Slashdot Mirror
45GB Triple-Layer HD DVDs
m4c north writes "Toshiba has developed a new DVD-ROM: 45GB spread over 3 layers. From the press release (which has a few illustrations) the new discs have the ability "to record twelve hours of high-definition movies on a single disc." They've also added a "dual-layer hybrid ROM disc comprised of a dual-layer HD DVD-ROM side and a dual-layer DVD-ROM side." Japan Today's article adds, "The huge capacity means that a single disk can store a Hollywood movie trilogy." Do I smell yet another Star Wars re-re-release? Toshiba will take the wraps off the new DVDs at the Media-Tech Expo 2005 in Las Vegas. The HD DVD Promotion group offers the press release in PDF."
It's a shame that the DVD community doesn't have the ability to decide on a standard...
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
I'm sure Star Wars re-re-re-released on HD DVD will be stunning, but I'm rather skeptical about when I'll actually have a HD TV to watch it on. As it is, the set I just got is pretty damn good when viewed on a non-CRT screen (no black lines.) A couple years ago Philips had the TV/Monitor to watch HD on, but it was $18,000. I'm certain that kind of quality hasn't come down far enough in price, nor shall it in the next 3 years for me to even consider buying one (probably only when I get HD Soccer on FSC or such.) Meanwhile, as we saw the other day, someone has nanotubes which may make some really great screens, but probably won't actually hit consumer markets, priced attactively (gotta pay off that investment in research.)
Heck, I'm only moving to a 64bit CPU at home because 32bit motherboards aren't being innovated anymore and I need a new mobo. It'll probably be a burned out monitor that forces me to get the nanotube screen and a few really good movie titles which convince me to upgrade to a new DVD (only because non HD players aren't made at that point.)
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
We've been looking for a decent replacement for our old 30gb tape backup system, and this looks to be the critter. Hope the price of burner and DVD's isn't too high. Heck, with that kind of storage, I could use Ghost or something like it to do HD images.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
and I just ended up buying that double layer writing capable writer.. can they arrive on a standard and let me buy something.. for cheap?
Now it will only take 20 of these to backup my porn!
The backwards compatibility is great and all. HOWEVER, I'm selfish -- I care far more about a cheap and fast recordable format.
The triple-layer action sounds about as non-recordable as it gets. Given that HD DVD without it has far lower capacity than Blu Ray, I really, really want HD DVD to lose.
Now my DVDs will come with 10 hours of useless crap instead of the current 4. And I'm sure the 30 episodes of season Y of show X will still come on 3 disks.
Blu-Ray has had 8 layer 200gb discs for almost a year now: http://www.digitmag.co.uk/news/index.cfm?NewsID=44 30
Just imagine how many different models of CD(or whatever)-ROMs we're going to need now, and how many sub-versions (a-la DVD-R, DVD+R) we'll have.
The packaging on burners will look something like this:
16x4x16x DVD+RW / 12x4x16x DVD-RW / 5x DVD+R DL / 4x HD DVD+R / 32X HD3-DVD1-R+RW / etc / etc
-Jesse
Nothing says "unprofessional job" like wrinkles in your duct tape.
With something like this I'll be able to backup my workstation with ten pieces of media, instead of the seventy or so DVDs it would take to do a Full Backup.
Seriously, it's about time offline media started catching up with hard drive capacities.
Twelve hours of high-definition pr0n on a single disc.
"The nice thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from."
- Andrew S. Tannenbaum
The first 80 minutes of these discs will hold music...the remainder of the disc will hold the RIAA's DRM.
Dupe right? Or did I see this on Tom's Hardware...
Sigs are for Terrorists.
More wondering which will support true 1080 (progressive).
Transcend Humanity. Please.
not going to happen.
the film companies love multidisk sets.
did we need 4 disks for the fellowship of the ring? were they full to capacity both sides, both layers?
As stated previously, when they decide on a standard, let me know. I'd really like to get a burner, and I know that it will probably work well and be compatable for some time. However, I don't want to buy something and then have it become obsolete just after I buy it. Guess I'm just too cheap.
