Slashdot Mirror
Toshiba To Offer Laptops With HD-DVD in 2005
LBArrettAnderson writes "Toshiba will release laptops with HD-DVD under its high-end Qosmio brand and plans to ship one million units in the first year to Europe, the U.S. and China, as well as Japan. The company claims the slimline HD-DVD format is more suitable to laptop PCs than the rival Blu-ray Disc format."
They say the HD-DVD is better suited for laptops than Blu-Ray, but they don't say why?
Are they heavily invested in Blu-Ray? Is that maybe why? Or is there actually a technical reason?
Here we go again.
---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?
Besides being competiting formats is there any major differences between HD-DVD and Blu-ray? If not, how long will it be before there are drives that support both formats like DVD+/-RW drives?
What marketroid told them that a near-miss for Quasimodo was a good brand name? Hmpf! ``Qosmio'' indeed.
See what I've been reading.
Would HD-DVD be compatible with our current DVD standard?
:(
I wonder if they would have more DRM on these new DVDs too
Online backup with Mozy, sounds like Ozzie, but more!
It was the studios that ultimately forced the compromises that led to a single SD-DVD format, and I think the same will happen with Blu-Ray. Whichever format has the clear majority of titles in print wins.
The differences are greater than between DVD+/-RW. HD-DVD is easier for manufacturers, because the production process is simular to DVD.
:(
Blue-ray on the other hand has larger capacities. This is important as some experts think that fitting a HD (1080i or 720p) movie onto HD-DVD will be a tight squeeze so there will be no room for special features, and higher compression than desired may be required
Building players that can handle DVD will be equally easy for both formats. I don't know about a single player that could do both HD-DVD and Blue-ray.
Will I be able to burn DVDs right away on this thing in Linux?
Heck, I installed Fedora Core 2 and dvd burning apps on there still say that I can't burn DVDs without some kind of binary closed source addon. ARGH.
--- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
It was the studios that ultimately forced the compromises that led to a single SD-DVD format, and I think the same will happen with Blu-Ray.
/my clue-by-four is at the ready...
Well, sort of. The studios backed DVD, and then some of the studios branched off and were trying to support DIVX (the throw-away, incompatible DVD rival). Then the consumers proceeded to hit those studios and everyone associated with DIVX with a clue-by-four, and now we have a single DVD standard.
Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
I own a Toshiba Satellite from about 3-4 years ago, and I use another Satellite that belongs to work which is only a few months old. The new one doesn't have the same style battery as the old one. In the new one, a square-ish battery goes into one of two ports that can also be used for CD or floppy drives, as opposed to the oblong brick that slides in the side on my old Satellite.
While we're at it, I have to say that the quality of contruction has gone way downhill! The old one still looks and works pretty much as it did since the day I got it (although I did have to replace the battery once), but on the new one, the Ethernet port has broken and the silver paint is already starting to rub off and give way to black plastic. Bah!
Take a look at the Blu-Ray website. I think the only company that's missing in the industry partner list is Toshiba. Plus after reading some documentation internal to my company regarding manufacturing costs of Blu-Ray discs they are cheaper to make than HD-DVD's in both cost per disc and cost per gigabyte.
In the past we've seen products like the Beta format for example that have a small industry following just go by the wayside. It seems such that HD-DVD is progressing along the same path. Time will tell I guess.
What's a sig? Pete Brubaker
And so you shall...
What's better?
HD-DVD
Blu-Ray
Sex with a mare
Although Blu-Ray may hold more information (25GB/layer * 2 layers = 50GB vs 15GB * 2 layers = /30GB for HD-DVD), I personally am sick of Sony trying to push their proprietary standards out again. They do have a large backing for Blu-Ray, but if you take a look back at their other (and more expensive) dead-end proprietary products--namely Mini-Discs and Memory Sticks, I wouldn't count HD-DVD out just yet...
I dont really see a winner emerging, at least not for a while. With betamax/vhs, studios had to try to cater to the format most of their consumers were using, but with hd/br soon into it (as has been speculated by many others) someone will release dvd players that can handle both formats, and as with dvd+/-r the consumers wont care which format the dvd they are buying is.
Then eventually, i think the studios will only standardise over one format if its either cheaper (?), or offers more features/space (blu-ray?).
Paul
The format Toshiba supports is actually called AOD (Advanced Optical Disk) and HD-DVD can refer equally to AOD or Blu-Ray.
The DRM will not prevent good old-fashoned "insert and hit play", but it will prevent uncontrolled ripping and copying.
