

[JNasty4G63]

Then reread your statement:

Don't need to, I wrote it.

That is a statement of fact. If it was an opinion, then why even mention a "current time frame", and where do you say "I believe...".

Perhaps, just maybe, you should just not take everything you read as fact. I never said anything was set in stone, nor did I state a set date. I gave a rough estimate on when I believe the switch to happen.

Here is another fact for you...

Oh boy, I can't wait for this one.....

....So even if you said "I believe it will happen by late 2009, or early 2009." - It wont because no such time frame exists. It is up to each studio to decide if and when and how often they want to use ICT.

So, what your saying is, my OPINION is wrong?? Is that what I'm to gather from that statement?? I'm still unsure as to how your opinion is supposed to be taken as hard factual info, and everyone else is just blathering nonsense and rumor-mill spec. Come on now.

...or at the very least you may want to consider a change in the way you express your opinions, so they do not look like statements of fact

Again, maybe you should examine the way you READ THINGS. I never said anything was fact, I never said I knew something other people did. I never gave hard facts. Normal human reasoning would lead me to believe that most people can understand what I'm saying.

I'm not an industry insider, nor do I work for a movie studio. I'm not sure where people are going to mistake my speakings for hard fact. You seem to, and I don't know why. But, it seems to me, you should be the one adjusting your viewpoint, not me and my communication.

... or not get so defensive when someone points it out.

How about not telling people their opinion is WRONG, when you are doing nothing but stating opinion as well. I like Blue, is that wrong for a favorite color??? I really love my new Adidas shoes, is that wrong, should I like Nike??? An opinion can't be wrong, stop telling me it is.

Hilg

 

[JNasty4G63]

And I specifically said I don't PERSONALLY feel they will any time soon.

Thats wrong. Stop stating facts that people are going to misread. You can't be doing that.



Hilg

 

[Tornado]

That is not at all what I said or am saying. In fact, I quite clearly said any studio can use ICT at any time. And I specifically said I don't PERSONALLY feel they will any time soon. The first statement is fact, while the second is clearly an opinion.
Here is the exact quote in case you miss read it:

No, I didn't miss it at all. But what stuck out more is this little chestnut, which I see JNasty has already covered, but whatever:

So even if you said "I believe it will happen by late 2009, or early 2009." - It wont because no such time frame exists.

So, it won't, which is a statement (usually tied with facts) that apparently proves JNasty's hyptothetical opinion used in that scenario wrong (which is another common practice of facts).

 

[JNasty4G63]

Since you're in here Toronado, I'll ask you. Did you, in reading what I wrote, happen to take any of what I said as HARD FACT, and not just opinion?? Am I missing something here???

Hilg

 

[Digital-Nitrate]

No, I didn't miss it at all. But what stuck out more is this little chestnut, which I see JNasty has already covered, but whatever:

Well he didn't, he's just provedmy point though, but whatever.

So, it won't, which is a statement (usually tied with facts) that apparently proves JNasty's hyptothetical opinion used in that scenario wrong (which is another common practice of facts).

No. I said the "time frame" wont happen. Studios may very well start touse ICT by late 2009, or early 2010, but not because of any agreed upon time frame. As said before, no studio has ever even hinted that such a time frame exists. The only fact is that the studios are within their rights to use ICT when, where, and how often they choose, and are not limited by any known time frame. Hope this finally clears it up for you.


As for Jeff 'Nasty' Latka... Its pretty obvious no amount of reasoning is going to get through to him. He sees what he wants to see, and clearly anyone who dares correct him is wrong and he'll only escalate it into a flame war, which I have no interest in. I wont respondto his nonsense any longer, except on occasions where he might once agian makes misleading factual statements instead of simply expressing an opinion.


Bottom line, despite what JNasty suggests, there is no time frame for ICT activation that would prevent the studios from useing ICT in thenear future. So for those of us who feel this is important and are interested in HD DVD/Blu-ray, and want to invest in theneccessary equipment, then be sure your display has HDMI or DVI w/HDCP. ICT may never get used, or it may get used on all future releases from all studios. There is no current time frame that will prevent or make studios use ICT.

