Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Media Data Storage Movies Hardware Entertainment Games

Blu-Ray DVDs Hit 100 GB 349

Posted by Zonk from the that's-a-lot-of-movie dept.
Xesdeeni writes "According to The Register and MacWorld, TDK has unveiled a Blu-Ray DVD with four layers that will hold a whopping 100 GB of data. This is shortly after the previously reported HD-DVD announced three-layer HD-DVD that would hold a "mere" 45 GB. Unfortunately, this is also on the heels of the news that the HD DVD unification talks have stalled."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Blu-Ray DVDs Hit 100 GB More

Blu-Ray DVDs Hit 100 GB

Comments Filter:

  • groovy... (Score:5, Funny)

    by zxnos ( 813588 ) <zxnoss@gmail.com> on Thursday May 19, 2005 @01:16PM (#12580110)
    ...i can now fit my 1/100th of my porn collection on one disk. sweet.
    • ...i can now fit my 1/100th of my * collection on one disk. sweet.

      And rip your heart appart whenever the disc gets scratched :-/
      (That's why I always backup my anime divx's twice)

    • Re:groovy... (Score:5, Funny)

      by rampant mac ( 561036 ) on Thursday May 19, 2005 @01:36PM (#12580369)
      Along the same lines, I was complaining to a co-worker a few days ago about how my Firewire drive was on it's last legs... It's a 100g drive and nearing capacity so I needed to buy a new one anyway.

      He was blown away that I had that many files as it was, and I was about to make a humorous comment about the boatloads of porn I have on it, when a female co-worker walked in...

      "Oh, it's all Photoshop documents that I've done! Some of `em are almost 400 megs each!"

      Except everyone in the office knows I can't draw to save my life. Now she won't even talk to me. :(

      • Re:groovy... (Score:5, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 19, 2005 @01:52PM (#12580525)
        Don't kid yourself... she wouldn't talk to you in the first place..
      • ok, the woman and porn issue came up so here I am... to the rescue. Women don't like porn as a simple demand / supply issue. We supply too much sex so they don't demand anything from porn. They supply almost no sex and the sex they do supply is bad quality so we demand a lot from our porn. But they're clever too... if we stop giving them sex, they just get it from somewhere else and feel in the right too. So how do you solve this dilema? Simple! Fuck'em!

  • Multiple Standards (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bunburyist ( 664958 ) on Thursday May 19, 2005 @01:18PM (#12580136)
    This multiple format business is a mess. Look at the problems with SACD and DVD-A. Nobody is buying them (and if the music industry stopped suing people and promoted those formats that are so much better than downloaded music they would actually make more money because there is new value there.)

    But back to the topic at hand: The industry would benefit more from having ONE SINGLE TRUE UNIFIED STANDARD as opposed to a couple of standards, which would confuse people. The public at large (Joe Sixpack) gets all confused with this 2-format thing. They want to buy a movie and play it, not worry about if this disc will play on their type of player. When we have one unified standard, confusion is reduced, people can just buy and make the industry happy. The the industry focus can be put on actually releasing content and worthwhile stuff, as opposed to teaching consumers that they need a different player for their Fox releases versus some other studio and then wondering why people don't buy any of these confusing and conflicting products.
    • Various elderly friends have just moved to DVD from video for their favourite TV shows. Trying to explain DVD region coding and why DVD's purchased from amazon.co.uk will work, while those from amazon.com won't is bad enough, let alone try and make their player multi-region.
    • " This multiple format business is a mess. Look at the problems with SACD and DVD-A. Nobody is buying them"

      The fact that nobody is buying them is not just because there are 2 different formats. There are good inexpensive players out there that can handle both formats no problem. There just isn't that much of a demand for them currently and multichannel audio is inheirently more difficult and time consuming to record/mix/etc.

      • Re:Multiple Standards (Score:5, Interesting)

        by soupdevil ( 587476 ) on Thursday May 19, 2005 @01:51PM (#12580515)
        I'm a composer/producer. It's actually as easy or easier to make a surround mix than a stereo mix.
        But it's difficult for the average consumer to have a playback system that makes it worthwhile. You have to spend a few thousand dollars, and have the right room, and then spend your time sitting in the sweet spot to listen to your music.
        If, like me, you listen to music while driving, exercising (oh wait, this is /.) and entertaining, there really is no reason to pay for the equipment/setup, and therefore no reason to spend the extra bucks on the higher quality discs.
        • Explain to me why it's easier.

