Talk:HD DVD/Archive 1

message: This article demeans Blu-Ray.
It's not neutral. Give details not comparisions! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.84.214.69 (talk • contribs) 2005-09-12t21:43:49z.
[Prejudice wording] It would be most proper to allow criticism from within the reader rather than using suggestive wording. The details are relative to the topic. But to use a word like "substantially" suggests that HD DVD is at a great disadvantage as far as the required size for the new video market. Storage size does not suggest a direct advantage or disadvantage especially since it's not defined which market that scenario may exist in. Negative wording motivates the reader to look with a cynical eye rather than a neutral eye.  
HD DVD was developed for the market it was intended for. Blue Ray was developed for the market it was intended for. 
This information should be presented objectively. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.241.234.96 (talk • contribs) 2005-09-21t05:53:01z.
: I think we all share your feelings on NPOV, but when you changed "substantially" to "significantly", I think this did not help. We should either reword this or remove it, which I have for the moment. I think this article is about as NPOV as they come as it stands now. (By the way, please sign your posts on talk pages.) -- Chris 18:14, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I was comming to wikipedia for information and I found this statement: "Blu-ray Disc was developed outside of the DVD Forum, and was never submitted to the forum for consideration." and I belived it was true, which it is but it doesn't tell the whole story. If it wasn't for the fact that I know of two DVD forums that have seem to have formed that it dawned on me a few minutes later. There is one for the movie industry and some dvd player companies (IIRC, who also spawed the formats DVD-R, DVD-RW, and DVD-RAM) and one for the PC market and the other dvd player compaines (who spawned the DVD+R and DVD+RW formats). It would be good to clarify that Blu Ray was submitted with one forum where HD-DVD was submitted to the other.  --ZacBowling 05:02, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's actually incorrect as there is only one DVD Forum, which support and created DVD-R/W and DVD-RAM; DVD-RAM being mainly for the PC market. DVD+R/W formats were created by the DVD Alliance (a grouping of companies that didn't agree with certain projects from the DVD Forum or left for other reasons.) Mind you that the DVD Forum is/was considered the "official" format. WiZZLa 04:09, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm not seeing the neutrality here either. There's also some apparent vandalism/fanboyism going on in the Blu-Ray Disc with regard to the history of that format. I'd also like to see some neutrality in these articles, or at least, factual accounts with sources... Locke Cole 05:42, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I tend to feel the same way.  I was editing the Blue ray page as it was simple a redirect to Blu-Ray Disc while I think it should be neutrally referred to the "technology."  within 24 hours, someone would just change it back to a redirect stating that: 1. Blue Ray = Blu-ray and 2. Anyone who are looking for Blue ray is looking for Blu-ray Disc. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.109.0.182 (talk • contribs) 2006-01-06t04:56:54z.
I'm sure more information could be here. This is too small.--Occono 16:45, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Bias.

message: DVD Studio Pro does not allow burning HD DVD media, but it does allow burning HD H.264 content to a normal DVD. Why would Apple support HD DVD when they are on the BOARD OF DIRECTORS for Blu-Ray? -Finster 2005-09-29t17:39:54z
:Nevertheless, DVD Studio Pro claims to support this. --Yamla 22:50, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  From the website: "Showcase your HD content with integrated, scalable H.264 encoding that allows you to fit HD content on DVDs using existing drives and existing media. Create HD on DVD versions from existing SD projects. Go from native HDV to HD on DVD with no recompression from Final Cut Pro and save time by encoding HD and SD in one Compressor batch." As you can see there is no mention of HD DVD anywhere.  DVD Studio Pro does not claim to support the HD DVD standard in any way.   PaulC/T+ 00:03, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes but don't forget you'll need a H.264 compatible DVD player ;) It's like DivX. 81.247.103.54 22:52, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Psantora only quoted part of that feature from Apple's page -- he omits the final sentence: "Even create HD DVD versions from existing SD DVD projects." (http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/dvdstudiopro/) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 198.77.206.228 (talk) 20:04, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe (from context) that that refers to HD projects that will be burned onto normal DVDs. An unfortunate combination of wording by Apple and silly naming conventions by the HD DVD Assoc. MasterCKO 04:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Apple does not support "HD DVD"