 

[JNasty4G63]

No. I said the "time frame" wont happen. Studios may very well start touse ICT by late 2009, or early 2010, but not because of any agreed upon time frame.

This is where you are misunderstanding me. When I said the words "time frame" in my post, I didn't intend that to mean a SET IN STONE written agreement on a set date. You implied that was what I meant, and ran with it. I simply meant, and you missed, that its just generally guessed that the switch won't happen before that time. Not that a date was set, not that certain studios have agreed to a date, and not that it would or wouldn't happen. Those are all things I didn't say, but you assumed I meant. You, not me, is the one confused here.

As for Jeff 'Nasty' Latka...

Um, what??? Not sure what that is supposed to mean. Again, you seem to be reading into things that aren't meant to be. That isn't my last name, first off (you searched, and searched poorly). And my nickname is an inside joke with friends that you just wouldn't get, so stop trying to infer meaning. But, since you are always right, I'll be sure to change my name. And, I'll tell Lats when I see him next that we will have the same name soon.

Its pretty obvious no amount of reasoning is going to get through to him.

I'm perfectly fine with reasoning. Its being told my opinion is WRONG that is unacceptable. Understand that, please.

...and clearly anyone who dares correct him is wrong and he'll only escalate it into a flame war, which I have no interest in.

No flames, I didn't call any names, or belittle or demean you. I simply objected to you calling my opinion hearsay and false, and your opinion facts and the truth. How is it wrong to feel that???

I wont respondto his nonsense any longer, except on occasions where he might once agian makes misleading factual statements instead of simply expressing an opinion.

Which, to you, is apparently most all the time. So, I guess we'll be hearing from you quite a bit. Look, you misread what I wrote, and took exception to it. Thats fine, we all do it. I'm sorry you misunderstood me, and I'll try harder to make it much clearer from now on.

Bottom line, despite what JNasty suggests, there is no time frame for ICT activation that would prevent the studios from useing ICT in thenear future.

Again, for the last time, so we're clear on this, you misunderstood what I meant. I've already discussed why, so just stop.

Hilg

 

[DuckRacer]

Everyone, calm down. Please.

 

[Duke]

Since you're in here Toronado, I'll ask you. Did you, in reading what I wrote, happen to take any of what I said as HARD FACT, and not just opinion?? Am I missing something here???

Yes, you are missing something quite large.

I didn't claim to know a set date, or say that it was certain to happen. All I said, and I still say, is that all things being the way they are, I HIGHLY doubt we will see the switch on the ICT thrown for at least 2-3 years. I'm saying late 2008 at the EARLIEST in my opinion. But, hey, what do I know. Apparently nothing, right???

I have no idea what you know or don't know, but I do understand that you have an extremely hard time communicating for some reason. I've highlighted a number of words above in red. Please explain where those ideas are communicated in your original post below:

When they throw the switch for the ICT, we'll be using a new Xbox. Current time frame for the ICT activation is in late 2009, or early 2010.

Where is there any idication that this is only your opinion? Where is the indication that it may not happen for certain? Nowhere. This is clearly stated as if it is an official time frame, with no indication at all that it is merely what you think. Contrast that with what D-N said:

I agree that it is very unlikely that the studios will use ICT in the near future, but just to be clear on the facts, there is no such current time frame...

I don't personally see this happening, but let us not suggest that it isn't possible, and that some sort of legal time frame prevents them from doing it.

See those bits I've highlighted in blue? Those are the parts where he qualifies his statement as an opinion. Again, where does that appear in your original post?

When they throw the switch for the ICT, we'll be using a new Xbox. Current time frame for the ICT activation is in late 2009, or early 2010.

Right. Nowhere. See the difference?

That doesn't mean it won't happen, which is what you are saying as fact.

Not at all. It's quite clear that the only thing D-N is stating as fact is that there is NO SET LEGAL TIME FRAME for the event to occur. This is a true fact. He never said it would never happen. He never said the time frame would differ from Hilg's. All he said was that it was a fact that there was no legal timeframe, which is true, and he went to great lengths to indicate the variability of it and identify his guesses as to when it would happen.