          • Re:Multiple Standards (Score:5, Informative)

            by soupdevil ( 587476 ) on Thursday May 19, 2005 @02:11PM (#12580797)
            A stereo mix gives you just two channels into which you have to place all of your content. Generally bass content is placed fairly equally into both channels, and bass takes up a large percentage of the energy an average speaker can produce. So it's quite difficult to carve out a unique space on the virtual stage for each instrument, balancing frequency, amplitude, depth, etc., for all the instruments and allow each of them to be heard without overwhelming either of the speakers.
            Surround, especially with a separate subwoofer, gives you a much larger virtual stage, which allows you to make creative choices with your instrument placement, and rather than having to squeeze them into what's left of a stereo speaker's capacity.
          • I'm not the parent but I do deal in audio, and I can kind of understand what the parent meant.

            If you're dealing with a mix of instruments from a studio recording session, it can often be difficult to get all of them to sit well with one another in a stereo mix. Gentle EQ'ing, compression, and so on, all go into making that mix sound good in stereo.

            With more channels, you have more leeway on where to place sounds and it could be seen as easier to arrive at a final mix that sounds good, given the range

    • But back to the topic at hand: The industry would benefit more from having ONE SINGLE TRUE UNIFIED STANDARD as opposed to a couple of standards, which would confuse people.

      Actually, it doesn't matter, as we've seen with the DVD +/- wars, because manufacturers stepped up and released burners capable of burning either medium. The only losers are the early adopters who are stuck with the losing format.

    • As I understand it the problem is as follows:

      HD-DVD is backwards compatible with current DVD players while Blu-Ray is not.

      That's basically it. The Movie people don't want to have to stock two different discs, one for Blu-Ray and one for current DVD owners. For more, see this article. [ecoustics.com]

      • "The Movie people don't want to have to stock two different discs"

        How many versions of Star Wars (Episode IV) are there?
        I'm sure that there are several slashdotters that have original Star Wars VHS, Wide Screen VHS, New Effects VHS, Widescreen New Effects VHS, and another one of each on DVD, and probably a Beta version and a Laserdisc version as well. (or something like that)

        I can't believe that Lucas, or Wal-Mart, or anyone but the buyer lost money on that.

        I expect that it is difficult for hardware man
      • Eh???? We aren't talking about the players themselves right... As you'll still need different lasers to read them both.
    • That would be nice, but unfortunately its not likely to happen. The DVD-R vs DVD+R battle was never settled, now all DVD burners handle both. However, from looking at shelf space in electronics stores, it looks like DVD-R outsells DVD+R by at least 3-1. That's what will happen with Blue Ray vs HD-DVD. The first generation players will be cross-incompatible, then the next generation will handle both, and eventually one will be decided a winner over the other, but the other won't go away. IIRC, the sam
      • Joe Six-Pack might not notice he was listening to mono, but he'd probably feel less immersed by it and at some level feel something was missing.

        Then he'd figure out what it was when you switched to stereo... trust me, I'm no surround-sound afficionado, but I can still tell the difference, no problem.

        As for the left/right problem; pretty much nothing released from the mid-1970s onwards suffered from that. It was done that way because a lot of older record decks had integrated speakers close to each other
    • The public at large (Joe Sixpack) gets all confused with this 2-format thing.

      It's not just Joe Sixpack. I'm a nerdy slashdot-reading gadget-susceptible linux kernel developer, and I don't want to have to compare the string of logos on the back of the disc with my drive's spec sheet every time I buy a friggin' album either....

      --Bruce Fields

    • Look at the problems with SACD and DVD-A. Nobody is buying them

      nobody's buying SACD's and DVD-A's because its a thin niche market. super-high resolution audio only really appeals to audiophiles, 99 percent of the population probably couldn't tell the difference between tracks mastered at 16 bits vs 24 anyways.
      • 99 percent of the population probably couldn't tell the difference between tracks mastered at 16 bits vs 24 anyways.

        Make that 100%. The 16 bits format wasn't chosen at random. Human ears have a 120 dB dynamic range, and 16 bits allow for 102 dB dynamic range. Considering that someone having an anechoic chamber with less than 18 dBA background noise is extremely improbable, 24 bits is just a waste of money.

