Slashdot Mirror


High Definition DVD

Vinnie_333 writes "Looks like the specs for HD-DVD are currently being discussed by Hollywood big wigs, with an optimistic product release date of Xmas of 2003. Unfortunately, they seem to be completely disregarding the higher storage capacity of the Blu-Ray disc standard, that will hold 6 times the amount of a DVD-9, for the current red laser format with a different compression algorithm. Come on, more storage is always a good thing. Not only will it give us the quality we deserve, it is likely to cut down on Hollywood's largest fear (piracy) by making the media ungodly HUGE."

18 of 307 comments (clear)

  1. Great by ArchieBunker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Now we have to throw away all the current players and TV's to take advantage of this. People are just now getting used to DVD's and they want to switch formats so soon? Bad move.

    --
    Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    1. Re:Great by waytoomuchcoffee · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Now we have to throw away all the current players and TV's to take advantage of this. People are just now getting used to DVD's and they want to switch formats so soon? Bad move.

      You're an idiot. This is for those people that have ALREADY thrown out their TV's for HDTV. Current DVDs can't support more than 520p, while this format would do 720p/1080i.

    2. Re:Great by ergo98 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Already"? I've had and used a DVD player for several years, and have been looking to replace it anyways (because of support for things like MP3 playback. On top of that, as mine was one of the early players menu switches and such takes a lot of time). If the new players, when they come out (probably not for about 2 years) let you enjoy your old library as well (which I have zero doubt that it will), then where's the downside?

      The TV issue is a non-issue anyways: Already the TV shops are filling up with HDTV TVs, and the avaialability of media is increasing. Hell, we've used the same format (NTSC) for a long, long time now, and it is quite obsolete.

    3. Re:Great by ergo98 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When DVD players first came out they cost about $800, yet they've ebbed down to where they can be had for ~$100 now (in many cases less than VHS decks). There is no reason why HDTV will not follow the current trend: Right now they're imposing the early adoptor "wealth" tax on it, but eventually the technology will become commonplace. One net effect of the government(s) imposing mandatory HDTV broadcasting is that virtually instantly it will become a commonplace technology, and the prices will plummet.

  2. Compression by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How does this cut down on fears of piracy? Why couldn't they be compressed back down?

  3. a discrepancy (IMHO) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Not only will it give us the quality we deserve, it is likely to cut down on Hollywood's largest fear (piracy) by making the media ungodly HUGE."

    No it won't, it will have no effect because people will just reencode it to a lower bitrate. Whether the DVD is at9 mbps or 20 mbps people will still encode it to 3000 kbps and fit it on 2 or 3 cd's

    1. Re:a discrepancy (IMHO) by JeffSh · · Score: 2, Insightful

      True, I was originally going to post that point as well.

      The only roadblock the higher capacity would be is in the size of the intial rip. Currently in DVD encoding, you need to rip the entire dvd contents and then encode which requires 8-9 gigs free.

      So really you would need more free disk space for the rip, but thats the only difference. and it's not like disk space is in short supply nowadays.

      and even then, if you only had a limited amount of space to do the rip, there are ways around it; albeit it more time consuming.

    2. Re:a discrepancy (IMHO) by ergo98 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I bet that HD-DVD and this blue laser DVD are going to flop for putting a single movie on because the human eye isn't that presise

      The human eye isn't that precise? You sound like Atari ST fanatics (I was an ST fanatic, but I always disagreed with this ludicrous claim) back in the day versus the Amiga users : You see the ST fanatics claimed that the 512 colours was more than adequate because the, err, human eye, yeah that's it, can't see more. You see, the 4096 colours of the Amiga was mere waste. Of course we've long since proven this to be absolutely absurd. About 99% of the time that someone claims that something is "as good as it can be", it's proven to be completely ignorant in the future.

      Whenever someone sits in front of an HDTV screen (with an HDTV source), they are blown away by the image because their eyes, contrary to your claim, are that precise. This is especially the case as we move to larger screens, and with lightweight screen technologies such as plasma or LCD panel you can expect screen sizes to edge ever upwards. As such, the need for higher resolutions are going to be increased. DVD started its life as insufficient for HDTV (HDTV has 1080 lines, versus the 500 or so for DVD), so already HDTV users notice a difference switching between an HDTV source, and the significantly lower quality DVD. DVD needs to be resolution enhanced, and the reality is that even HDTV is pretty subpar when it's on 50"+ TVs.

  4. By the time this comes out by jandrese · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That kind of size won't be so scary. Remember when CD media first started coming out and the record industry smugly thought that it was unpiratable because 650M was just so ungodly huge. Even DVD movies, oversized as they are for net piracy, can be recompressed down to a file that can be transferred over a broadband connection with little trouble.

    The moral of the story is: size is a poor piracy prevention tool. Technology will eventually catch up no matter how big you make something.

    --

    I read the internet for the articles.
  5. Two stages by benwaggoner · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Except that Blu-ray couldn't possibly be mass market by Christmas 2003. The nice thing about a red laser system is that the physical medium of the disc doesn't have the change, which means the hardware in existing DVD players can be mostly the same, with just a different decoder chip. Fast computers will just need a software update. And, of course, replication and duplication facilities won't need to chance, so it'll cost well less than $1 to make an HD disc, which means we could start seeing mass market prices very quickly.

    This is really good from the Hollywood perspective. They'll get us all to buy 1280x720 red laser HD discs from 2003-2006, and then come out with 1920x1080 Blu-ray as a mass market technology around Christmas 2006-2008, when they get all the kinks worked out. Same way we've already bought DVD and laserdisc versions of the same movie.