Perhaps, just maybe, you should just not take everything you read as fact. I never said anything was set in stone, nor did I state a set date. I gave a rough estimate on when I believe the switch to happen.

Perhaps, just maybe, you should clearly indicate that what you're saying is only your opinion. I refer you to all those red words above that you totally left out of your original post.

So, what your saying is, my OPINION is wrong?? Is that what I'm to gather from that statement?? I'm still unsure as to how your opinion is supposed to be taken as hard factual info, and everyone else is just blathering nonsense and rumor-mill spec. Come on now.

[snip]

How about not telling people their opinion is WRONG, when you are doing nothing but stating opinion as well... An opinion can't be wrong, stop telling me it is.

Please do indicate where he said that your opinion is wrong. In fact, from everything I read, he mostly agreed with your interpretation of possible events. What he said was wrong was your presentation of an opinion as a fact. You've totally missed that point, whether on purpose or through inaccurate reading. Stop telling him that he's calling your opinion wrong, when quite clearly he is NOT.

Get it, yet?

 

[Robin]

I really think the having another box to put on the side of your console looks kind of ulgy.... MS should have thought of this before and put it in the console which is why the 360 seems so rushed. Will this add on it puts it in line with PS3 money which makes it even more stupid.....

Oh and I thought I might aswell post this news here aswell... The 20GB PS3 will also have a HDMI port now (makes it less tardy) and it will be cheaper than the stated price...

http://uk.ps3.ign.com/articles/734/734349p1.html

 

[DuckRacer]

Oh and I thought I might aswell post this news here aswell... The 20GB PS3 will also have a HDMI port now (makes it less tardy) and it will be cheaper than the stated price...

http://uk.ps3.ign.com/articles/734/734349p1.html

...And yet the price drop is for Japan only, and only 20% of all PS3s will be 20GB versions.

 

[harrytuttle]

Well, many HDTVs also have a VGA input. And MS has confirmed that the VGA cable will be compatible. So, either use the VGA on your HDTV, or the VGA on a PC monitor, and you'll have your 1080p output. Until the update happens, and we find out FOR SURE whether or not the Xbox has digital video out, and is capable of an HDMI out, we won't know for sure their thoughts on getting 1080p fully.

Side note: many old HDTV's have VGA inputs. Hardly any new ones do, aside from better-market plasma displays. There's just no HD devices with VGA output (unlike the RCA DTC-100, which rocked...five years ago!).

 

[YSSMAN]

Unfortunately for all of us, it is pretty plain to see that none of us have the answers that we are all looking for. Given the current stance of the market that is without wide-ranging HDMI and 1080p support with HDTVs, and the slow sales of BOTH HD-DVD and Blu-Ray players, we are going to have to wait a while before anything is completely "solid."

We can argue left and right for what we personally believe to be "right" when it comes to these formats, but for the most part it is going to come down to what the average consumers (aka, not us) want with their HD-Format video. What format they choose is going to be largely dependant uppon prices both both the HDTVs and the players, as well as the title selections, etc. As of right now, both of them suck... And it is quite unfortunate that we are going to have to choose between the two. I still know people who buy videos on VHS, and they are royally screwed now...

Is this the best way for Microsoft and Toshiba to push HD-DVD? No.

Is it the dumbest thing they could do? Certainly not...

 

[JNasty4G63]

Yes, you are missing something quite large.

No, I think I see whats going on here. Unless I start all of my posts from now on with....

"IN MY OPINION....."

...it will be taken as fact, and I will get railed on for no reason. BUT, when a certain someone says....

....but just to be clear on the facts, there is no such current time frame.

...its just taken as a REAL fact, that he somehow knows FOR SURE does not exist. Now, I'm not going to argue if there is or isn't a time frame, because it really is a moot point. But, its a bit silly questioning opinion over fact given the statements made by each.

Just so we are clear, and to get my point across that I'm not the only one thinking like this....

time frame
n. A period during which something takes place or is projected to occur: “a start of deployment in the 1993 time frame” (Harold Brown).