I'm not a troll, but I play one on Slashdot.
12 hours of HD in 45GB? Lets see here:
45GB=45000MB=360000Mb
360000Mb/12hour=30000Mb/hour=8.3Mb/s
Interesting... Not only is that below what HD TV is, it is below the highest speed a standard DVD is read at (1x=~10Mb/s). You can compress HD to that level, but it will look like crap. SD, on the other hand, will look fairly good at that bit rate. My guess is that on a 45GB disk, they will be able to store 4 hours (~25Mbit) of HD programming on this disk. And yes, that is what I expect HD programming to debut at (at a minimum). Personally, I am hoping for something a bit hgiher (say 45Mbit at least).
Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
Wow thats a lot of porn!
Taco?
"Do I smell yet another Star Wars re-re-release?"
So? It's not like all your other Star Wars DVD material suddenly went obsolete, and you HAVE TO buy the new release.*
*Luddites all. You somehow expect technology to stay stagnant, and when it doesn't. You find something negative to say about it.
This is what, the 42nd new DVD format this week?
If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
1) Even if it has a "scratch-proof" surface, data gets much more delicate. Think about it, 45 GB of data on one disk. If this disk gets broken, you lose a whole lot more than having the data on 10 DVDs and losing one.
2) It is still a mechanic, spinning system. Which sucks, because it has to accelerate first, then it can read. If there is an error, it decelerates.. well, you know it already. It blocks parts of the system, and is downright annoying.
OK - the data density is MUCH higher than in a CD. But no one says that the maximum transfer rate isn't going to increase. And when this happens, we have the spinning & error problems again.
This sig does not contain any SCO code.
How long until we get n-layers deep, where n is a very high number? Pretty soon, the whole world will fit on a disc.
Let's get the double layer ones at a reasonable price before we go crazy on this new one. I'm still seeing around $4 apiece for the doubles buying them online in bulk.
"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
Where are the disco-dancing pits and lands ?
I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of killer sig, which this margin is too narrow to contain.
At the beginning of the CDrom era, a CDrom handled more space than most of HDs over there (at least the personal computer HDs). You were lucky if your HD was 200Mb!!. I guess we would be happier with something of about 100Gb right now, but I agree that 30Gb is more than enough.
Am I the only one who doesnt always care about resolution? Sure, some things I want them to look nice, but if I'm catching up on a TV show with 900 episodes, why not cram 24 episodes onto a single disc? (And if I like a particular episode and want to see it in HD, I'll buy it seperately)
Does anyone care about HD? Yeah, of course. Do enough people care about HD that eliminating (or simply never producing) lower-resolution formats makes sense?
-- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
The HD-DVD folks have upgraded their inferior 30GB disc to a still inferior 45GB disc. (15GB per layer) Meanwhile, Blu-Ray still holds steady at 50GB. (25GB per layer) All of this is moot, of course, as Blu-Ray will prevail with an eventual max size of 200GB (8 layers) per disc, outdistancing a max size of 120GB (8 layers) per disc for the HD-DVD condortium.
This artical seems to say that an agreement was made. I thought it sounded strange and saw this artical on theregister today. I dont think anyone knows whats going on at the moment :)
I -- as someone else mentioned -- hope that Blue-Ray tech gets used for the media. As its far superior.
10-15 minutes of porn is sufficient for general public, really. No need to be HD quality either.
Good enough, then.
I'm thinking it might not be a good idea to have an entire trilogy on one disc, especially considering just the surface area size remains the same but the data density is far more than a std. dvd. A nick or a scratch might result in more than just a wee 'glippup' when watching a movie. It'd suck to have a trilogy hosed because of disc damage. I'd rather have them separated on different disks.
http://www.randomshiznat.com/Boomshots/2000052500_ 00.html
Not long ago I purchased the "Smokey and the Bandit" trilogy on DVD ($12.50 at Staples), and was suprised that it fit on one DVD.
