With the HD-DVD and Blue-ray formats duking it out in the background, we look at HD-DVD technology and 12 HD-DVD products. Blue-ray is next.

Here's a question - what is the benefit of 1080p output from the A20? Even in the case of 1080p media output through a 1080i interface, the conversion should be lossless, no?

So it should be: 1080p(media)->1080i(output-weave)->1080i(input-deweave)->1008p(display). In other words, you can fit a 1080p24 (24hz) signal entirely within a 1080i(60hz) output signal with no loss of signal, assuming your TV is 1080p and can do a non-cheesy de-interlacing of an input 1080i signal, from what I understand.

The section on AACS is wrong: AACS does not mandate any particular version of HDMI. All versions of HDMI support HDCP, and that is what AACS requires on digital video connections.

HDMI 1.3 gets you nothing over 1.2 in this scenario: 1.2 carries all the audio channels you need as LPCM.

Actually, the Microsoft Xbox HD-DVD player can be mounted internally inside a PC. All you need is a mini atapi port adapter, like this
http://www.colordrives.com/cd-rom% [...] pter-1.jpg

Your Wrong too. HDMI 1.2 allows for SACD to be transimetted over HDMI.

HDMI 1.1 can carry all the LPCM sound. (up to 7.1)

For watching Blu-Ray or HD-DVD. heres a FACT. YOU DO NOT NEED HDMI 1.3. NO NEED.

HDMI 1.1 supports and uses HDCP, which gives you... Drum Beat. 1080P.

Plus For next gen audio, The revicer in 90% of cases will NOT BE ALLOWED to Decoded Dobly Digital+, or DTS-MA. It will have to be done on the player, and then sent via PCM.,

This article had 3 authors, and not one of the caught that.

Just go to avsforums. at least people their KNOW what they are taking about. And most of them dont get paid for it.

Unfortunately that is a very large assumption. Virtually no TV can do "non-cheesy" deinterlacing of 1080i. Most don't even try. Of the ones that do, most of them end up displaying 1080p/60 rather than 1080p/24 or 1080p/48, which is not good at all.

It gets even worse when you have a source that was shot on hi-def video rather than film. No that many TVs can do a good job of distinguishing between 1080i video and 1080i film, and, of those that can, not many will do proper per-pixel motion-adaptive deinterlacing on video sources.

It's worse still if you have to deal with 50Hz as well as 60Hz sources, but as far as I know all hi-def disc content will be 60Hz even in Europe, so we are at least spared that.

Oh, and I second all the points about HDMI versions. HDMI 1.3 may become important for lossless surround audio formats, but that's all. HDCP is perfectly happy over HDMI 1.1. 1.3 will also eventually become important for resolutions beyond 1920x1080 or video signal formats with > 8 bits per colour channel, but that's years away, and any present-day players won't be able to decode the discs by then.

How was I wrong exactly? I said "in this scenario", and SACD has nothing to do with this scenario. (Plus it should be "you're", not "your" ).

How was I wrong exactly? I said "in this scenario", and SACD has nothing to do with this scenario. (Plus it should be "you're", not "your" ).

You don't need HDMI 1.2.

All you need is HDMI 1.1.

How can I check what version of HDMI connection my HDTV supports? I can't find it in the manual.

The "Best Buy"?

NONE OF THE ABOVE!

I cannot fathom why anyone would want to spend the outrageous sums charged for either of these technologies. Unless you enjoy being on the "bleeding edge" and paying for the privilege of having even more DRM restrictions forced upon you.

No thanks!