My statement was taken, misunderstandingly by you and others, as hard fact, and taken to the cleaners on it because I didn't EXPLICITLY state that it was opinion. Yet, his replied statement to mine noted above, which was also not directly noted as opinion, and actually STATED AS FACT, is just somehow OK, and we just take it for certain??? Um, what??? Did he start that statement by letting us know it was his opinion?? No, he didn't, nor did I. He was the only one that EXPLICITLY stated he knew "facts" in all this. How am I the one getting drilled here???

I have no idea what you know or don't know, but I do understand that you have an extremely hard time communicating for some reason. I've highlighted a number of words above in red. Please explain where those ideas are communicated in your original post below:

Well, thank you for the compliment on my communication. I didn't realize I was supposed to poll EVERY member here on their education level and communication skill just to be sure that my posts are understood fully. I'll make sure I send out a big mass mail to get that info soon, so we will all understand each other clearly. Thanks for the heads up on that.

As to the quoted statements, lets examine them. In the post in question, I state that the time frame is going to be sometime around 2009-2010. Now, going by what I understand the phrase "time frame" to mean, echoed by the DICTIONARY, that statement to me sounds pretty logical. It says that, the projected moment when we will first see the ICT implemented is not going to be until 2009 or 2010. No specific studios, no specific movies, not set in stone, just a projection. Please excuse me for not making sure everyone here knows EXACTLY what I mean with the phrase "time frame" before posting.

Please do indicate where he said that your opinion is wrong.

As noted above, it was, and still is MY OPINION that.....

Current time frame for the ICT activation is in late 2009, or early 2010.

...to which he kicked this all off by responding with....

....but just to be clear on the facts, there is no such current time frame.

You guys misunderstood me. I never said that it was fact, but you assumed that I intended that. That was your fault, not mine. I can no more prove that this WILL happen around a certain time than he can prove it WON'T happen. So really, there is very little fact to be had here at all. So, assuming anything stated here in this ENTIRE POST as fact is a step in the wrong direction for those who do, as you two did.

But anyway, IN MY OPINION, we need to get back on topic, so.....

Side note: many old HDTV's have VGA inputs. Hardly any new ones do, aside from better-market plasma displays. There's just no HD devices with VGA output (unlike the RCA DTC-100, which rocked...five years ago!).

Well, I just looked at both Sony's and Samsung's sites, and IN MY OPINION many of their current NEW models are still offering a VGA input. I stopped looking after those big two, but something tells me they aren't the only ones.

Now true, IN MY OPINION, the VGA input will be going away soon. IN MY OPINION, with more and more computers, and thus HTPCs, coming with DVI and soon HDMI, the VGA input will be unused. But, IN MY OPINION, it still has a decent ammount of life left before its dead for good.

Hilg

 

[DuckRacer]

No, I think I see whats going on here. Unless I start all of my posts from now on with....

"IN MY OPINION....."

...it will be taken as fact, and I will get railed on for no reason. BUT, when a certain someone says....

...its just taken as a REAL fact, that he somehow knows FOR SURE does not exist. Now, I'm not going to argue if there is or isn't a time frame, because it really is a moot point. But, its a bit silly questioning opinion over fact given the statements made by each.

Look at D-N's statement:

I agree that it is very unlikely that the studios will use ICT in the near future, but just to be clear on the facts, there is no such current time frame.

I bolded "there is no such current time frame". You know why? Because it's true. They could activate it in a few hours, or they could activate it next year, or they could activate it years down the road. Or a few decades. Or they could not use it at all.

What D-N said was said as fact, but it's true. This, however...

Current time frame for the ICT activation is in late 2009, or early 2010.

...is said as a fact, though it can be interpreted as a guesstimate. But it is more easily interpreted as fact, and that's why D-N said this...

I agree that it is very unlikely that the studios will use ICT in the near future, but just to be clear on the facts, there is no such current time frame.

 

[Jeremy Ricci]

Just to be clear, opinion is usually implied by using words such as "I think" or "I believe" or "In my opinion". Without the use of "I" in some form, or a reference to your general thoughts, the usual interpretation will be that you are stating a fact.