message: In the Controversies section it states an HP engineer has claimed the Blu-Ray alliance offers cash incentives to hardware manufacturers who adopt their technology.  Is there a citation which states this engineer's name or has the engineer opted to remain anonymous?  --Klhuillier 07:43, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Erm, I believe that's FUD. Thunderhawk89 22:53, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I wouldn't doubt it, but that's my bias. --Can Not 04:17, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: HP Engineer claims Blu-Ray cash incentives

message: Will HD DVD "support" region codes ? If somebody reliably knows then please add this information .... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 199.43.32.85 (talk • contribs) 2006-01-10t16:21:11z.
: It seems HD DVD, at this point, is still unclear about whether to use region code or not, though various reports seems to indicate that it will not have region code.  On the other hand, Blu-ray has 3 regions: 1. America and Asia (Excluding China), 2. Europe and Africa, and 3 (China and Russia). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.109.0.182 (talk • contribs) 2006-01-28t00:15:56z.
The HD DVD format doesn't have a region code system.  HD DVD players are mandated to play DVD-Video discs, and as such must respect the full DVD-Video specification, including support for region codes on DVD-Video discs.  Tvaughan1 17:26, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Region codes

message: Okay, let's clear up some confusion and misinformation about this.  First, there is this line, taken from the article:
:HD DVD is frequently mispelled 'HD-DVD' as people think it copies the dash from previous generation DVD-R/RW.
First, this is not a misspelling, which is also misspelled.  Spelling involves letters, not punctuation.
Second, the name of the character is a hyphen, not a dash.  There are several kinds of dashes, see Dash.
Third, what exactly draws the correlation to DVD-R?  I would think the correlation, if any, would come from CD-ROM—remember those?
Fourth, HD-DVD is a perfectly acceptable abbreviation.  It is a hyphenation of two abbreviations: high-definition–digital versatile disc.  
Abbreviations in English do not use spaces for one very good reason: it breaks up a word, which makes its placement in a sentence confusing.  It's great that some Japanese marketing exec though that "HD DVD" looked better than "HD-DVD", but he didn't actually speak English.  Compare the readability of the following two versions of the same excerpt from the article:
:There are many advantages to the fact that HD DVD discs will be the same size as current DVD discs. Backwards compatibility will be available with all HD DVD players allowing consumers to only require a single player in their homes to play both HD DVD and DVD discs.
:There are many advantages to the fact that HD-DVD discs will be the same size as current DVD discs. Backwards compatibility will be available with all HD-DVD players allowing consumers to only require a single player in their homes to play both HD-DVD and DVD discs.
For me—and I am a quite literate individual—the second is more easily readable.  So, though "HD DVD" is official, "HD-DVD" is easier to read and as such will be what most English-speaking people will use, regardless.  It should not be shunned, but rather stated as an acceptable alternative.—Kbolino 22:38, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For me—and I am a quite literate individual—the first is more officially accurate. So, though "HD-DVD" is easier to read, "HD DVD" is official and as such will be what most English-speaking consumers will use, regardless. It should not be shuned, but rather stated as the official term. Pvt Mahoney 11:42, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually I doubt that. History has shown that what's most used is only slightly influence by what's correct. Nil Einne 02:34, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "HD DVD" vs "HD-DVD"

message: Someone removed the full-sourced controversies section. Has a valid reason for this? --Rick Browser 02:35, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Opinionated and one-sided. Mirror Vax 15:10, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  It is a fact reported on media and sourced. --Rick Browser 01:06, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Controversies

message: [Release titles changed...] I'd like to mention an article http://www.panandscan.com/news/show/Warner/HD-DVD/448, stating that the release dates of the movies Warner Bros. for the HD DVD standard have changed... Thought I'd mention it. Wondered if anyone else can confirm this? Pvt Mahoney 14:35, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: First HD DVD movies released.

