Partisans of these platforms can argue all day about which is better. But the competitors have some things in common. Windows computers and Apple Macintoshes can both display the same photos and office documents, and play the same MP3 songs and YouTube videos. BlackBerrys and Treos can receive the same emails and call the same phone numbers.

It isn’t perfect. There are some files that don’t play well across platforms. But most common content does.

Yet there’s another technology competition that doesn’t share content well and offers few, if any, benefits to consumers. It’s the fight among two groups of technology companies and movie studios to sell a successor to the DVD. Each has developed a new type of disc that has the ability to show movies in high definition. To my eye, the pictures they deliver are identical.

Neither of these competing new discs, called Blu-ray and HD-DVD, works in current DVD players. They require very expensive new players, and the new players can’t handle both new disc formats, only one or the other.

Adding to the annoyance: Some movie studios release movies only in one of the two formats. Paramount and Warner Brothers support both formats, but Universal supports only HD-DVD, and Disney, Fox and Sony only Blu-ray.

So, in order to be sure you can play any movie released as a high-definition disc, you would have to replace your old DVD player with two new, much costlier players. It would be like having to buy separate TV sets to watch different networks’ programs.

Now, however, one gutsy company, LG Electronics, of Korea, a longtime member of the Blu-ray camp, has broken ranks and introduced a new combo player that can handle three formats: Blu-ray, HD-DVD, and regular old DVDs. It’s called the BH100 Super Multi Blue.

I’ve tested this combo player and found that it plays both new formats, as well as regular DVDs, just fine. But it’s more expensive than most single-format players and has some serious limitations when navigating through the menus on HD-DVD titles. For now, I can only recommend it for serious videophiles with deep pockets, but I’m hoping it’s the start of a trend that will end the foolish war.

The BH100 costs $1,200. That’s vastly more expensive than the newest DVD players, which, for less than $100, can take a regular DVD and “upscale” it so it looks better on a high-definition set. But that $1,200 isn’t so outrageous if you compare it with the price of buying two separate Blu-ray and HD-DVD players, which can reach or exceed $1,000 total. And the new LG takes up only one input on your TV, occupies less space on your component shelf and requires just one remote control.

I tested the LG combo player on my high-definition TV with this year’s Oscar-winning best picture, “The Departed,” and with “Superman Returns,” each of which is available in both of the new formats, as well as on DVD.

All played perfectly. The picture looked great in both formats and was noticeably better than an upscaled DVD image, which the LG unit also can produce. The LG outputs both new formats in a high, but grossly overhyped, resolution called “1080p.”

But the BH100 did a much better job with the Blu-ray discs than with the HD-DVD titles. That’s because while the combo player can play HD-DVD movies perfectly, it can’t display the HD-DVD discs’ menus for selecting scenes or accessing special features.

These menus usually offer the title and a photo to identify a scene, and the title and/or a description of the special feature. But on the LG BH100, the HD-DVD menus have no pictures, titles, or descriptions and look nothing like the original. They only identify scenes by number and duration. That makes it hard to find, say, the deleted scenes from “The Departed,” or the documentaries on the Superman disc.

The BH100 was based on a Blu-ray-only player and lacks the special chips HD-DVD players use to display the menus properly. LG had to concoct its own rudimentary replacements for those menus. The company says a future combo model could include the chips and thus display the HD-DVD menus as well as it does the Blu-ray menus, but it hasn’t decided whether to make such a product.

One reason for that decision may be the competing approach to solving the stupid disc war. Warner Brothers is working on a combo disc, instead of a combo player. This disc would hold both the Blu-ray and HD-DVD versions of a movie, so you could pop it into whichever type of player you own.

Until the electronics and movie companies support universal high-definition players and/or universal high-definition discs, I don’t recommend that most people invest in either technology. Why prolong a war that’s bad for consumers?

Email me at mossberg@wsj.com. See video versions of my reviews at wsj.com/mossbergvideo.