They used the trick of the double sided DVD to acomplish this mission.
Since only Smokey and the Bandit 3 is on one side I can safely say that there at least one side with no quality data on it (how horrble must a script be for Burt Renolds to turn it down?)
I used to have a cool sig, back when I cared
Back when I first bought a CD burner, I did it to archive. Back then, a "big" consumer harddrive was around 1.2G and a CD held about half of that. Not bad for the time.
These days a "big" consumer harddrive is around 250G to 300G, and this "great new technology" (yet to be released) will allow for about one fifth of that.
That's simply not enough for me to justify using it as a method of data archiving or backup. To backup a single 250G volume I'd need 5+ blanks.
On the consumer side of the equation, I can't see people moving from DVD to this unless there is some justification better than "you'll have to swap discs one third as often".
Now, on the topic of size, since most optical media is recorded radially, why not make the physical size of the discs bigger? Not as big as LDs, because those were a little unmanageable, but another inch or two in diameter would GREATLY increase the capacity of even a DVD-R. Some will point out that it would no longer fit in a 5.25" bay, but who cares. This is why we have firewire and USB2.
Thoughts comments?
it isnt soon when TB would be as ubiquitous as GB is now.. intially it was only RAM and now even flash drives are into it.. but isnt the domain of users limited to those in the industry? I mean would a household need this expensive thing "at this time" to back up stuff? unless u have GBs of pron or something to backup.. I sometimes feel the resources are outnumbering the needs (for a common user)..
Wow I need to get my calculator and see how many divix movies that is. Lets see, the whole battlestar galactica first season fit on 1 and a half regular (4GB?) dvds..... I could move my whole movie collection to a few mega-dvds, and my entire music collection to just one.
I Am My Own Worst Enemy
There's not been 45 fsking gigabytes of content made in the last 2 years I'd want to waste my time viewing.
"Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
...of this article is out of touch with movie releases. I think he meant re-re-re-re-re-re-release of Star Wars. Then again, maybe I missed a "re."
Quick, someone crash Goerge Lucas's computer before he reads this news!!!
-Valiss
So you'll need a new dvd player?
/has a high def tv at home //frustrated by lack of programming, seems All I ever get to watch on it is Lost and the occaisional Discovery special
I mean dvd-/+r and then the dual layer burners can all pretty much be read on the same dvd players (yes?) as most commercial movie releases are "dual layer" dvds? or am I way off here? Also I'm assuming any dvd player that is going to play High Def movies would have to be "new" do they even exist?
I wonder how fast it will take these to hit the market? With the impending XBox 360 release, I'm sure it would be nice for them to slip something like this in considering the PS2 will be using Blue-Ray.
Top 10 Reasons To Procrastinate
10.
"record twelve hours of high-definition movies on a single disc"
Now, if I could only find some high quality movies I'd be all set.
Finally, a solution to cramming Longhorn onto a single disc.
It's already been done.
...at least 6 hours of completely UNCOMPRESSED 1920x1080 progressive 24-bit video at 30 fps. I never liked the idea of requiring proprietary compression schemes for both archival and patent reasons.
A little over 4 Terabytes per disc should do, thanks.
Enough with the geek-bickering. You two are missing the important thing: he's got shitloads of naked boobies!!!
It's so good to know that people have finally agreed on a standard...
João Pinheiro
I bought into the Double Layer hype.
The price of the CDs are prohibatively expensive.
So no mater how many layers you cram onto a CD, unless the price is worthwhile, its useless.
Keep in mind that there are on-going talks on merging the formats (HD-DVD & Blu-Ray) next week so the timing of this is mostly political positioning. The change itself hasn't been discussed in the DVD forum and it's all vapor right now.
dual-layer DVD's are currently a few $ for 1, and write at about 1/4 the speed (on a decent priced burner) if that trend continues (does some approx. in head) thats in low-mid 10's of $ (10-15) and would take 16x as long (2 hrs)
By reading this, you have given me brief control of your mind.