message: I know the page says it can go up to triple layers (45 GB) but I was wondering is it possible it can go up to quadruple, if not quintuple layers? Or it can just go up to 45 GB? Thanks. --McDonaldsGuy 06:21, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it is possible.  But they aren't even done with triple layered discs, so we won't see 4+ layer discs for awhile. Sonic3KMaster 06:23, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: AFAIK with DVDs they were talking about up to 20 layers. They never got past 2 so I wouldn't be too enthusiatic about anything above 3, if they even reach that (it's probably technically possible but it depends if they really bother or not) Nil Einne 19:47, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: How much can it hold?

message: HP is shown on the Blu-Ray page as one of the companies suporting Blu-Ray, I can not imagen a company suporting 2 standards, what is correct? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 137.120.53.7 (talk • contribs) 06:04, 6 April 2006.
:As I recall, HP is supporting both, to make sure they are on the winning side. Sonic3KMaster 06:58, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you sure HP doesn't want to make sure they're on the losing side? :-P Nil Einne 02:31, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: HP is still supporting BD. If they weren't, they wouldn't be on the BDA home page. They area also on the BDA Board of Directors. http://www.blu-raydisc.com/general_information/Section-14009/Index.html 02:05, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well yes, that's what Sonic said. But he/she said that it's because they want to be on the winning side. I say it's because they want to be on the losing side :-P Nil Einne 12:24, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: HP and Blu-Ray

message: AFAIK, porn has been one of the key drivers of new technology (video tapes, DVD, internet, broadband?). I wonder if this is going to be the case again. Does anyone know which format, if there is a bias, the porn industry is leaning towards? This may be the key to victory or defeat... Nil Einne 19:47, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I read on PS3updates.qj.net that some Japanese Porn companies will support Blu-Ray.  I'm not sure how valid the post is, though. Sonic3KMaster 23:19, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes I agree. That's why I'm wondering whether the porn industry themselves have given any hint. Although now that I think about it, the porn industry is most likely to just do both. It doesn't make sense to take sides. Well unless one side give you more money ... Nil Einne 02:31, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Porn industry

message: "The HD DVD format also can be applied to current red laser DVDs in 5, 9, 15 and 18 GB capacities..."  What does that mean? Is it that the new high-resolution video format can written onto a standard DVD? That would seem obvious, as one can put any data onto a DVD disc, but I doubt that a DVD player would know what to do with it.  
"Blu-ray does not work with red laser discs." Blu-ray video format? physical format? Does "work with" mean "can't be put onto"?  Does "red laser disc" mean a DVD disc?  
If these statements mean something to you, reword them. Otherwise, I don't feel they're adding much to the reader's understanding.
Spiel496 04:19, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cryptic statements in Overview section 

message: There has been speculation thet the audio watermark feature might stop playback of discs containing a home video that is shot with the TV in the background (with audio on) playing a audio watermarked movie (or whatever)... Nil Einne 02:36, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Audio watermark 

message: I removed the following from the list of alternatives
:*Enhanced Versatile Disc - from China
Reason being EVD is an alternative format to DVD, not HD DVD. There is no evidence it supports HD content. It was clearly intended as an alternative (that appears to have failed) to DVD based on the time frame and the design. Note that we don't discuss DVD or VCD as an alternative format. Clearly it doesn't make sense. Nil Einne 02:59, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  EVD 

message: Whats the status of someone DeCSSing HDDVD? any other piracy or DRM circumvention out there? any stuff done by creators of HDDVD that violates fair use?Patcat88 11:27, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm really curious about this also, and it seems odd that it's not included, as it is a major theme in the competing product's article.  Neutral POV seems to require some mention of DRM here, but there's none.  Apparently, HD DVD uses AACS as well, that should probably be included.  Thomas B 17:02, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