 

[Duke]

Thank you, Duck. That's exactly the point. D-N's statement was a fact, because his statement merely boils down to this:

"There is no legal or official schedule for the implementation of ICT."

Even Hilg cannot argue that this is a fact. That's the sum total of what he is claiming to be 100%, definitely true. The rest of his post consists of D-N's projections for what he thinks is likely to occur, and these are clearly marked off by phrases like "I believe it's unlikely" and such.

I'm not sure what you're on such a high horse about, Hilg, but it's time to get off. Your statement that it's all our fault for misunderstanding you is quite untrue. You are resting your argument on a very very narrow assumption as you defined above. It was easily open to misunderstanding, particularly given the bare-bones way that you presented it.

Let's try a little excercise. Let me make a statement, and you respond to the way it's written:

"Hilg is behaving like a total asshole."

What's your response?

I bet it was "Hey, that guy just called me an asshole! Board admins aren't supposed to do that! What the hell?!"

But I didn't call you an asshole, did I? No. I just said you were behaving like one. So it's not my fault that you misinterpreted it, now is it?

Can we put this issue to rest, now, and move on with our lives?

 

[Tornado]

Not at all. It's quite clear that the only thing D-N is stating as fact is that there is NO SET LEGAL TIME FRAME for the event to occur. This is a true fact. He never said it would never happen. He never said the time frame would differ from Hilg's. All he said was that it was a fact that there was no legal timeframe, which is true, and he went to great lengths to indicate the variability of it and identify his guesses as to when it would happen.

I know what he said, and what he meant. But I was using that as criticism of him for the current (past?) argument becuse the way he wrote that specific phrase:

So even if you said "I believe it will happen by late 2009, or early 2009." - It wont because no such time frame exists.

makes it sound like a fact that it simply will not happen at all because there is an absense of a time frame, regardlesss of how JG had phrased it. That phrase alone comes off as sounding that even if JG had phrased it to say "In my opinion" that even that would be wrong bcause it simply was not going to happen, which I found ironic in the recent flurry. I know what he was trying to say, but the way he phrased it showed irony in that he was trying (or it just came off sounding that way) to convey that as there was no time frame for it to happen in 2009, that was no way for it to happen in 2009 at all.

 

[MustangSVT]

I would like to share my thoughts on this.

From my understanding, the HD-DVD add-on will work like this:

- with dash update, chip will enable 1080p processing and also output 1080p via VGA

So assuming you buy the add-on, you can either do the following:

- output 1080i via Component. Assuming 360 processes it at 1080p, it'll do 3:2 pulldown to 1080i from 1080p, and then any modern 1080p TV like Samsung DLP, Sony SXRD, JVC D-ILA etc. will de-interlace this signal to 1080p. This should look about as good as watching from the current Toshiba HD-DVD player, minus limitations of Component vs HDMI, so let's say 5-10% worser PQ (since component isn't as good as HDMI). This is all assuming the 360 interlaces signal to 1080i properly just like the Toshiba HD-DVD player.

- output 1080p via VGA.

Except, there's 1 problem. I don't know of any TV's that support 1080p via VGA. From my own experience and what I've read, the Samsung HLS 1080p DLP tv's (very new) and the Sony SXRD A2000 1080p (latest LCoS), neither one accepts more than 1366x768p via VGA. Even my own TV, a JVC LCoS (720p model, came out this year so relatively new) has a VGA input, but it's crippled, only accepts up to 1024x768 on it (4:3). it accepts 1366x768 but it doesn't look proper. The only use of 1080p via VGA I can think of with those new LCD monitors (such as Dell 24" LCD) which have DVI and VGA and can accept up to 2048x1536 on VGA so should be no problem to put 1080p via VGA (and other CRT monitors I guess).

 

[JNasty4G63]

Let's try a little excercise. Let me make a statement, and you respond to the way it's written:

"Hilg is behaving like a total asshole."

What's your response?

I bet it was "Hey, that guy just called me an asshole! Board admins aren't supposed to do that! What the hell?!"