        I know, there are many experts who claim to be able to tell the difference between both, but when y

    • SACD and DVD-A.

      I am an audophile, my question for you is, how do I make an ogg from a DVD-A or SACD to put on my car player? My CD collection lives under my bed in crates now, I dont want to be tied to media.

    • Re:Multiple Standards (Score:5, Insightful)

      by mbbac ( 568880 ) on Thursday May 19, 2005 @01:43PM (#12580437)
      This multiple format business is a mess. Look at the problems with SACD and DVD-A. Nobody is buying them (and if the music industry stopped suing people and promoted those formats that are so much better than downloaded music they would actually make more money because there is new value there.)
      Early adopters aren't buying them because all of the discs are encumbered with DRM unlike CDs. Without early adopters, there is no one to influence the mainstream. Thus little market for SACD and DVD-A.
    • The public at large (Joe Sixpack) gets all confused with this 2-format thing.

      Joe Fourpack seems to understand that they can't play XBox games in their PS3.

      Based on past OpenOffice.org discussions, it is also clear that Joe Fourpack understands that it is best to just use Microsoft Office, because it is not interoperable with the others. i.e. multiple standards.

      Think of the benefit from multiple formats to the content owners (not to be confused with content producers).

      If you have one type of DVD
    • Look at the problems with SACD and DVD-A.

      You said DVDA... hehe.

      Yeah, seriously. That shit is painful. You try having 4 dicks in you and see how you feel. ...not that I know this first hand, but one can assume.

    • Re:Multiple Standards (Score:3, Interesting)

      by aslate ( 675607 )
      The industry would benefit more from having ONE SINGLE TRUE UNIFIED STANDARD as opposed to a couple of standards, which would confuse people.

      The industry as a whole would benefit, we all know that. However, who should back out? The one that steps down loses everything and the other reigns supreme. In the DVD +/- war, neither + nor - won, and both formats are about. None of the producers stepped down, everyone "won" as opposed to one side losing.

  • Size is no longer the issue (Score:5, Insightful)

    by kneecarrot ( 646291 ) on Thursday May 19, 2005 @01:19PM (#12580144)
    After a certain threshold, the capacity of the next generation DVD standard ceases to matter as much as cost, ease of use, and compatibility. So Sony/Toshiba... please step up and convince me of these issues instead of throwing capacity numbers around!

    • Re:Size is no longer the issue (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Thats funny 'cause I always save my last mod point to mod down something Insightful. You bastards think you're so smart.

    • I hear you (Score:4, Funny)

      by geekoid ( 135745 ) <dadinportlandNO@SPAMyahoo.com> on Thursday May 19, 2005 @01:26PM (#12580255) Homepage Journal
      It's great thet they got 100GB disk.
      Now fill it up and let a four year old put it in and out of a player a few time.
      If it is still readable, then you know you are on to something.
      • Now fill it up and let a four year old put it in and out of a player a few time.

        ... or a drunk /.er.

      • Why can't they make the plastic for the disc out something hard as, say, polycarbonate (used in sunglasses). If you need a softer material near the recording medium then they could do a layer of polycarbonate on the surface so at least it won't scratch as easily.
    • Being robust is also and advantage -- but NOBODY talks about it. I find that DVDs are quite prone to having problems if you get them scratched. With the density increasing, this problem is likely to get worse. A larger DVD - ho hum. An indestructible DVD - that excites me!
      • Remember when CDs originally came in Caddies?

        Damn I miss those days.
      • "An indestructible DVD - that excites me!"

        Me, too.
        We can armor Humvee's with them (overlapping to cover the holes).
        Maybe armor buildings with them too.
        And use them structurally.
        Use them to build space-craft.
        Or submarines that can take ultra-high pressures.
        Even black hole exploration.
        Use them for long-lasting (albeit slippery) pavement/floor coverings.
        Make notched ones to use for non-wearing saw blades.
        Use them to make non-wearing bearings.

        The disposal will be difficult, since they won't biodegrade.
        And you
    • From a consumer standpoint, there isn't much difference between the formats other than capacity. With either one, you're going to need new hardware to use it.