An HD-DVD will easily fit the amount of video that is now stored on a whole season-pack of DVDs. But people will not be willing to pay $120+ for a single disk. They will demand what was sold before for $120 for $20. And thus we will never get the potential of this technology. You'll still have to get Star Trek: The Next Generation on 7 packs of 7 DVDs, even though they could fit it all on 3 or 4. The worst heresy I've seen recently was Bandai putting 26 24-minute episodes of Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex on 7 DVDs, and trying to charge up to $30 each for them. Considering that a single dual-layer DVD can fit all 26 episodes encoded at basically-perfect 1600kbs Xvid along with 6-channel AC3 audio, they have no right to spread out 11 hours of video to 7 disks. Its just an utter ripoff.
Okay, so I got unlazy; Memory-Tech, Toshiba Develop DVD/HD-DVD Discs
Kralizec writes "PC World reports that Memory-Tech has developed a dual DVD, HD-DVD disc, which stores DVD content on the upper layer and HD-DVD content on the lower. The DVD data can be read by standard DVD players, giving customers the incentive to buy now, and reap future benefits by buying an HD-DVD player at a later time. Blu-ray suffered a heavy blow when HD-DVD gained the support of four major movie studios; could this be the knockout punch?" (The format was developed jointly with Toshiba.)
Listen up Japan (and china) All I want right now are cheap, but good quality dual layer recordable DVD's. Hop to it.
Don't blame me, I voted for Cthulhu.
Last time I checked the price of dual layer DVDs was over $5/disk. My understanding is this is due to the high failure rate in production of blank discs. I can only imagine a triple layer disc would suffer an even greater problem of quality control. Thus I wouldn't count on the blanks being too cost effective in the near-term.
You get a lot more milage out of those formats. If you have a fast (3ghz+) Windows machine and are interested pick up the T2 Extreme Edition. In there is a DVD with the movie encoded for Windows Media player at 1080p. It is stunning, to say the least. At normal DVD rates they get some damn good quality HD.
Now I'm not saying that more bits won't give better quality or anyhting, but 7mbps with a new compression algorithm is enough to do HD.
So basically, a trilogy, since it has three movies will be entitled to be expensive and will cost around 80$/.
That's quite a lot for a single disk when you think of it.
I hear people replying, "yeah but single movies will be cheaper !". Sure, but then why do we need bigger disks ?
I just don't think storing several movies on a single media and selling it will work.
...Novell announced it would support the new standard immediately for Suse Linux's next live DVD iteration. In a related announcement, the new minimum memory requirement to run it will be increased to twelve terabytes.
Re: Star Wars
It takes less space for it after Jar Jar is edited out, not more. This format is overkill.
Re: chaotic standards
Why don't they just apply single or dual layer standards to larger discs instead of cramming ever more into a smaller disc where a single scratch wipes out a hundred times more data than ever before? Yet, ever more, we get farther from caddies which would be safer to keep this dense storage in.
If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
You're trying to tell me you're gonna try and sell a single disk for $100? No way. It won't happen. They'll still box them. And if people complain, they'll just add 40 hours of worthless crap to the discs to justify their 6-disc sets (instead of deleted scenes, they'll simply have 4 versions of each episode in their entirely, each differing by 30-seconds or so, or interviews with the "key grip," "costume designer," etc - it'll cost them pennies to tape those interviews, and they'll reap the benefits.).
And now some scratches and dust on these fragile disks hurts even more. Ever notice how CDs are a lot more resistant to abuse than DVDs? It's only gonna get worse. . .
With three layers, Blu-Ray will be able to handle 75GiB.
"Oppression and harassment is a small price to pay to live in the land of the free." -- Montgomery Burns.
I'm waiting for the DVD format that can hold a library of congress.
1. Invent new DVD format
2. Push the format on the masses
3. ????