But I didn't call you an asshole, did I? No. I just said you were behaving like one. So it's not my fault that you misinterpreted it, now is it?

I know what you are trying to say. But, if we go by the recent protocol of this thread, you not clearly stating that it was just YOUR OPINION that I'm acting like an asshole, it might be interpreted as fact, and it would be you getting railed for it, not me for minunderstanding it if I did. Do you see what I mean???

I said something, it was misunderstood by some, and I got railed for not being more clear. So, by that rationale, it would be YOU getting berated for making a statement that others misunderstand. That IN MY OPINION, is my problem with all this. Sure, me being a little more clear would have solved a lot of this. But converse to that, IN MY OPINION, maybe everyone else just asking for clarification instead of just slamming me would have helped as well. I could have done things better, as could others, IN MY OPINION.

Look, IN MY OPINION, I'm well over this. I made a statement, it was misunderstood by most all of you and, IN MY OPINION, I'm getting railed for it. I'm sorry that I didn't ask everyone here what their interpretation of the term "time frame" was before speaking. That term to me, and apparently the Dictionary as well, means just a general projection of a time when something might happen. But, as I can see now, IN MY OPINION, I'm obviously in the minority here on thinking that is what the term means. I'll be SURE to ask everyone here their thoughts on things before posting anymore.

And, I don't know why you guys also keep bringing up "legality" with regards to all this. IN MY OPINION, I don't think anyone here will argue with the fact that there is no legal binding on the movie studios with regards to the ICT implementation. My statement, IN MY OPINION, was just that at this current time, with things the way they are, and from what I have read, if and when the ICT does start being used, IN MY OPINION, it won't be for at least 2-3 years. Nothing legal, nothing set in stone, no studios firmly set. IN MY OPINION, just an approximate time we might see it.

So, there you go. I now have a firm understanding on the "communication" level of everyone here. I now know that I must use clearly defined terms in order to not get crushed for it. And I now know that if I say something that other people take the wrong way, it will be my ass if I don't explicitly state that it was all just IN MY OPINION.

Hilg

 

[Drillah]

Lol.
The understanding of the english language in here at the moment is truely saddening.

--Can I get a 1080p picture over DVI?

 

[JNasty4G63]

...t'll do 3:2 pulldown to 1080i from 1080p

The 3:2 pull down doesn't have anythign to do with the resolution. It has to do with the frame rate of the source material. Many films are shot at 24fps. But on NTSC displays, everything runs at 30fps interlaced or 60fps progressive. So, there has to be some processing to get the different frame rates to sync up.

http://www.dvdfile.com/news/special_report/production_a_z/3_2_pulldown.htm

Except, there's 1 problem. I don't know of any TV's that support 1080p via VGA

Sony Bravia XBR LCDs, 1080p/60 via VGA (page 51)
http://www.sonystyle.com/intershoproot/eCS/Store/en/documents/specifications/xbr.pdf

Sony SXRD XBRs, 1080p/60 via VGA (page 77)
http://www.sonystyle.com/intershoproot/eCS/Store/en/documents/specifications/60_70_xbr.pdf

Samsung DLP, 1080p/60+ via VGA (page 134)
http://org.downloadcenter.samsung.c.../20060527125706906_BP68-00588H-01Eng_0516.pdf

Samsung **95 series LCD flat panels, 1080p/60 via VGA (page 78)
http://org.downloadcenter.samsung.c...M/200608/20060812122221765_BN68-01047J-00.pdf

Samsung **96 series LCD flat panels, 1080p/60 via VGA (page 113)
http://org.downloadcenter.samsung.c...M/200608/20060812103314890_BN68-01047F-00.pdf

Theres a quick few that I found that will do full 1080p from the VGA input. It is kind of hit and miss as to what sets do, but there are a decent number out there that will.

Hilg

 

[JNasty4G63]

--Can I get a 1080p picture over DVI?

A 1080p signal can be sent over component cables, VGA cables, DVI cables and HDMI cables. So, as long as you use one of those types of cables, it will transmit. Now, on the display side, it depends on what type of display, and what the functions of the inputs on that display are, as to what type of image will be produced.

Hilg