      The real difference is in the manufacturing end. HD-DVD is designed with the goal of minimizing the amount of changes needed at the existing manufacturing plants, making it cheaper and easier for existing manufacturers to upgrade. Considering that movies often come with extra discs without increasing the retail price, odds are that Blu Ray isn't expen
    • Even with the latest quad-layer format, optical storage formats don't seem to be able to keep up with hard drive technology. When CDs were first introduced, they had much higher storage capacity than the highest capacity consumer drives available at the time. When DVDs were introduced in 1996, the highest end 3.5" hard disks could match even the double layer capacity at 9.1GB. Now, we are talking about a quad-layer Blue Ray disk which will have a total capacity of 100GB. This sound pretty impressive but it

  • Go BluRay (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Mr Smidge ( 668120 )
    Personally, HD-DVD's disgraceful AACS is enough to make me cheer for Blu-Ray, but I really think that BD-ROMs will win the battle.

    Go Blu-Ray!

  • Reliability (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Airline_Sickness_Bag ( 111686 ) on Thursday May 19, 2005 @01:19PM (#12580148)
    We already have problems with DVDs and CDs going bad. From what I've read, the Blu-Ray discs may be even more fragile due to their extremely thin protective layer. If I am to pick between the two coming standards (Blu-Ray vs HD), I'll choose the more reliable one.

    • Re:Reliability (Score:2, Insightful)

      by fbody98 ( 881072 )
      Am I the only one in the world who likes the idea of a protective case? It's apart of the original Blu-Ray standard. I HATE my movies skipping especially when I rent them. I don't care if it adds to the production cost, pass it along to me and instead of having to treat my movie collection like my Grandma Treats her damn China I can pay a measly $.50 and have my cake, est it, and crap it out... all WITHOUT scratches!

      • Re:Reliability (Score:3, Interesting)

        by FidelCatsro ( 861135 )
        Sony on the UMD disks for the PSP (which are derived from Blue-ray tech)Have a cartridge like case for the disks , So perhaps when they go comercial they will have the sence to use a simmilar case for blue-ray .
        It may put the cost up a little , but i would be willing to pay extra for the peace of mind.

  • YAY (Score:5, Funny)

    by lupinstel ( 792700 ) on Thursday May 19, 2005 @01:19PM (#12580150)
    Yay! Now we just have to wait 3 years for this to come to the market and 3 more years for it to be affordable. Then I will be all over it, until something better comes along.

  • Enough already (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 19, 2005 @01:20PM (#12580158)
    People are getting hyped up over this platform debate like teenage girls wondering who will win between Rubin and Clay. "Oh no, I'll just die if Clay doesn't win, but mom says I can't call and vote more than once a week or she'll take my cell phone away!!!"

    News flash: It's not that important!

    One or the other will get a foothold and catch on, the other will go away. Whether the winner is the "better" of the two options or not, we will still be better off than where we are now.

  • Unification (Score:5, Funny)

    by DuBois ( 105200 ) on Thursday May 19, 2005 @01:21PM (#12580179) Homepage
    Perhaps they should both talk to the Rev. Sun Myung Moon?

  • excellent! we're closer to (Score:5, Funny)

    by Savatte ( 111615 ) on Thursday May 19, 2005 @01:21PM (#12580184) Homepage Journal
    all 3 lord of the rings movies on one dvd without any pauses between the movies or needing to switch discs. Numb ass, here I come!

  • Scratches (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Niekie ( 884742 ) on Thursday May 19, 2005 @01:23PM (#12580208) Homepage
    100 GB of data on a DVD? I think we're putting too much trust in those little discs, no matter how handy they are.. Would sure be very painful if you'd scratch it and lose 100 GB's of data.

  • Durability? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by J Barnes ( 838165 )
    There's got to be a price for these increases in storage capacity. With more data in a smaller package, aren't you just asking for larger errors due to physical damage and defect?

    I'm just thinking of how scratched my average disk can get, and imagine if that scratch now corrupts 200 megs of data instead of a few bits in a song.

    When are we gonna have to enclose these things in some sort of 8-track like case?
    • The very same argument was used when we started moving from floppys to CDs.
      I am fairly sure the comercial Blue-ray discs will in all likely-hood be alot more resiliant than the current discs .
      Who knows they may very well use a cartridge , which would be great.
    • Yes. That's why DVDs are less reliable than floppy disk drives.

      It's not like higher storage densities allow for more space for error correction or anything.
    • With the right error-correcting codes, you can make the disks extremely resistant to hard errors. The problem is that this reduces the usable capacity of the disk due to increased overhead. The trick is to balance durability and usable capacity. This also affects the production yield in manufacturing pre-recorded disks.

