DVD / Hard Drive Recorder With 28-Day Capacity

fenimor writes "Panasonic today unveiled new DVD-recoders with astonishing 709 hours video recording capacity. The top model has onboard components of a good PC: 400GB hard drive, Ethernet port, broadband receiver, SD Memory Card slot, and a PCMCIA card. The DVD recorder is the fastest in the industry as it can record a one-hour program onto DVD-R disc in just 56 seconds. Internet access allows users to program recording through cell phones or PCs while away from home."

Comments

Re:burnin'

[Nos.]

Exactly... I think we're going to see some decrease in sales of DVD's as products like this start becoming popular (and cheaper). How long before the MPAA attacks these sort of devices (again) especially ones like this that will allow trading of content very easily.

Cost inefficient?

[scowling]

OK. I have a computer with video in, a DVD+-R drive and 300 GB of hard drive space. Just about anybody upgrade their system with the same for about $400. Right? A little more if you want digital video in.

And it's user-friendly. Got a remote control and everything.

So how much is Panasonic's system, and how would it be better for me than what I've already got.

Re:Cost inefficient?

[genericacct]

User-friendly to set up, silent, attractive. Price notwithstanding, this is an option to most consumers, most of whom have never even heard of Windows Media Center. For you, though, if your computer isn't deafening, keep what you've got.

Re:burnin'

[stratjakt]

Does this decode CSS for you?

If not, the MPAA doesn't care.

How can you WATCH that much TV?!?

[the_skywise]

I've got a Tivo with 120 hours on it. I can't KEEP UP with it. Half the stuff "spills off" for having too many copies (I stick with the default 5 episodes max for most things) or the suggestions just time out.

Granted, it's nice to be able to thumb through that much content when I don't feel like my normal stuff, but 700 hours worth!? (Yeah, there's always archival and keeping your DVD library on the hard drive is convenient but... c'mon... how hard is it to pull the DVD out of the case and put it into the drive?)

Re:How can you WATCH that much TV?!?

[bungeejumper]

I just got a 200 GB hard drive to throw into my ReplayTV, that'll give me 65 hours of high quality recording space. It's not that I watch a lot of TV, it's just that I like to watch TV programmes on my own time...if I record a little extra, it comes in handy whenever i get the couch potato TV-watching bug. And, do you know you can watch a 4 hour baseball game in under an hour !!! All that time they waste getting ready for a pitch ! i just hit the "skip 30 seconds button" and they still haven't thrown the pitch. Imagine a 3-2 walk...it takes like 5 minutes to get that torture over with ! Believe me, if you like sports, get a ReplayTV/Tivo...you'll know what i mean only once you've gotten it.

Re:One hour in 56 seconds

[jrumney]

seriously, doesn't 56 seconds seem like a typo?

Not really. It does seem like the marketing version of the story though, as they are certainly talking about raw write time, not including compression time etc. My guess is the steps go like this:

1. Capture one hour of TV.
2. Possibly cheat by removing ad breaks, leaving around 40 minutes.
3. Compress to MPEG4. Think VHS quality, not near-DVD.
4. Defrag hard drive
5. Start timer
6. Write to DVD
7. Stop timer: 56 seconds.

Obviously Still a Beta

[Nom du Keyboard]

unveiled new DVD-recoders

And they're going to keep re-coding the thing until they get it right!

Beta - no relationship to Betamax.

Re:burnin'

[Anonymous Coward]

Such copying of DVDs is against both the spirit and practice of law. If you do indeed copy DVDs as such, your actions will both in aggregate increase the price of goods for others and decrease general welfare by causing increased restrictions, both legal and technological, to be imposed on future products.

Re:One hour in 56 seconds

[Zocalo]

doesn't 56 seconds seem like a typo?

Not at all. Since it doesn't say what level of compression was used on the one hour of video, I think it's reasonable to assume it's the one with the most. If so, and the thing can store 709 hours of video in 400GB, then that's just over half a GB of data, or about 10MB/s.

Re:One hour (of compressed video) in 56 seconds

[jfw25]

It's gotta be the compression they're using. After all, they can fit 709 hours onto a 400GB disk, so an hour of video takes up about half a gigabyte -- not 4.7GB. This is not going to be an hour of full-quality video.

Think "security system"

[ElForesto]

That's the first thing I thought of. Using these things in large security systems to keep archives would seem to be the most likely application.

Re:burnin'

[jhylkema]

Does this decode CSS for you?

If not, the MPAA doesn't care.

Wrong, buzzard breath. The MPAA cares a devil of a lot about any technology that enables people to view content other than through their "licensed" means. (Granted, we techies know that this is pie-in-the-sky: CSS was broken by a 15-year-old, Macrovision has been hacked already AFAIK.) Keep in mind that the movie industry fought VCRs all the way to the US Supreme Court. The case was Sony Corp. v. Universal City Studios, Inc. . The case headnote:

Petitioner Sony Corp. manufactures home video tape recorders (VTR's), and markets them through retail establishments, some of which are also petitioners. Respondents own the copyrights on some of the television programs that are broadcast on the public airwaves. Respondents brought an action against petitioners in Federal District Court, alleging that VTR consumers had been recording some of respondents' copy-righted works that had been exhibited on commercially sponsored television and thereby infringed respondents' copyrights, and further that petitioners were liable for such copyright infringement because of their marketing of the VTR's. Respondents sought money damages, an equitable accounting of profits, and an injunction against the manufacture and marketing of the VTR's. The District Court denied respondents all relief, holding that noncommercial home use recording of material broadcast over the public airwaves was a fair use of copyrighted works and did not constitute copyright infringement, and that petitioners could not be held liable as contributory infringers even if the home use of a VTR was considered an infringing use. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding petitioners liable for contributory infringement and ordering the District Court to fashion appropriate relief. [Emphasis added].

Held:

The sale of the VTR's to the general public does not constitute contributory infringement of respondents' copyrights. [In other words, told Universal to go stuff themselves.]

Hollyweird has yet to learn from this stinging defeat and the aftermath. Turns out that, far from decimating the industry as Jack Valenti predicted, Hollywood now makes more off of videotapes than screenings. Hollywood makes more movies than before, not fewer.

In business, you must either adapt or die. At least for now, Hollywood has chosen not to adapt.

Panasonic

[payndz]

Panasonic's DVD recorders that I used in my (not long past) days as a tech reviewer, I rated pretty highly. Yes, they had their annoying quirks, but probably less than the equivalent Pioneer-clone units, and certainly a lot less than the Philips +RW machines. It comes down to format - Panasonic, IIRC, uses DVD-RAM, and as yet none of the three (three!) rival formats have yet established a convincing lead in the market.

The big question is, can they still be snapped up before Broadcast Flag compatibility becomes mandatory?