text: CSS is only the system used by DVD, so DeAACS would be the more appropriate term. There doesn't seem to be any newsworthy progress on this front as of yet, but I'm sure there are already projects working on cracking it. Furthermore, I'm not sure exactly what information you wanted on piracy, but there doesn't seem to be any of that yet either. --Kamasutra 02:51, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ANYTHING, i read the other bluray article, and this, and there is a total lack of ifno.Patcat88 21:34, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Piracy 

message: The article currently states "The HD DVD format supports 720p, 1080i and 1080p formats." Supplements included on discs have been in 480p and 480i. Is there any practical limit on what format video can be in? Could a 576x432 or a 320x240 video be included, for instance? —Gabbe 14:04, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind. I've found info on this and included it in the article. —Gabbe 19:11, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  video format 

message: It says that 1080p isn't supported by the players as an output... I was looking on the Toshiba site and it sad "native resolution through HDMI" as output... This was for the HD-XA1 and HD-A1... do they not output 1080p?  Or, can this be clarified sourced and are there plans for units that will output 1080p... and why the limitation?  I think the article should be more clear on this. gren グレン 10:15, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Neither is 1080p capable, see  —Gabbe 22:46, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

text: None of the players output 1080p, but as they output 1080i@60, all the information from the 1080p@24 image is being sent, all that is needed is a good deinterlacer and the image is reconstructed with the full 1080p image. Most HDTV's contain a deinterlacer that can do this. It is interesting to note that the samsung blu-ray player also produces 1080i @ 60 output, but they added a deinterlacer chip to the player to convert back to 1080p before it leaves the player, so they could claim 1080p in their marketing --Windsok 14:40, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Player output 

message: In your iHD section, there is more said about BD-J than iHD, why is so much space being spent on the opposing format's interactivity layer? Also, the statement about the BD menus being "more seamless" does not appear NPOV, as well as being factually incorrect. None of the BD titles currently out use BD-J at all, they're all using BD-MV. See . BD-MV is just an extension of normal DVD navigation. Bkilian 21:53, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think what current titles use is relevant to BD-J being mentioned unless you're implying that BD-MV should be mentioned as well, but I agree with the rest you've said. The section should only talk about BD-J (or BD-MV) when in direct comparison to iHD. --Kamasutra 10:02, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  BD-J 

message: considering i can go down to the neighborhood Best Buy and pick up a player and a few discs, can it really be called "next-generation" anymore? Paul Irwin 19:03, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: next-generation?

message: Anyone got any stats/info on the success of this format up until now? I know its proponents have been hailing it as a disruptive technology but I'm yet to see anything remotely disruptive about this or Blu-Ray. One way or the other, it's worth including info on the effect that the new formats are having on the DVD market. Jamyskis Whisper, Contribs  03:40, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Videoscan released a report recently which gives HD-DVD currently an 11:1 sales advantage over Blu-Ray, its a private report though, you have to pay to get a copy, so not easy to reference. http://www.thedvdwars.com/index.cfm tracks HD-DVD vs Blu-Ray sales for amazon.com --Windsok 15:08, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Success/failure? 

message: what about the three layer thing? 1 dvd layer and 2 hddvd layers on the same disk? hopefully noone's going to be a cock and delete this this time.
: Sign your posts!  And watch your language.  This format will be very difficult and expensive to manufacture.  1 DVD and 1 HD DVD layer is practical, but the HD DVD title would be limited in capacity.  Tvaughan1 17:48, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  no, seriously 

message: Which of my rights does it manage? Nothing, unless manage means wrest. So I will rename it to "Digital Restriction Management" if nobody complains, because this describes much better and unmistakable what it suppose to do. --Wall unit 08:39, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The "rights" DRM refers to are the ones of the owner(s) of the intellectual property, not of the consumer. Clearly the opposite perspectives will yield opposite interpretations, so both are correct. However, don't be surprised if someone reverts your change eventually.  --Kamasutra 18:27, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Digital Right Management 

message: The HD-DVD promotion group keeps an updated list of all released, and to be released HD-DVD titles, I have used this as the new reference for the released titles section. It would be good if wikipedians could check the list for updates every now and then, and update the article when needed. The list is located here - http://www.hddvdprg.com/eng/list/list.pdf --Windsok 15:06, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definitive Release List 

message: The text in the overview seems to be anti-Blu Ray and less focused on facts...Experts and Senior Editors kindly see.--The world salutes the Rising Star...Try to be One 02:43, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overview: POV? 