  • PS3 (Score:3, Interesting)

    by ignipotentis ( 461249 ) on Thursday May 19, 2005 @01:24PM (#12580226)
    Yes, but is this something that will be standard on all blu-ray devices. Will the PS3 be able to read blu-ray discs which can reach 100GiG? Further, will game developers take advatage of that much space for larger, more expansive worlds?

    Will the content providers step up and use the capacity?
    • Just imagine the load times.
    • Until they put the hardware for larger, more expanisve worlds. The discs are not the choke point preventing the consels from doing just that. Even the new toys coming out from all the big players will be sorely short on the RAM needed, and I can't see the read/write speed being more than 2-4x faster that current media which meaning your are going to see some abysmal load times for anything expansive.

      100gb is alot for a game. Even the biggest ones out now are less than 5gb. What it would be nice for 10

    • Probably not, as its long been possible to make a 4 layer DVD (2 layers on each side) But as the manufacturing cost is so high most opt for 2 layers on one side on two seperate disk. Its a cost/conveniance factor.

  • a day to blank it and another day to backup your hard disk on it?

    What is the speed input/ouput? That is the most relevant factor!

  • That's the death sentence for Bluray (Score:4, Insightful)

    by stecoop ( 759508 ) * on Thursday May 19, 2005 @01:26PM (#12580257) Journal
    Lets say that you could fit the entire Lord of the Rings in HD on 1 disk. Hmm, lets see what a movie company exec might say "Consumers wont pay 60 bucks for 1 disk. They want a bunch of disks so they think they're buying a bunch of stuff."

    Consumer would say "Hey why are you charging me 60 bucks for one disk, it should only be 20 bucks as it doesn't cost you anymore to stamp out one disk as it does 4 disks."

    Unless for the next 7-10 years a quad layer Blu-Ray dvd media costs > $10k. And if that were the case then BlueRay would be the winner. You have to get the companies onboard thinking that no one can copy their disks cheaper than you can sell them for. Look at the price dual layer dvd the best I could find is $3 and I can get regular ones for 50 cents; so the execs are looking at moving on because the price of dvd replication is falling to the brake point of make it your self is cheaper.

    • "Consumers wont pay 60 bucks for 1 disk. They want a bunch of disks so they think they're buying a bunch of stuff."

      This hardly stops them even today. Look at most Anime discs and the like. You could easily fit the entire series on a single disc, but they split it up into 3-4 eps per disc (if you're lucky). Same with movies. Throw on a bunch of useless extras, use "high-definition" video to eat up lots of space, and release tons of editions.

      Mostly, this is useful for pressing data. Large game

  • So what kind of media requires 100GB of storage? Or do the MPAA finally feel comfortable enough with onboard DRM to prevent copying? When will the +-RW units be available? Man, that'd be awesome for backups!

  • Yippy! (Score:4, Funny)

    by ucblockhead ( 63650 ) on Thursday May 19, 2005 @01:30PM (#12580293) Homepage Journal
    The capacity of these drives that I can't buy yet goes up and up! Oh boy!! I'm so excited that there's a format in a lab somewhere completely unavailable to me that could back up so many of my files on a single disk, if only I had one!

  • Overkill? (Score:5, Funny)

    by moviepig.com ( 745183 ) on Thursday May 19, 2005 @01:36PM (#12580365)
    Blu-Ray DVD with four layers . . . will hold a whopping 100 GB of data.

    For movie-consumers, now those DVD extras will include the cast party, the set-security tapes . . .

    And TV-fans now can buy a single disk with the entire 2004 season of . . . well . . . TV.

    • It would be nice to have an entire season of The Apprentice on just one disk(instead of charging me for 5 dvds at the video store), AND include the deleted secenes you can see from the website.

      Not sure why they didn't go for a "Director's Cut" of The Apprentice, when plenty was available on the cutting room floor.

      Just citing an example. A good selling point would be to get a full hour of a television program instead of 40-something minutes/episode.

      But with The Apprentice, no 'extended scenes' existed, th
    • I was looking at the boxed sets for TLoTR in a store and after I saw the DVD extras "map" guide (basically a flowchart to all of the extras on the other DVDs) I could only think "Do I really give a damn how the cast's hairdresser prepared for a shoot?". Soon they'll be adding in "A behinds the scenes look at the catering."
  • Not only do we get to see the movie in HD, we can see the filming of the movie also in HD, and from different camera angles.