4. Profit!!
This means an entire season of "The Simpsons" will fit on one disc! Although, "24" will still need two discs- but hey, that's better than 6. But I'm not so sure that reducing the number of DVD's will bring down the price of the set. List price for a season of 24 is $70. Just under $3 per episode. Anyone think it will get any lower based on new media technology?
Nope. As it was the original VHS, the re-release of the Special Edition on VHS, and the re-re-release for the current DVDs, that would make the next one the re-re-re-release.
This is the type of technology that is never going to be released. Blu-ray is failing miserably. There's another DVD standard on the go. Lots of hype, but this huge capacity DVD is only useful as a research tool, I mean, as technology basis for other developments and proof of concept.
Nothing to see here. Move along.
Your head a splode
So is there a nice simple FAQ that explains all the formats? I've searched and can't find something comprehensive.
i.e., they don't rot, like DVDs do.
The Raven
digital cameras and video camera.
In one year, my wife has gathered 10 Gigs of photographs. Soon she will get a digital video recorder. og course as disk space in all forms gets cheap, the option for higher quality is there. so instaed of 200 Megs of decent shots on a flash, we could have the option of 200 HD shots on a flash.
Eventually you could have genreations of photos that will be in the terrabyte range. By the time my kids have grown, and have kids we will have taken a ot of pictures, and each of our kids will get a copy of them.
that was just an example, I know that is not what the article was about.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
If they only put the HD movies on at a milder compression then there would probably only be room for one movie.
But hollywood has their own idea of what "good enough" means when it comes to MPEG compression. That's why satellite TV looks like crap.
DVDs are roughly 5:1 compression with a 90m single layer DVD. Not that great.
At least with an ultra-high capacity disk it's technically possible to put an HD movie on it with mild enough compression that even a videophile might not see the blockiness.
I just have my doubts that the movies that come out will be offered in that quality.
Do I smell yet another Star Wars re-re-release?
Great. In this one, nobody shoots first.
Now my 1-year-old daughter can destroy an entire trilogy at once!
errr... at least she could if I bought any movies......
This is all relatively secret, but yes, there will be another rerelease of the original trilogy. First, though, the LucasFilm team will have to work out some minor changes...
Wow, you're set top DVD player plays Xvid MPEG-4?
NO ONE ELSE'S DOES. These things are encoded in MPEG-2, which does not compress the video as much. This is why they need more capacity.
The smart cats pulled the Columbia House scam over and over again!
the best technology always wins.... not.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
GeForce 6800 Ultra Dual-link DVI graphics card: $400
;) The system in all honesty isn't perfect (for example, my cable box won't output the menu system over the firewire connection, at this time... but I hear it's planned), but it makes for damn good demo. And if you have a PC, you can still buy this screen and a GeForce and be doing this. (I am trying to get a PC to hot-switch in this setup but there are no dual-link DVI KVM switches yet...)
Apple 30" Cinema Display HD: $2999
Ability to view HD in full rez off a firewire stream from my cable box, PLUS games, PLUS movies, PLUS anything in any format that you can conceivably view on a computer screen... Priceless
But seriously, when I was in the market to invest in both an expensive HDTV screen and a nice computer (in this case, a dual 2.5ghz G5), I thought... why not merge, AND save money? So I got a hideaway desk that looks like an entertainment center, stuck it in my living room, and voila, my computer is also my entertainment center. All I do is push the Aeron out of the way when I'm entertaining guests
When will the holographic disks come out? I hear those were supposed to put HD-DVD and BluRay to shame. And when will we realize that HDTV is obsolete, and that 3-d projectors are the wave of the future?
Squishing all four seasons of the Trailer Park Boys into a single-layer DVD makes for more fun and is compatable with all DVD-R capable players. Call me when the fallout ends from all the next generation DVD standards (a.k.a. the company with the biggest war chest tells us what we want to buy).
;-)
Recipe:
4 lbs DVDs
48 hours CPU time
1 mplayer
1 mkisofs
1 cdrecord
1 blank DVD
Three Drives for the Movie-kings who plunder and ply,
Seven for the Hardware-lords all but clones,
Nine for Portal Men doomed to buy
One for the DRM Lord on his dark throne
In the Land of Discs where the data lies.