message: I edited the article to remove a statement that claimed that HD DVD is cheaper to manufacture than Blu-Ray disc.  At this point, there is no factual evidence that this is the case.  If you understand how these formats are manufactured, you would know that this is not a valid claim at this point.
A single-layer Blu-Ray disc holds 25 GB... more than enough to hold a Hollywood movie in high definition, especially when advanced codecs are used.  A single layer HD DVD holds 15 GB... also enough to hold a high definition movie.  However, dual-layer HD DVD discs are relatively easy to manufacture, versus single-layer HD DVD.  Two half-thickness substrates must be molded and bonded together in either case.  The information layer can be molded into both substrates, and with the appropriate metalization and bonding processes, a dual-layer HD DVD can be made (just like a dual-layer DVD).  Today it isn't much more expensive to manufacture a DVD-9 than it is a DVD-5.  HD DVD will most likely be the same, as manufacturing techniques and yields improve.
Blu-Ray Discs, on the other hand, consist of a single 1.1 mm thick substrate protected by a 0.1 mm thick "cover layer".  Thicker substrates are easier to mold accurately... and it takes only one injection molding machine per manufacturing line (as opposed to 2 IM machines per DVD or HD DVD line).  Dual-layer Blu-Ray discs require a more exotic and difficult photopolymer process to manufacture, and yields will be lower (and costs much higher) than for single-layer Blu-Ray Disc manufacturing.  However, single-layer Blu-Ray discs have more than enough capacity for most purposes.  So we may see this market situation continuing... Single-layer Blu-Ray discs competing against dual-layer HD DVD.  25 GB vs. 30 GB.  If this continues to be the case, and if the spin-coating process for the 0.1 mm thick cover layer on Blu-Ray discs is as cheap and reliable as it should be, Blu-Ray discs may be cheaper to manufacture than HD DVD.  This is also due to the fact that only one glass master and one stamper would be required for a single layer Blu-Ray Disc, while 2 masters and 2 stampers are required for each HD DVD title.
But it remains to be seen... this story is just starting to unfold.  Real, reliable financial data will be hard to come by anyhow.  Both formats must be "sponsored" to some extent, as manufacturers seek to establish early market share.  In any case, I would recommend that we hold off making any definitive statements on manufacturing costs of HD DVD versus Blu-Ray Disc.  Tvaughan1 18:13, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I realize the talk page isn't exactly a vote, but I want to throw my full support behind the paragraphs above. Any treatment of cost comparisons must be able to address the points Tvaughan1 just raised, or else the comparison is invalid. Snacky 00:38, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Manufacturing costs / efficiency versus Blu-Ray disc 

message: After participating in reformatting articles like the Laserdisc and reading the blu-ray article, it is my strong opinion that this article is in desperate need of some attention by more than just HD DVD Supporters.  With this in mind, I would like to start this discussion regarding how to go about it.
It is my intent to bring this article inlife to the format used in the Laserdisc artcle by shuffling around current content so they fit into hardware and software areas of the HD DVD format, specifically:
*Merging, sorting, and renaming content from "Digital Rights Management", "Interactive Content" under a Software section.
*Merging, sorting, and renaming  "Specifications", "Common Disc Structure", "Laser", "First released players" under a Hardware" section
Mind you, this is just a very rough plan and not set in stone. I have in mind but since it is a major one, I would like to have input from other major editors to make sure that our intents do not conflict.  If there is no opposition (via my or this talk page) I will go through with it by Saturday, November 25.--Kenn Caesius 16:25, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  November 2006 Article reformat discussion 