...for the first couple of months, you mean.
I really wonder why they even bother. Unless they include hardware DRM to disallow access to all unauthorized programs, this WILL be cracked. And either one does do such a thing, the other one will almost assuredly win the format wars.
My message to MPAA is this: Save your money. Leave it unencrypted. Let us do what we want with our movies. The VCR did not put you out of business, and neither will this.
I think you need directions for your links
Click on the one you vote for since that is your vote.
I hear that Philips' profitability is largely contributed to by the fact that they own the IP on media like CDs, DVDs and previously, audio cassettes. No wonder so many companies are involved in the fight!
I don't want to read
I don't think you understand what a "dead-end" product is. Sony is so big that even if no other manufacturer supports their formats, they will continue to exist, and be popular, as long as Sony wants.
Mini-disc is example 1. Been around 15+ years. You cans till buy them, and are still popular among certain crowds. I don't see that as a 'dead-end product'.
Memory stick is an even better example. Guess who the #1 maker and seller of digital cameras in the world is? Sony. Guess what format all those cameras use? Memory stick.
I would hardly call that a 'dead-end'.
Slimline HD-DVD? Correct me if I am wrong, but both HD-DVD and BluRay are about 1-2mm thick. Unless something has changed, I don't think that will be a major contributing factor to laptop thickness. Also, since they are not burning BluRay, at least at first, aren't the power differences between the blue and red lasers going to be negligable, like .03W vs .05W?
Ok, this isn't the right place to ask this question, and I'll definately get moded down, but can someone explain to me the difference between a Pentium M and a Pentium 4. I see laptop companies selling what should be high end laptops, one with a Pentium 4 3GHz and one with a Pentium M 1.7GHz.
Is there something I'm missing about Pentium Ms that make their considerably lower speed not such a big drawback compared to the Pentium 4s? Why, if given the choice, or similar pricing, would anyone choose a Pentium M?
If someone can help me with this one, it'd be very appreciated.
Thanks.
--
RumorsDaily
I think the difference is Pentium M is a modified version of Pentium 3 with enhancements borrowed from P4. It also has a larger L2 Cache, which makes it better. My PentiumM 1.4ghz laptop is faster than Pentium 4 2.4 workstation in numerous applications. Intel really should use PentiumM for desktop already and bail on Itanium line of CPU's.
Can't we skip over the HD/blu-ray generation and wait another 10 years before my DVD's are obsolete?
Veramocor
The Pentium M is intel's low powered, high cache processor. It was designed to succeed the centrino, while offering good battery life and capable processing power.
It compares to a regualr P4 the same way AMD's numbering scheme does. The lower cpu speed is less important with the larger cache and speedy bus. As demonstrated in the newer P4's with 1 and 2 mb cache. Increasing the cache on die is a good way to continue revenue stream with an old archetecture, being a tried and true performance booster.
For my money it would have to be and AMD 64 DTR notebook, but for reasonable processing power and a slim portable solution a Pentium M is a good way to go.
Why limit your selves to spinning the disc? Why not have a fixed disc and have the laptop spin around... really fast? Now that's what I'd call a super-twist display!
Welcome to windows... please log in.
*D'OH* *D'OH* *D'OH* *D'OH* *D'OH* *D'OH* *D'OH* *D'OH* *D'OH* *D'OH* *D'OH* *D'OH* *D'OH* *D'OH*
I don't think we have any evidence that any of the conditions the parent listed were true, as the poster said "I don't know which of these apply".
Long story short: processor performance is (approx) equal to the intructions it can do per second (IPC) times the number of cycles per second (frequency).
The Pentium 4 was specifically designed to have a high megahertz, at the cost of IPC. That means that when the Pentium 4 first came out, the 1.3ghz Pentium 4's were actually slower performance-wise than the 1ghz Pentium III's they were replacing.
What Intel has now discovered is that their high frequency chips eat tons of power and are reaching a wall in terms of performance. So, they've come up with the Pentium M, which actually has a higher IPC than the old Pentium III architecture.
So, long story short: the 1.7 Pentium M is not really that much slower than a 3.0 Pentium 4. It's slower but not that much (about the speed of 2.6 Pentium 4), and it's *far* more efficient - so it can get up to double the battery life of a Pentium 4 laptop, as well as fit into a thinner, lighter, cooler, quieter case since it'll need less cooling.
Basically, high-end Pentium 4 laptops are good for desktop replacement since they can still be faster than Pentium Ms, but they're big, heavy, hot, loud beasts. Pentium Ms may be a bit slower, but all around are much more pleasant laptops.
