pc dvd vs. standalone

[cptpuget]

with the prices of standalone dvd players dropping below $200US is there still any advantage to buying a dvd rom and using a pc to view dvd's on tv? any thoughts appreciated.....

[xippo@work]

You said it. If you can afford to purchase a DVD for your home theatre system, do it. It is still inevitable that you will need a dvd rom drive for your pc, it is just a matter of time before you buy one. Some games and programs come out on dvd now.

I use my dvd from my puter to watch movies on my home theatre system, but only because I couldn't justify the expense of the home theatre dvd player. Take into account that the cable you run from the computer to your receiver can be very expensive. I paid upwards of $100 for a high quality 20 foot cable. Also, you don't have a remote on the pc.

xippo

[ahartman]

I agree with xippo - pony up for the standalone DVD player. They're practically giving them away now... Many manufacturers are giving away 3-5 free DVDs which nearly makes up the price of the player anyway...

I would imagine you have much smoother playback, better audio options and something you can easily move when it comes time to rearrange the furniture. Also, you will pay quite a bit for the cable (esp. if your comp. is in another room).

[Corwin_Brute]

Unless you have, like I do, a 15" TV and a 22" monitor...

------------------
Corwin the Brute

[xippo@work]

I can tell where your priorities reside Corwin_Brute.

lol

[CrazyBee]

Actually.. I have found that my software DVD player has better picture than a stand-alone players. Of theones i have seen at Best Buy and Circuit City and the like.

Also, I get Dolby Digital out from my SB Live! and have just as many audio options with the SB Live! and WinDVD 2000 as with a standalone player.

But, yes, the remote issue does suck. BUT, there is a remedy. One can get an adapter and a program that will accept remote control signals and use that to control the DVD player.

[xortam]

You'd have to compare PC-DVD with a progressive scan stand-alone DVD player and those cost over $1000. Most stand-alone DVD players produce an interlaced signal which produces an inferior image.

[cptpuget]

xortam - your reply intrigues me. are there differences between types of players? can someone elaborate on this further?? i'm not adverse to going with pc dvd despite the remote, but with stand-alone players at about $200 and almost $100 for a pc dvd it seems a pretty close call. maybe comparing pc dvd and a cheap stand-alone player is apples and oranges... with all the dvd talk on this forum, i know the answer is here somewhere. maybe someone with knowledge of both dvd types can help me sort this out before i make a mistake.... tks

[Chris B]

In my humble oppinion you´d be better of buying a stand-alone dvd player, especially if you plan to use it in a home theater system.

A high-end stand-alone player Is more expensive than the PC-DVD players, but if supperior sound and image quality is more important than the price, go for the stand-alone model.

Don´t buy the cheapest model available though. The DVD is the backbone of the entire system. So if you buy an inferrior DVD player it doesn´t matter how good the rest of you system is... it won´t make up for a poor quality DVD player.

[g400man]

No No No No No !!!

The image quality of DVD playback on a PC is technically superior to stand alone domestic players. This is because it produces a progressive scan image, not interlaced, and can produce very high, customised, screen resolutions. Therefore, everyone with a projector TV, which can usually run at resolutions above 1280X960 and accept RGB siganals, prefers to run a HTPC (Home Theatre PC) because the image quality is so much better. This is also why people pay over $1000 for stand-alone DVD players with progressive scan

You can find much more information at www.avsforum.com, if you go to their HTPC forum. There you will find that the toprated video card for DVD playback is ........... the Matrox G400!

Also see the online DVD Faq at various sites.

[mynx]

cptpuget goto the stores a check out the picture quality of the cheaper dvd players vs the better ones. There is a reason they are cheaper. Also base your choice on the tv you have or plan to get soon. Also what type of connection does your tv have? Getting an expensive player that outperforms your tv is a waste of money. Also keep in mind the CPU speed plays a part. Is someone likely to want to use the computer while a movie is playing.
I use my computer because I won't by a dvd player until 1) they have a digital video out interface, 2) they support dvd audio, 3) they support HDTV. I don't want to buy something that will be obsolete next year.
My computer already does that

[xortam]

cptpuget, g400man has expanded on the differences. Let me know if its still unclear.

g400man, nice plug for AVS. Mark Rejhon is 'da man. I understand that the G400 has fallen to the GeForce recently over there. The G400 had been king for a while since it took that title from the ATI Rage Fury.

The DVD-player (whether in your PC or stand-alone) is one device among the entire HT system. The chain is only as strong as its weakest link. You also need to look at the TV/Projector capability, audio decoder (preferably DD or DTS), and the quality of all cables/interconnects not to mention amps, speakers, room acoustics and lighting, etc. PC-DVD produces clearly better video (no difference in audio) than a non-progressive stand-alone DVD player but you won't appreciate the difference if your other components are crippling the signals or your viewing only a small image size.

mynx, Hollywood is preventing/perverting a lot of these technologies in order to protect their properties. Might not have to wait a whole lot longer for DVDHD (I think that's what they're calling HDTV DVDs). DVD Audio is reportedly only going to support analog output (6 channel) ... some threaten a boycott of this approach (also more audio decoding equipment and preamps to buy). HDTV is very slow in getting adopted. You can't even properly interconnect some of these devices yet. And how about a digital display for that digital video signal and ... don't get me started.

[Bond]

g400man has it pretty much spot on. A properly configured HTPC provides an image quality way superior to almost any stand alone DVD-player. That is if you connect your HTPC to your high resolution capable display via VGA/RGB to get true progressive scan video. Remember, composit and S-video are always interlaced.
It is not uncommon that modern regular front wiev (CRT) TV set's has RGB inputs. But since there are a various types of the RGB one has to be sure of what type is there before plugging in the HTPC. Remember, RGB could both be interlaced and non-interlaced. Cheaper TV-sets with RGB-inputs is usually limited to interlaced video and has a scaning frequensy of around 15 kHz. To be able to display high resolution video the RGB has to be named something like "progressive scan compatible" and specified to support > 31.5 kHz to be able to display computer resolutions, (640x480@60 Hz requires a bandwith of 28.8 kHz (480*60)). Even if your TV set has a VGA port be careful when selecting resolution and refresh rate.
The real deal is of course a highend projector wieved at 1.5 times the screen size! http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/Forum12/HTML/001066.html

xortam -
Actually, the preferred choise between the G400 and the GeForce depends of what type of display you have got. Some CRT projectors owners finds the GeForce to provide a slightly sharper image, but not by much. If you have a RPTV the prefered choise is stil the G400 because it provides more flexibility over the GeForce when it comes to creating custom resolutions, refresh rates and video timings. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/Forum12/HTML/001809.html
Over at http://www.avsforum.com , Mark J Foster has shown a lot of knowledge in creating custom video timings for the G400. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/Forum12/HTML/000910.html (3 pages)

thank you // Bond

[xortam]

Thanks for the links Bond. Been trying to read more of the postings over there. Have you delved into HDTV yet? I've got a BUD and am ready to replace/augment my Monty 90 w/ the 4DTV box now that the HDTV decoder (HDD-200) is making its way into Canada (here in the U.S. soon). I don't have room for a FPTV and will probably soon purchase a roughly 50" RPTV. Still debating about wide-screen vs. "standard" due to the burn-in issue and current transmissions. Probably go for the wide-screen and hope the grey-scale trimming will help the tubes last a bit longer. Kinda like the Panasonic PT-56WXF95 since its the only one that can handle 720p as well as 1080i and is a good match for the HDD-200 (no terrestrial though, for what that's worth). Any suggestions? Guess I need to do some more reading and posting over at AVS.