But, while YouTube is sometimes seen as synonymous with the Internet video revolution, there is a lot more to Web video. In fact, some of the most interesting video on the Web isn’t even the type of stuff that’s most popular on YouTube — short, one-off clips.

In various corners of the Web, people are producing real, episodic TV shows, including news, drama and comedy — sometimes with real actors and professional production values. Some of these longer-form, episodic shows are called video blogs, or vlogs, but others simply call themselves shows. Instead of lasting just a few minutes, they can run up to half an hour. These programs have more in common with regular broadcast and cable shows than with those emailed clips.

One of these days, a real hit show will emerge on the Web.

To be sure, such Web TV shows aren’t brand new. Ever since Apple began offering free video blogs on its iTunes store, people have been making them. One of the first to achieve popularity was a cheeky daily newscast called “Rocketboom,” which made a star of its first host, Amanda Congdon, who has moved to the ABC News Web site. (”Rocketboom” continues with another host.) Another was a comedy called “Tiki Bar TV.”

But the trend has accelerated and deepened lately, and a number of interesting sites have sprung up. My favorite is blip.tv, run by a team made up of a former systems administrator for the NHL, and a former TV news reporter and producer. Blip.tv (not to be confused with a similar-sounding site called bliptv.com) hosts a bunch of these new Web TV series, and also helps them attract funding, sponsors and advertisers. Anyone can upload a show.

One of my favorite shows available on blip.tv is called “Goodnight Burbank,” a comedy series about the squabbling that goes on behind the scenes at a local TV news show. Another is “Alive in Baghdad,” news reports from Americans and Iraqis on how the war affects average Iraqis. “Cube News 1″ is a series about life in the office cubicle. Other shows I’ve enjoyed on blip.tv include “HotRoast,” “The Ministry of Unknown Science” and “Josh Leo.”

Each show on blip.tv is accompanied by a profile page, comments from viewers and sometimes a blog. Many aren’t exclusive to the site. Some have their own Web sites, and episodes can also be found on YouTube and downloaded from iTunes and other sites. In fact, blip.tv provides links that make it easy to subscribe to shows on iTunes and other sites. But blip.tv does a good job of gathering a whole bunch of these Web TV series in one location.

Another good place to find these kinds of video blogs and Web TV series is at the iTunes Store. Unlike the music, commercial-TV shows and movies that Apple sells there, these Web video series are free. And because they are on iTunes, you can easily download them for viewing on a Windows or Macintosh computer, or on an iPod. You can even watch them on a real TV if you plug a computer or iPod into the set, or buy Apple’s forthcoming Apple TV product.

There are way too many Web series and video blogs on iTunes to list here, but if you go to the podcast page in the iTunes store and scroll down to Featured Video Podcasts, you can get an idea of what is available. iTunes includes several Web-only video series produced by the big TV networks, including a fascinating series from ABC called “The Day It Happened,” with historic footage on events such as the Kennedy assassination, the fall of the Berlin Wall and the wedding of Princess Diana.

Another site worth watching is brightcove.com, from a company whose main business is selling the technology for doing Web videos to big media concerns, including Dow Jones & Co., the publisher of this newspaper. But brightcove also hosts Web video from average folks and small outfits. It will soon introduce a feature to allow average users to record video directly to its Web site and then mix it, legally, with clips licensed from big media companies.

Yet another worthwhile site is Network2.tv, which attempts to aggregate a wide variety of Web videos in one place.

I’ve only scratched the surface of the available video sites, but if you like YouTube, you may love what else is out there.

• Email me at mossberg@wsj.com. See video versions of my reviews at wsj.com/mossbergvideo.

This isn’t Microsoft’s first effort to stop the iPod, but it’s the first for which the software giant is adopting Apple’s own business and design model — where one company makes and controls the hardware, software and online component, and tightly integrates them. The Zune is produced by Microsoft’s Xbox group, which builds game consoles on that same end-to-end principle.

Microsoft’s Zune comes in black, white or brown.