message: A few technical specifications are listed in the table, but it isn't described in detail elsewhere in the article.  Is it a standard DVD-ROM disk authored with advanced compression codecs for use only in HD-DVD players, or is it an attempt at creating a disk playable on both types of players? BigE1977 16:23, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am very unsure but it does look like a standard DVD with the High def (h264/mp4/divx/etc) compression. I would really like someone to expand on this and also does Blu-ray support this? --64.240.163.221 00:13, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This refers to an HD DVD title that is written to a standard DVD.  The DVD player must be able to play back the DVD at 3X the nominal DVD transfer rate , in order to be able to play the HD DVD title on the disc.  Of course, the proper software and decoders must also be present.  The nominal playback rate for a standard DVD-ROM is 10.08 Mb/sec, not 11.08 as shown in this table.  I'll correct this now. Tvaughan1 01:03, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that while the video spec is 10.08 MB/sec, the drive transfer rate is spec'd at 11.08 MB/sec. I'm not sure which one belongs in the table, but I just wanted to point out this possible source of confusion. Spiel496 06:21, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

text: So it is using the mp4 compression tech on a standard DVD? How many minutes would a current DVD be able to hold on a standard double sided disc with this compression tech? Could it hold all 3 lord of the ring movies on one disc? Does Blu-ray support this?--64.240.163.221 02:22, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello?--64.240.163.221 18:10, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Is this thing on??--64.240.163.221 18:26, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Testing testing... 1...2...3... does anyone have an answer for above?--64.240.163.221 01:00, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I answered this here. Hope it helps...J.delanoy 16:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks64.240.163.221 04:12, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: What is 3x DVD ROM?

message: I don't think it's fair to use a blanket statement "All movie titles released so far have had the feature encoded in 1080p" and then provide no reference to show this is true. Unless someone can verify that EVERY HD-DVD movie ever released has had the feature encoded in 1080p this statement needs to be changed. Also the sentence needs to have a clarification added, like "All HD-DVD movie titles released so far have had the feature encoded in 1080p". It's a bit vague about exactly what movies are encoded at 1080p. I'll fix it up myself in a few days if someone hasn't already. Happy 2007, from Australia!  Pretender2j 15:17, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please verify 

message: 68.102.100.240 replaced word exploit in the title of and in the text of the subsection with "fair use fix". It is not comprehensive because it could be used for other purposes other than fair use eg. backing up DVDs. I think replacing it with what it was, "exploit", or using something else such as "AACS key decryption code" (just some words I strung together). It exploits a vunerability to decrypt a key. Apartmento 12:03, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What does anyone else  think? Apartmento 12:06, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've been bold. I've done it. I've changed it to Advanced Access Content System#Muslix's exploit Apartmento 12:44, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "muslix64 fair use fix" not good sub-section name 

message: Some people keep changing articles with no proof.  Stop it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dominiward (talk • contribs) 15:13, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blu Ray fanboy stay out 

message: It's gone ? Can someone tell me why ?
:This appears to be the result of vandalism. Hopefully, AntiVandalBot or another bot will be able to recover the article. J.delanoy 16:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I added something. Can someone make it legible? I don't have time to do it myself. See the note here. Hope someone can restore it.J.delanoy 17:23, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

text: See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of HD DVD releases. NoSeptember 00:32, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  yeah, I didn't notice that.... oops. J.delanoy 22:07, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What happen to the List of HD DVD releases ? 