One Drive to read them all, One Drive to write them,
One Drive to bring them all and with their lasers byte them
In the Land of Discs where the data lies.
There is nothing so silly as other peoples traditions, and nothing so sacred as our own.
A man can only rebuy the White album so many times!
Not noteable, IMO a rubbish article.
I was once told by someone whom work in the video/audio media industry that one of the major factors that determine whether a type of media is a success or not is whether the media is "porn" friendly. When Pioneer made Laser Discs (LD), their "license" prohibited porn to be made on them, resulting in the flop of the format. VHS on the other hand had plenty, and DVDs are even friendlier with their "multi-angle" option (that surprisingly many people do not know about). If the porn industry picks a format, you know that one will be the winner.
By 2020, the base install for windows is going to be 640GB!
HD size having increased alone means very little. A 300GB drive with nothing to put on it wouldn't justify a need for bigger backup devices.
What really creates that need is the contents we're dealing with nowadays. Gone are the days where you only had a couple dozen wordperfect documents to backup on your HD (or whatever). Floppies were enough to backup your files.
Now, the average consumer has much higher needs. I've got CF cards over 2GB for my DSLR that I fill repeatedly, miniDV/DVB-S/DVD/analog video sources that I capture and/or PVR, I've got a music collection and a music video collection on separate HDs, lots of documents/code/databases/email/ebooks/etc accumulated over the years (many gigs of stuff)... Even if you have a small'ish HD, you may still be dealing with a LOT of data to backup (that need to burn stuff is actually higher if you HD is smaller - you must make free space). And we're not talking about all the pr0n, P2P downloads and such that a lot of people have endless GBs of... I doubt any backup device could keep up with it. Even if we had affordable 200GB Blu-Ray discs, I'd still be buying lots, and soon enough it wouldn't cut it anymore.
Bigger backup devices are a desperate need right now for all of this stuff, but size is only one concern. Reliability is the other big factor. My photos are now all digital, if the media dies, I loose everything. No more archived film... We need something that will last, I've already had to re-burn so many things already, it's scary.
Right now, it looks like the best backup device is a HD, size wise (fits lots per unit-no excessive swapping), more reliable than most other [optical] storage means, and half-decent value for the money ($/GB) [for stuff that matters at least, like digital photos]. Both new format address the size issue, but not really the reliability. It doesn't seem like there is much hope for a solution that adresses both points to come out anytime soon.
///<sig
so let's see here, one triple-layer HD-DVD hold 45GB while a dual-layer Blu-ray disc holds 50GB.
Toshiba is incompetent. Blu-ray wins.
Will these new DVDs be readable by older DVD players? How will that work, will the player read only from the two first layers of data? I don't know anything about these technologies, I'm just asking
"Words of wisdom: drop that zero and get with the hero" -- Vanilla Ice
The videos were released several times... in a 15-20 year period. Almost as if they were released after the movie had been out of print for aperiod of time.
Does anyone know how many times Wizard of Oz or Godfather or Jaws was released on video? No, cause no one pays attention to that.
Back in 1999 when every dvd-fanboy was yelling and screaming for the Star Warts movies to be released on DVD (including the ones they hated) Lucasfilm's position was that they wouldn't come out until Episode 3 came out. 'Why not just release a barebones version now and Super version later', many demanded. Lucas also mentioned in interviews that he was thinking about waiting until a newer hi-def DVD standard was developed.
But people yelled and screamed that he was being Greedy and Selfish by not releasing the movies on DVD. (Tough one would think it would be greedy to release the movies and take in as much money as possible.
So Lucas released the movies on DVD, first TPM, then AOTC, right after its run and then the OT-SE versions last year.
Then people started complaining that he was going to rerelease them again just to make more money, and by the way why wasn't he releasing the original theatrical versions (which would have made him even more money if he had).