In its first incarnation, the Zune comes in only one version, a big, chunky $249 model that can hold 30 gigabytes of music, videos and photos. I’ve been testing the Zune for the past couple of weeks and comparing it with the most similar of Apple’s six iPod models — the smaller of the two full-size iPods, which also holds 30 gigabytes and also costs $249.

Zune has several nice features the iPod lacks: a larger screen, the ability to exchange songs with other Zunes wirelessly and a built-in FM radio. It solves the worst problem that plagued earlier Microsoft-based music players — frequent failures to synchronize properly music and videos between the players and personal computers. Synchronization on the Zune is smooth and sure.

Also, the Zune player and software have a very good user interface, different from, but in some cases easier to use than, the iPod’s. While it lacks the famous iPod scroll wheel, instead using a common four-way navigation pad, I found song lists easy to navigate on the Zune. It has only a few buttons and is quite intuitive to use. To my ears, it sounded as good as the iPod.

But, this first Zune has too many compromises and missing features to be as good a choice as the iPod for most users. The hardware feels rushed and incomplete. It is 60% larger and 17% heavier than the comparable iPod. It has much worse battery life for music than the iPod or than Microsoft claims — at least two hours less than the iPod’s, in my tests. Despite the larger screen, many album covers look worse than they do on the iPod. And you can’t share music libraries between computers like you can with iTunes.

Zune’s online store offers far fewer songs, just over two million, compared with 3.5 million for the iTunes store. In fact, as of this writing, songs from one of the big labels, Universal, were missing from Zune Marketplace, though Microsoft says it is confident it will have all the major labels when it launches Zune on Tuesday. Also, despite the player’s capability, Zune Marketplace offers none of the TV shows, movies or music videos that iTunes does, and has no audiobooks or podcasts.

Even worse, to buy even a single 99-cent song from the Zune store, you have to purchase blocks of “points” from Microsoft, in increments of at least $5. You can’t just click and have the 99 cents deducted from a credit card, as you can with iTunes. You must first add points to your account, then buy songs with these points. So, even if you are buying only one song, you have to allow Microsoft, one of the world’s richest companies, to hold on to at least $4.01 of your money until you buy another. And the point system is deceptive. Songs are priced at 79 points, which some people might think means 79 cents. But 79 points actually cost 99 cents.

Unlike iTunes, Zune offers subscription plans, where you can get an unlimited numbers of songs for $15 a month. However, Microsoft is de-emphasizing this option and mostly positioning Zune Marketplace as a source of individually purchased songs and albums.

Some consumers may well choose Zune for its big screen, which looks great with photos and videos, for its wireless song swapping, or for its FM-radio capability, which requires a $50 accessory on the iPod. Others may favor Zune because they are as tired of Apple’s dominance in music as some folks are of Microsoft’s dominance in computers.

But Zune has only around 100 accessories at launch, versus 3,000 or more for the iPod. If you have any iPod-specific accessories, they won’t work on the Zune. Also, none of the songs you may have purchased from Apple will play on the Zune, unless you undertake a laborious conversion process. Apple is rumored to be working on an all-new iPod with a screen as large or larger than the Zune’s.

Zune marks an unusual turn for Microsoft. The company is abandoning its favored business model, where it builds software platforms and then lets other companies make a wide variety of products that use that platform. Instead, Microsoft is building and totally controlling the whole chain associated with the product: the hardware, the software and the online music store. Songs sold on Zune Marketplace are intended to play only on the Zune, and Zune players won’t be able to play copy-protected songs bought elsewhere, even at other online stores that use Microsoft music formats.

Microsoft was driven to this approach because its platform model, so successful with personal computers, has failed miserably in the music category. Apple has simply rolled over all the hardware companies and online stores that were built around Microsoft’s previous music system, called “PlaysForSure.”

Zune comes in three colors: black and white, like the comparable iPod, and brown, a daring color for a consumer-electronics device, but one that has become popular in the fashion world. Each model also has a second color on a translucent band around its edge; the brown one is trimmed in green.