    Just think, we can have more blooper minutes than actual movie minutes.

    And George Lucas can remake the entire Star Wars series in HD and fit it onto 1 disc, with tons of extras.

  • More layers (Score:4, Funny)

    by nokiator ( 781573 ) on Thursday May 19, 2005 @01:49PM (#12580494) Journal
    Am I the only one to notice a weird correlation between the race for putting more blades on razors (three [gillettem3power.com] or four [schickquattro.com]) and the race for putting more layers on next gen DVD formats (three [businesswire.com] or four [theregister.co.uk]).

  • so what? (Score:4, Funny)

    by jspectre ( 102549 ) on Thursday May 19, 2005 @01:52PM (#12580534) Journal
    who cares? none of this means anything to me, wanna know why?

    I CAN'T BUY A PLAYER OR DISCS IN EITHER FORMAT RIGHT NOW!

    so who cares how much it can hold?!?!

    ATTN: I hearby announce my new holographic crystal format can now store 1,000,000,000 tetrabites on a crystal the size of a grain of salt. This device not yet available for sale, please come back in 100 years.

    I'm going to patent it all too and sue the bejeezus out of anyone who even attempts to copy it!

  • Not stalled, they are meeting again (Score:5, Informative)

    by The-Bus ( 138060 ) on Thursday May 19, 2005 @02:06PM (#12580728)
    Sony, Toshiba presidents to meet on new DVD format [yahoo.com]

    5/18/05

    TOKYO (Reuters) - The presidents of Japanese electronics giants Sony , Toshiba and Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. will meet to try to break a stalemate in talks over a unified format for next-generation DVD technology, a source close to the matter said on Tuesday. Sony and Toshiba, leading rival camps, have waged a three-year battle to have their new technology standards adopted by the industry. The winner will have pole position in the multi-billion-dollar markets for DVD players, PC drives and optical discs.

    The high-level talks offer new hope for negotiations that appeared to have reached an impasse. A senior Toshiba official was quoted by the Nihon Keizai Shimbun on Monday as saying one format based on Sony technology would be "extremely difficult." Both sides still believe one standard is the best scenario, knowing that a prolonged format battle like the one between VHS and Betamax two decades ago would likely discourage consumers from shifting to advanced discs and stifle the industry's growth.

    (continued) [yahoo.com]


    They know they need to collude if they want to maximize profits. Not having a standard is going to hurt everybody.

  • Now instead of ..... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by gstoddart ( 321705 ) on Thursday May 19, 2005 @02:53PM (#12581278) Homepage
    Now instead of complaining that when you buy 30-minute shows on DVD which only put two episodes/disk, we'll have a format with 25x the capacity which is still only holding 2 episodes.

    That's always bugged me about that kind of stuff on TV. They want to sell you a bazillion dollars worth of stuff. You want it all on one disk.

    Then again, I have a huge problem equating two 30 minute episodes of a show which has been running for several seasons to the equivelant (or more) then a movie which cost over $100 million to make.

    Yet, time and time again we see just that -- two episodes of Freinds (or whatever) costs as much as one Lord of the Rings movie -- personally I think they need to look at macroeconomics -- Mr Smith is not getting the utils of enjoyment out of the second purchase.

    There is no reason to believe this won't keep happening as disks get bigger.

  • Blu-Ray Wins.... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Razzak ( 253908 ) on Thursday May 19, 2005 @03:09PM (#12581443)
    With the recent PS3 announcement of Blu-Ray, and no HD-DVD from the Xbox or Nintendo Revolution, I seriously think Blu-Ray has won this. Besides having better capacity, they're going to guarantee themselves 25-50 million players in households by Spring 2006? Plus an additional 20+ million each year thereafter, that's a large footprint. Even if HD-DVD is more cost efficient and beats them to market (say a decent amount of players available by xmas 2005), I can't see the same amount of people jumping on the HD-DVD bandwagon in its first 6 months to outweigh the PS3 release.

    I hope HD-DVD hits a stumbling block, no one wants format wars.

  • Only three layers? (Score:4, Funny)

    by wheany ( 460585 ) <wheany+sd@iki.fi> on Thursday May 19, 2005 @03:23PM (#12581579) Homepage Journal
    This is shortly after the previously reported HD-DVD announced three-layer HD-DVD that would hold a "mere" 45 GB.