    The article claims that the compression technology will be from Microsoft, but my contacts tell me it is much more likely to be MPEG-4, in order to have a technology not tied to any one vendor. Of course, Windows Media derived codecs would offer better compression efficiency. We shall see.

  6. Re:pipes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    not really DVD ripping involves many steps first you have to deencode it (decss) then you have to rip the music out of it, then you have to frameserve it then you finally have to encode it to a lower bitrate. Although there are ways to just pipe a rip (http://www.vcdhelp.com/dvdbackup.htm) i have heard of peoples DVD drives messing up because they are reading constantly for like 14 hours. Storage space has become cheap, just do it the old fasioned way

  7. I'm betting.. by Restil · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That the primary purpose of reviewing this is to "fix" the "joke" copyprotection that's on the classic DVD. The first time around they either poorly underestimated the abilities of a few dedicated hackers or they just didn't understand simple technology when it came to encryption. of course, as much as the copy protection was considered an important factor on DVDs, the storage capacity, image quality, and lack of degregation were more important when it was designed. The copy protection was an industry requirement, one that despite their efforts has made no difference. Not really sure what the purpose of region coding was, beyond forcing people to buy multiple DVD players or to use them illegally.

    Despite their abilities to improve the encryption on their new DVD standard, it will only delay, but not competely thwart the efforts of those who have the desire and the ability to break it. The second ANY software is available to play it back, that software has to be distributed. It can always be disassembled and rebuilt from the assembly level. It will take a LONG time, but if someone wants it badly enough.....

    -Restil

    --
    Play with my webcams and lights here
    1. Re:I'm betting.. by David+Jao · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The ideal price of a DVD is very different in France than in Japan.

      Ironically, your example is a bad one, because both France and Japan are region 2.

  8. Re:6 times as large by wirelessbuzzers · · Score: 2, Insightful

    actually, there are a few reasons for this:
    1) Blu-Ray hasn't come out yet.
    3) Writable Blu-Ray hasn't come out yet and won't for a while.
    3) Rewritable Blu-Ray hasn't come out yet and won't for even longer.
    4) Even when rewritable Blu-Ray comes out, the media probably won't have nearly as many rewrite cyles as you would need to make a hard disk out of it, unless you want to replace it once a week. In fact, the use of a high-refresh rate application like virtual memory would make the disk overheat and fail very quickly.
    5)Rewriting it will probably be too slow to be acceptable, especially if you want to use it for virtual memory.
    6) By the time all these concerns are addressed, we will all be using 10TB holographic drives.

    --
    I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
  9. Re:Optimistic by dbrutus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It isn't bigger media that's the problem, it's faster media. Wider busses, faster record speeds, etc. Nobody wants to bother with a burn if it's going to take all day.

  10. But consumers were screwed in the first place... by Brat+Food · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Consmers have been screwed by hollywood already, ill break it down:

    HDTV, as a potential standard, has been around for a LONG time, but the bug media players keep stonewalling, and pusing back the date the FCC would have them force adoption by, among other things, throwing a million different standards out there and not agreeing on one. I seem to remember the FCC deadline being 2002..... And now, i have to wait another year to get what will more then likely be a defective standard. The reason, is they need to FINALLY invest in an infrastruture change after forcing consumers to stuick with the relativly low bandwidth and quality TV we still have after all these years. This then creates a catch-22, as it has for years... BigMedia doesnt want to invest in something where there is no market, tv makers cant drop prices and make a "standard" box because BigMedia wont decide on a standard and wont/cant release content, and then consumers may want but have no content or way to view it.

    The end result of this will be: consumers get screwed out of a GOOD standard that provides (potentially) excellent quality, and i fear it will end up with inferior quality and useability.

    On to DVD: People have know for YEARS that DVD does not provide the bandwidth to do full HDTV content. Issue one, 9gb is too small, issue 2, home readrs cant get to the datarate needed to even read off a datastream at that resolution. So, once again,insted of taking an oportunity to think ahead for once, we will end up with a standard that is 2 years dead when it comes out. And consumers STILL need to buy a new player. Most just wont know they are buying obsolete technology as they have been for years.

    Im completly frustrated about all this, and the FCC needs to apoint an OUTSIDE firm with no intrest in bigmedia to hammer out standards that are good for the consumer, are timely, and have potential of more then 2 years ago. I dont know why what is happening is acceptable to anyone.

    --

    "Stuff... In my home!? NEVER!" - Zim on Invader Zim
    "I want the toilet seat!" - Little Dog on Two Stupid Dogs
  11. Blue-ray is too expensive by CopperDream · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They're not ignoring the blue-laser encoding. They've dismissed it since it would require a retooling of the entire recording industry, requiring the movie industry to pass the cost on to consumers. Some people might be willing to pay $35 to $50 per DVD, but I'm not, and neither are the vast majority of consumers.

  12. Red Ray vs. Blue Ray by Temsi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The reason why they're going with the old red-ray instead of the new blue-ray is very simple:
    Backwards compatibility.
    The only way they can entice people to buy a new HD DVD player, is if it can play their old SD DVD's as well.
    Now, of course one could conceivably build a player with both red and blue ray lenses, but sticking with red-ray only means manufacturing the players will be cheaper.
    Cheaper players means faster implementation in the market place.
    Don't forget, it's all about the Benjamins...

    --
    -- This sig for rent.