Slashdot Mirror
High Density CDs
goofrider writes "Sanyo introduced a new format called HD-Burn, supported by their new DVD+/-RW chip. It allows the drive to burn up 1.4GB of data using a regular 700MB blank CD-R blank. The resulting HD-Burned CD-R can only be read by supporting DVD/DVD-ROM drives and CD-ROM drives. Most DVD/DVD-ROM drives can support the format via a firmware upgrade. It's unclear how easy and how likely will it be for future drives to support this format. In contrast, Plextor released their new GigaRec technology in their new PlexWriter Premium (read a review here). GigaRec also records on regular blank CD-Rs, allows up to 1GB of data on a 700MB disc. however, the disc can be read on any modern good-quality CD-ROM drives with no firmware upgrades required. So now I can record 2x the data on a CD-R but I still can't have filenames longer than 64 characters. :)"
This will probably flop, unless it becomes an integrated standard in all DVD +/- RW drives. No one wants to buy a special cdrom drive just to read high-density CDs, especially when better (read: DVD) technology exists.
The trouble is that since it's not a ubiquitous standard, it's not really all that useful. Compare to old optical media standards - there were plenty of optical medias that you could record to (and even re-record) long before CDR came out. But CDR took off like all crazy because it was standard media you could play back anywhere.
not necessarily...at the moment few people i know use DVD media for back-up storage, since the cost is prohibitive. secondly the average user does not need any more space per CD than what is currently available, because for the average user the largest single file they'll burn on a CD is usually a divx movie, and that doesn't usually exceed 800 megabytes. if an entire back-up of a hard drive is what's needed, most would simply use a few cheap CDs as opposed to a single expensive DVD blank.
another pitfall of using DVD media is the different standards available from different manufacturers, unlike blank CDs and 1.44mb floopies. this is one of the reasons why people still use 1.44mb floppies today.
with this new improvement in the data density of a CD, DVD media might be set to go the way of the MD. it could have been something good, but was never became something more than a novelty due to corporate greed.
Another hack that is too little too late. I already have my DVD burner, and it already burns 4.7 GB discs.
No thanks!
Natural != (nontoxic || beneficial)
I remember systems such as the Dreamcast had their discs designed to hold more than 700MB specifically so people pirating them couldn't do a perfect job, requiring audio tracks and cutscenes to be surgically removed from the game to fit on a normal CD. I know some PS2 games are just out of reach for CD pirates due to their > 700MB size as well. It seems to me it's quite possible for a soldering iron based firmware upgrade to put those games within reach for pirates now.
:).
Pirates are always the early adopters of these kind of technologies
Overrated Moderation: This posts sucks... because.
Sanyo's technology shouldn't stand a chance in surviving, much like Iomega's 250MB disks/drives. I would bet that most people (excluding techno-elitist) who are still using Zip drives regardless of their drive capacity, use only 100MB disks, since sharing them utilizes the much wider installed base of 100MB drives. Since CDR and CDRW has replace much of Iomega's usefulness, 250MB drives are pretty useless, especially in a cost/size comparison.
Likewise, why would anyone bother to use a technology with a very limited install base to double the capacity of a CD when DVD's are getting cheaper, hold even more data, and the installed base is much more prevalent.
However, plextor's solution should be more ideal despite the smaller 'overburn' rate. Since people can use it right away on the existing install base without worrying too much about compatibility when they go to share their media.
"at the moment few people i know use DVD media for back-up storage, since the cost is prohibitive."
Prohibitive? $/MB cost is more or less comparable to CD, I'd think.
"with this new improvement in the data density of a CD, DVD media might be set to go the way of the MD. it could have been something good, but was never became something more than a novelty due to corporate greed."
MD is *big* in Japan (no pun intended). In fact I'm a bit surprised that it never caught on here, perhaps it's due to the few problems they had at first. MD was (and still is) perfect for portable audio, offering long play times and low power comsumption in a small and convenient form factor, long before MP3 players became commonplace. I have a portable MD player that I'm very happy with.
I think DVD's will be replaced with improved technology such a blue-laser optical storage, not with a technology that'll let you squeeze a bit of extra data on existing CDs.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
I don't know where you're getting your numbers from. On pricewatch I find prices to be the following:
- DVD-R: $76 for one hundred 4.7GB discs, or 16 cents per gigabyte
- CD-R: $17 for one hundred 700MB discs, or 23 cents per gigabyte
So, media-wise, DVD-R is actually cheaper than CD-R.for the average user the largest single file they'll burn on a CD is usually a divx movie, and that doesn't usually exceed 800 megabytes.
You've got the relationship backwards. Divx filesizes are being held back to under 800 megabytes by the constraints in CD capacity. I no longer limit myself to 800 MB divx files now that I have a DVD burner.
Just because current CD burners limit you to 800 MB doesn't mean you should be so short sighted as to assume that the 800 MB limit is actually desirable.
another pitfall of using DVD media is the different standards available from different manufacturers, unlike blank CDs
You are correct that the DVD standards war is very damaging to DVD. But then in the next paragraph you advocate using nonstandard double data density CDs!
If you're gonna troll, at least try to keep your position consistent.
You forget why region codes were introduced in the first place
No, you just haven't realized that it's an excuse, not a reason.
There's no reason movie studios can't release movies simultaneously in all regions.
This can lead to a situation where a movie is available stateside on DVD before it has even been shown in Europe.
If international distribution is really the reason region codes exist, why are movies like Jaws (1975), Gone With the Wind (1939), or The Maltese Falcon (1941) region-coded? Are you suggesting that these movies have yet to be released in Europe?
I can imagine lines of people, somewhere in $EUROPEAN_CITY, desparately waiting in line to see Lee Marvin in The Dirty Dozen, 35 years after it was released in the US.
Region Coding is simply a way for movie studios to create artifical boundaries, to practice predatory pricing.