    Oh, the fools! If only they'd built it with four layers! When will they learn?!?

  • From the trenches (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 19, 2005 @04:09PM (#12582132)
    As a data addict, I feel I must weigh in here. There are a few concerns:

    Migration
    I have switched exclusively to recordable DVD for backups about 20 months ago. The extra capacity was dearly needed, as my CD-R collection was growing large by bounds and leaps, making it unmanageable. At first, like everyone else, I thought whoa - 4.37GB - surely nobody will need more that than. Famous last words.

    What was interesting to observe is that a) the transition to DVD from CD-R happened faster for me than from previous backup mediums to CD-R (Zip disks, MO discs, etc.). Whereas I had used CD-R in conjunction with my previous mediums for quite a while, jumping from CD-R to DVD-R was much quicker. About the only things that held me back are the fact that most OS installation media are still CD-R images, and the fact that the mp3-capable HU in my car only reads CD-R. That's why I still stock CD-R, otherwise I would have none.

    Capacity
    I felt the capacity of DVD-R as being limiting much quicker than I did so with CD-R. In other words, 4.37GB "got small" much faster for me than 700MB did. Broadband is here to stay and is only getting faster. The average computer, its display adapter, is getting faster and can display higher bitrate video content. Filesize is only going up.

    Evolution
    I feel that DVD-R is a clear improvement on technology compared to CD-R. There are a number of practical issues to consider. It looks like they did their homework and fixed the main issues with CD-R.

    Number one is sandwiching the recording layer between protective plastic discs, as opposed to putting it on top, as CD-R did, where it is easily damageable.

    The other is the overall improvement of recording reliability. Granted I only use high-quality media, but it seems to me that either thru improved error-correction algorithms and/or improved quality control/design of both recorder and media, DVD-R far surpasses CD-R in reliability. I haven't burnt one single bad disc that was directly related to media or recorder in over 1000 burns on multiple recorders. CD-Rs would often fail to verify.

    Price
    There is no contest as far as the price, per GB, of DVD-R vs. hard drive for backup purposes. Believe it or not, backup media has traditionally been lagging behind the real needs of customers.

    Standards
    CD-R had no competing standards. Good. In the beginning of DVD-R, it was a problem if you had a -R and someone else had a +R. Bad. They fixed it by having virtually all drive manufacturers, for both recorders and readers, seamlessly support both standards. Fair enough, and it gets a "fair -to- good" grade. It is transparent enough that today you don't need to even look at what media you're buying (if your name is "John Smith," of course - us freaks look at much more than just the brand of media we buy). But DVD-R was clearly a step into the general direction of chaos as compared to CD-R. It looks like the next gen will be considerably worse, unless one of the standards completely kills the other one before either comes to market.

    Conclusion
    Please note that I am not closely following the BR vs. HD-DVD race because I think it would be a waste of time at this point. This is a disclaimer for any specifics I mention - they are only approximations.

    I feel that 100GB should not be viewed as realistic. 4 layers are not practical unless they are introduced from the get-go. I offer current DVD-R dual-layer as an example. It has 2 major cons: 1) it is currently roughly 10-30 times as expensive as single layer DVD-R for roughly double capacity, 2) it does not burn anywhere near the speed at which DVD-R SL burns (fastest is 4x vs. 16x, realistic is 2.4x vs. 12x). The only people who spring for it are the ones that use them for video backups. Being that I only back up data, it would be of no use to me even if one of the two above points were to go away.

    Therefore, lets say a single layer disc will have 25GB. Nothing wrong with that, but by the time it is introduced it will be "just enough" to satisfy the needs of the market.

    I feel that backups will still be lagging for a while into the future. Don't believe the hype, and don't feed the trolls.

    • Re:From the trenches (Score:3, Interesting)

      by StikyPad ( 445176 )
      In all fairness, CDs were leaps and bounds ahead of contemporary storage media.. Hell, CDs held more information than my HDD when they started becoming popular, and the only other common removable media was a 1.44MB floppy (or not-as-widely adopted 2.88MB). As far as ubiquitous portable storage, CDs held massively more information than their previous generation counterparts. (I'm not counting Zip drives, or other proprietary magneto-optical storage, since they really weren't as widespread as floppies and

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close