message: People continue to remove the sentence 'However console add-ons of this type are traditionally (and notoriously) relatively unsuccessful due to poor sales.' saying that the addon is selling well. I contend that when put into perspective it is not 'selling well', not selling poorly just not well. With 10.5 million Xbox360's sold 1 and 'more than' 100,000 addons sold the attach rate is quite small for something that is supposedly 'selling well'. The maths (I'll use 150,000 to be generous) 150,000 / 10,500,000 * 100 = 1.4%. With pre-release claims from Microsoft that they would achive a 30% attach rate the current figures are less than good. Hense, I will be reverting the deletion of the sentence. Pretender2j 15:30, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You will have to provide a source for you comment, especially the "notorious" part.  The HD-DVD add on represents almost half the sales of HD-DVDs drives, so it is very successful. This is an article about HD DVD, not about Xbox360 attach rates. Daniel.Cardenas 21:09, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  When it says that they aren't selling well, Pretender2j is talking about the add-on as opposed to projected sales of the add-on. The fact that it has made roughly 5% of the projected sales means that, even if it is the best-selling HD DVD drive, it is not, by any means, doing "well". Pretender2j, then, is correct in saying what he did if he can find an article to cite about it. J.delanoy 22:13, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As I said above, this is an article about HD-DVD, so it is doing very well in the only context that matters to this article.  Daniel.Cardenas 22:35, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You all seem to be forgetting that the 360 HD DVD drive has only been available for about 3 months, and even then it hasn't been released worldwide yet. Its short sighted to declare that the attachment rate is low and thus the add-on hasn't been successful, when the availability is limited and its only recently been released. There are other problems with the sentence anyway: firstly, theres no citation. Secondly, how can you say this type of console add-on has been unsuccessful in the past when the 360 HD DVD add-on is the first of its type? There haven't been any other console add-ons (that I know of anyway) that are dedicated movie players; other add-ons in the past had the ability to play different games (Sega 32X, Sega CD, Jaguar CD, 64DD), not movies. I won't remove this again until I see what everyone else thinks, though I'll tag it with a 'cite needed' for now.58.169.6.1 00:18, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Unless you can find a reference for the claim that "console add-ons of this type are traditionally (and notoriously) relatively unsuccessful due to poor sales" I think such a statement should be removed on sight. Nil Einne 12:39, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Status of Xbox360 HD DVD addon 

message: 3x DVD is just the name for HD DVD content on a regular DVD, it is not a separate format and thus it should not be listed on the comparison table of formats as it just causes confusion. Ray andrew 07:17, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove 3x DVD from comparison table 

message: :In that case, the compromised players could still be used to break old titles but not newer releases as they would be released without encryption keys for the compromised software players requiring hackers to break other players. The latter alternative is not a desirable option, because it would result in legitimate users of compromised players being forced to upgrade or replace their player software in order to view new titles.
There is no reference for this. The previous actions and words of the publishers etc suggest to me that they don't really care and indeed, this was one of the primary reasons they included AACS. Therefore, IMHO the undesirable part should be sourced or removed. It may be undesirable from a consumer or software player vendor's POV but I'm doubtful publishers etc care Nil Einne 04:52, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not desirable 

message: I haven't seen talk of this disc being in the specs. Does anyone have a cite for this?  65.13.151.42 06:37, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's in the spec, "Initial HD DVD-ROM physical format specifications (version 1.0) were released in 2004 to define 12 cm single (SL) and dual-layer (DL) discs storing 15 GB per layer in single (SS) and double-sided (DS) configurations". Its definitly feasible too as evidenced by combo disks, you would just need to glue two hd halves together. --Ray andrew 06:50, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I see that it says double-sided in the specs but in that link it only refers to combo DVD/HD DVD. I guess it would be possible since they have Total HD discs out there but I was curious if there was any company working on double sided HD DVD or if it's still in the realm of consumer speculation like 100GB BD-ROMs and 51GB HD DVD.166.214.162.79 21:00, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  To be honest, I'm somewhat doubtful anyone will bother much with double sided for the same reason no one bothered with double sided DVDs. Most drives don't support reading both sides so you need to flip the disc. Ergo, there is limited advantage to double sided versus 2 discs from a consumer POV. And consumers generally speaking don't like to flip or change discs. Ergo no one is going to bother with either double sided or two discs. As a recordable media, perhaps it will happen to some extent like with DVD-RAM but most will almost definitely be single sided. However as I understand it, given the way HD DVD is designed, there is absolutely no reason why you can't have double sided discs Nil Einne 12:33, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Double Sided Dual Layered HD DVD