Not really, I think you were thinking of the CPI... since the IPC for the P4 is actually higher than the P3 since it has a few extra functional units.
The problem is that the P4's pipeline is 2x and 3x as long as the P3 (for the 2 and 3Ghz machines respectivelly). So basically a single stage of a newer P4 does 1/3 of what the old P3 stages did. Now, if you factor in things like the cost of branches and lack of ILP and so on... the overall CPI (clocks per instruction) for the P4 is higher than the P3. I.e. the average instruction takes more cycles to complete. However the "cycles" for the P4 are shorter so that was the tradeoff Intel designers were looking at.
Unfortunatedly, very deep pipelines need a shitload of storage structures and the fast switching times means more power consumption and worse leakage on the structures. So they ended up with a very fast pipeline, that was chugging glows of power: Not a good thing for a laptop.
First of all, both formats are considering the same DRM. I suspect that there will be no differentiation between the two formats in this respect.
Secondly, don't be too sure about the ability of these DRM measures to be cracked. It is not instructive to look at DVD as a lesson; there were significant flaws in its implementation. I frankly don't think they'll make that "mistake" again. The copy control system will likely be stronger than the successful systems employed for, say, SACD and/or DVD-A, involving both hardware and software based methods.
As some have stated, Blu-Ray discs will indeed have greater storage capacities in terms of raw bytes. However, they have chosen to only support MPEG-2 compression whereas HD-DVD will support several MPEG-4 variations (including H.264). What this means is that even though HD-DVD's have a significantly smaller storage space they will in fact be capable of storing more video at equal quality.
FACTS:
HD-DVD
Dual Layer Storage: 30 GB
Max HiDef Video: 4.5 hours
Blu-Ray
Dual Layer Storage: 50GB
Max HiDef Video: 4 hours
* Over 1000 Linux on POWER applications.
* Fifth generation POWER(TM) processor delivers enhanced Linux application performance via improved memory and data access.
* Backed by IBM's long-standing commitment to the Linux operating system.
* Consolidate your infrastructure and mission-critical applications on one OpenPower server.
I thought DIVX was more of an extension to the DVD format such that the dvd drives themselves were the same but different firmware/software, whereas blu-ray and HD-DVD are completely different formats in no way compatible.
Intel really should use PentiumM for desktop already and bail on Itanium line of CPU's.
Actually I believe Intel already has this planned, from what I understand however is they are dropping the low power consumption and ramping up the clock. Should make for an interesting desktop procescor.
On another note, I love my Pentium M 1.4ghz even at 251 mhz (its lowest speedstep) it runs my mmorpgs smooth as silk.
Yes, that is true, DIVX was built on DVD technology. But if the players and discs are incompatible, and some studios support one and not the other, the effect on the market would be the same as if HD-DVD and Blu-Ray both became "popular" for movies. The studios and the standards bodies need to get together with the technology folks and settle on one standard.
Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
Directv shut down the HU card about six months ago leaving millions of sat pirates in the cold. Their replacement, a.k.a. the P4/P5 card has been around for two years and afaik there has been no real progress on hacking/reverse-engineering it.
Unlike other pirate industries, the underground sat market is a huge money maker. The rewards are higher for hacking sat technology because you can resell it to friends and associates.
Despite a huge distributed effort, no one has been able to put a dent in Dave's new card.
Sometimes DRM does work.
With how many different formats of ATAPI drives we have, perhaps desktop ATAPI drives should slim down as well (or their SATA equivalent). Otherwise I may find it difficult to fit in CD-RW, DVD+/-R(W) +DL, HD-DVD, and Blu-Ray drives in a single case with only two 5.25" bays with front access for maximum access speeds and compatibility. (Dedicated CD-RWs tend to be able to read and burn CDs faster than multi-format DVD burners. And presuming something in that set still has DVD-RAM compatibility.)
If they could halve the height of each drive (would that be quarter-height or eighth-height drives now?), maybe it would work with an additional controller installed.
Why should only the laptop users benefit from the reduction in component size?
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
Standard DVDs are 480i/480p.
480p = 720x480.
720p = 1280x720.
And coming soon, special perpendicular-pan-and-scan versions of 720p HD movies on SD-DVDs viewable only on TVs in portrait orientation (or the viewer lying down). With the extra detail in the vertical resolution, you won't miss the other 62.5% of the picture.
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
i haven't been able to post comments for about a month and they accepted a story from me...