Actually, The PS3 is one of the Best Bluray Players out at the Moment, and considered a bargain. It use HDMI Ver. 1.3, can play all the latest Java niceties on BD Movies Discs, very fast response and has the abilty to output Full 1080p without upscaling or compressing image or audio.
Review from AVGuide link - http://www.avguide.com/products/product-3766/ [Aside from the lack of DVD conversion and automatic disc-format detection, I could find little to fault in the PS3's performance as a Blu-ray player. Picture and sound quality were first-rate (with a few caveats on DVD playback), and the console was far more responsive than other high-def players in my experience. At nearly half the price of the next most expensive Blu-ray player (unless you fall prey to scalpers), this black beauty is one hell of a deal]
PS3 has 1.3 hardware, but 1.2 software. Even if you had a 1.3 compliant display (unlikely, as there are very few of them out there) you are not using HDMI 1.3 on your display.
Second, as was recently admitted to by the BD assoc, no devices currently support Java. If you want to claim that BD has all these Java "niceties", then name one title that uses it.
I have both a PS3 and a 360 add on. The PS3 is a nice player, so is the 360 add on. The only problem I have had with the 360 is that when FF and RW it takes a little longer than I would like to return to play. Even though all the claims of the BD fans about better studio support, there are very few BD exclusives that make me favor BD. I have 18 HD DVD, 2 Blu-Ray. When my GF saw Big Fish she wanted it (not knowing the diff between HD DVD and Blu-Ray), so I bought it for her birth day. I also picked up Casino Royale for myself. I am still deciding if I want to get POTC I/II. PQ is great on both. AQ is great on both. But HD DVD has movies that I want now, not promised (and delayed over, and over, and over) from studios like FOX or Disney. The capacity of BD has not made one bit of difference (OK, so you could have had Planet Earth on 3 discs rather than 4 using BD50 over HD30 - but it does not make a difference for a regular movie), and the higher bandwith of BD only makes a difference for MPEG2, which has proven () to be wonderful for titles such as The 5th Element. But HD has benefits such as HDi (remember, no Java for BD), network connectivity, required decoding of advanced audio codecs, required managed copy, persistent storage, and more importantly to the regular guy, price. But BD has the lead in DRM, not only does BD support AACS like HD, but they have another layer of DRM on top of it.
Personally, I think that there will not be a winner, we will end up with something similar to DVD+-RW that we have now. I doubt we will have a pure download mechanism like a lot of techno-philes think. People will still want a physical medium like a disk to burn and cary around with them for a permanent record (do you want to download 30GB because you are on a different device?).
In the end, quit being a fanboy and read the actual doccumentation. What you think you have, is not what you do have.
"Actually, The PS3 is one of the Best Bluray Players out at the Moment, and considered a bargain."
A bargain is an understatement, it's nearly half the cost of Sony's BDPS1, and still cheaper than the cheapest stand-alone Blu-Ray player.
However HD-DVD is even cheaper! Last week, Futureshop (here in Canada) had the HD-A2 for $399CDN, and the HD-A20 for $569CDN, verses $699CDN for the PS3 + $39CDN for the remote control, or $1299CDN for the Sony BDPS1! The cheapest stand-alone Blu-Ray player is the Samsung BDP1200 for $999CDN.
A consumer would need a lot of faith in the Blu-Ray standard to pay $999 for a stand-alone Blu-Ray player when an HD-DVD player can be had for $399CDN. I'm still holding out until a winner, but that $399CDN price tag was mighty tempting!
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Ang @ May 18th 2007 1:26AM
Get Your Facts Right.
Actually, The PS3 is one of the Best Bluray Players out at the Moment, and considered a bargain.
It use HDMI Ver. 1.3, can play all the latest Java niceties on BD Movies Discs, very fast response and has the abilty to output Full 1080p without upscaling or compressing image or audio.
Review from AVGuide link - http://www.avguide.com/products/product-3766/ [Aside from the lack of DVD conversion and automatic disc-format detection, I could find little to fault in the PS3's performance as a Blu-ray player. Picture and sound quality were first-rate (with a few caveats on DVD playback), and the console was far more responsive than other high-def players in my experience. At nearly half the price of the next most expensive Blu-ray player (unless you fall prey to scalpers), this black beauty is one hell of a deal]
cs32 @ May 18th 2007 3:26AM
No, get your facts right
PS3 has 1.3 hardware, but 1.2 software. Even if you had a 1.3 compliant display (unlikely, as there are very few of them out there) you are not using HDMI 1.3 on your display.
Second, as was recently admitted to by the BD assoc, no devices currently support Java. If you want to claim that BD has all these Java "niceties", then name one title that uses it.
I have both a PS3 and a 360 add on. The PS3 is a nice player, so is the 360 add on. The only problem I have had with the 360 is that when FF and RW it takes a little longer than I would like to return to play. Even though all the claims of the BD fans about better studio support, there are very few BD exclusives that make me favor BD. I have 18 HD DVD, 2 Blu-Ray. When my GF saw Big Fish she wanted it (not knowing the diff between HD DVD and Blu-Ray), so I bought it for her birth day. I also picked up Casino Royale for myself. I am still deciding if I want to get POTC I/II. PQ is great on both. AQ is great on both. But HD DVD has movies that I want now, not promised (and delayed over, and over, and over) from studios like FOX or Disney. The capacity of BD has not made one bit of difference (OK, so you could have had Planet Earth on 3 discs rather than 4 using BD50 over HD30 - but it does not make a difference for a regular movie), and the higher bandwith of BD only makes a difference for MPEG2, which has proven () to be wonderful for titles such as The 5th Element. But HD has benefits such as HDi (remember, no Java for BD), network connectivity, required decoding of advanced audio codecs, required managed copy, persistent storage, and more importantly to the regular guy, price. But BD has the lead in DRM, not only does BD support AACS like HD, but they have another layer of DRM on top of it.
Personally, I think that there will not be a winner, we will end up with something similar to DVD+-RW that we have now. I doubt we will have a pure download mechanism like a lot of techno-philes think. People will still want a physical medium like a disk to burn and cary around with them for a permanent record (do you want to download 30GB because you are on a different device?).
In the end, quit being a fanboy and read the actual doccumentation. What you think you have, is not what you do have.
Evan @ May 18th 2007 9:36AM
"Actually, The PS3 is one of the Best Bluray Players out at the Moment, and considered a bargain."
A bargain is an understatement, it's nearly half the cost of Sony's BDPS1, and still cheaper than the cheapest stand-alone Blu-Ray player.
However HD-DVD is even cheaper! Last week, Futureshop (here in Canada) had the HD-A2 for $399CDN, and the HD-A20 for $569CDN, verses $699CDN for the PS3 + $39CDN for the remote control, or $1299CDN for the Sony BDPS1! The cheapest stand-alone Blu-Ray player is the Samsung BDP1200 for $999CDN.
A consumer would need a lot of faith in the Blu-Ray standard to pay $999 for a stand-alone Blu-Ray player when an HD-DVD player can be had for $399CDN. I'm still holding out until a winner, but that $399CDN price tag was mighty tempting!
Ang @ May 28th 2007 3:07AM
Firmware 1.80 has just come out - enough said about HDMI 1.3 and it will get better.
Like I said the PS3 is considered a bargain.