Placing the Zune next to the 30-gigabyte iPod provides a strong contrast. The iPod is thin, sleek and elegant looking. The Zune looks big and blocky, sort of like a prototype for a gadget, rather than a finished product. It is longer, thicker and heavier than even the 80-gigabyte iPod, which has more than twice its capacity.

Zune was adapted from a much-praised but slight-selling music player, the Toshiba Gigabeat, in order to get it to market more quickly.

The word “Microsoft” never appears anywhere on the Zune, only the new Zune logo and a cheeky, “Hello from Seattle” in tiny type at the bottom of the back of the device. The Zune’s tag line, evident immediately when you open the box, is “Welcome to the Social,” a phrase meant to stress the device’s wireless song-sharing feature, and to reach out to the Zune’s target market, young music lovers who build social relationships around favorite songs and artists.

But the wireless music-sharing feature on the Zune is heavily compromised, in a way that is bound to annoy the very audience it is targeting. Each song sent to your Zune from another Zune can be played only three times and is available for playing for only three days. After that, it dies and can’t be played again unless you buy it. Even if you play the song only halfway through, or for one minute, that counts as one of your three allowed plays. In fact, in my tests, a song I sent to my assistant’s Zune expired after only two plays, one of which lasted just a few seconds. Microsoft attributed that to a bug that it said would be fixed.

The Zune’s other big plus, the big screen, is similarly compromised. While it is three inches versus 2.5 inches for the iPod’s screen, it uses the same resolution. That combination can make images coarser and grainier. In my tests, on photos and videos, this didn’t matter much, and the Zune did a good job, even automatically switching into horizontal screen mode. But images of album covers often looked fuzzy, grainy and even distorted on the Zune when compared with how they looked on the iPod.

And for a product that’s all about “the Social,” Zune is curiously lacking a very popular iTunes feature — the ability to view and to listen to another user’s music library over a local network. This iTunes feature works in homes, office, college dorms, hotels, and other places, and it functions in mixed groups of Windows and Macintosh computers. But with the new Zune software, you can share your library only with Xbox game consoles, not other computers.

On the plus side, I really liked the interface on the Zune. In some modes, it allows you to do things with fewer clicks than the iPod does. For instance, if you are browsing through music, you don’t have to go back a step to switch from, say, a list of artists to a list of albums. Those choices are arrayed at the top of the screen and can be selected with a sideways push of the navigation pad.

Also, the entire interface is more colorful and visually satisfying than the iPod’s. Lists of albums are accompanied by thumbnails of their covers. Menus zoom in and out, and some are translucent. You can also select your own photo as the wallpaper or background for the device. But, unlike on the iPod, you can’t customize the main menu or go to “Now Playing,” or shuffle all songs with one click.

The Zune software also has a handsome look and feel. And it allows you to “guest synchronize” a Zune on another computer, something iTunes doesn’t allow. You can load songs from someone else’s library onto your Zune without wiping out your own library, though you can’t then transfer those songs back to your own PC.

But battery life on the Zune was very disappointing. Microsoft claims 14 hours of music playback on a single charge with the wireless feature turned off — the same as the comparable iPod — and 13 hours with wireless turned on. But Microsoft bases these claims on strict and unnatural usage conditions, such as never increasing the default volume, playing only one album over and over, and keeping the backlight on for just one second.

I tested the Zune in more normal conditions, shuffling through hundreds of songs, adjusting the volume where needed, skipping or repeating songs occasionally and using a 30-second backlight. In my test, I got just 12 hours and 18 minutes of music playback, versus 14 hours and 44 minutes from an iPod under the same usage pattern. With the wireless turned on, battery life on the Zune was worse — just 10 hours and 12 minutes, even though I didn’t send or receive any songs.

Overall, the iPod and iTunes are still the champs. Still, I expect the Zune to attract some converts and to get better with time. And this kind of competition from a big company with deep pockets and lots of talent is good for consumers in the long run.

Email me at mossberg@wsj.com.