So Lucas is Greedy-Selfish if he DOES release the moviaes and he's Greedy-Selfish if he DOESN'T release them.
That's a pretty tidy situation.
Now it looks like there's going to be a newer higher capacity format avialable.... after Episode 3 is finished - just like Lucas predicted.
-------- In Soviet Russia, "Soviet Russia" sigs hate Slashdot.
..that aren't like $10 a pop or whatever. I'll admit to not looking for any in a few months, but it seems they never went down in price even when the price of DL-capable burners hit rock bottom.
Maybe they're cheaper, but not close enough to single layer.
Bummer. You had me excite thinking I could buy say 100 for $39. I was already thinking how I could use them. I guess I'm still stuck with the old 4.7s. Ebay seems to have them at $5 a pop. Way more expensive than 2 X 4.7 disks. The one dual disk I had took forever and a day to burn as well. Sure seemed like it.
Do I smell yet another Star Wars re-re-release?
Do I hear a "ONE 'RING' TO RULE THEM ALL"?!
---Up Up Down Down Left Right Left Right B A START
I think that in the rush for high capacity storage, the durability will suffer.
Be it for movies, be it for backups, durability is far more important to me than how much data I can store and lose in too short of a time.
ZeKritik - Ze man has zpoken
Maybe now they can release a disc in a nice form factor like Minidisc. Making the discs smaller would be nice. Another nice feature would be discs that aren't as easily scratched. I would so love to not have to obsess about dropping the disc when transfering from the case to the player and back again.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
Oh! Good! Now my DVDs will self-destruct three times faster than my single layer ones.
This is what, the 42nd new type of beer this week?
This is what, the 42nd new brand of car this week?
This is what, the 42nd new kind of bread this week?
Ahhh!
*light comes on*
You like capitalism when it gives your more of the same.
You hate capitalism that forces you to make a choice.
Toshiba will take the wraps off the new DVDs at the Media-Tech Expo 2005 in Las Vegas.
You mean the one that ends today?
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
Damn 45GB that's crazy. Are these things compatible with current DVD players? Jeremy Whittaker MCSE MCSA CCNA http://www.n2networksolutions.com/ Arizona Computer Consulting
While I love new tech, and what self-respecting geek doesn't, my wallet has been in hybernation mode for the past two years. And if I get the urge to to buy the special edition Return of the King or Star Trek TOS 1 then I'm gitty to buy the good ole fashioned DVD format, thank you very much!
And tell me how they're going to get DVD burners to work with this media when they can't even get top of the line Taiyo Yuden media to work with my stupid Lite-On!
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
I've said it before and I'll say it again:
As bit density goes up, and is multiplied across multiple layers, scratches become more and more of a serious issue.
EG:
With CD's, minor scratches were played through with little, if any, musical detriment. Major scratches might ruin part of a song, or in the worst case, a whole track or two. But the rest of the CD was still good, so you could skip to other tracts.
Now DVD's, with higher density, have higher sensitivity to scratches, and also because movies are much longer than songs, skips are much less tolerable. Scratches that would go unnoticed on a CD can cause super annoying skips on a DVD and larger scratches can just obliterate whole parts of the movie. That's why i don't rent DVDs very often: Middle of Climactic Screen>>>>> opening credits? WTF? They just don't play smoothly far too often.
This is unacceptable now, but it's going to get WAY worse with higher density media and even more layers. There are two solutions:
1) "Diamond"(or some other super scratch resistant) coat the disc surfaces...or
2) PUT THEM IN FREAKING CADDIES YOU GREEDY, SHORT-SIGHTED DUCHE-BAGS!!! YOU HAVE TO SELL MOVIES IN A CASE ANYWAY? WHY NOT ONE THAT INTEGRALLY PROTECTS THE MEDIA AT ALL TIMES!!
Look, so it might cost a (little) bit more up front, but it would also raise the cost to pirates (the real, group operation type, not 13y-olds) by a MUCH bigger percentage of their revenue, thus cutting down on their profitability, ergo, more people will buy legit copies.
I was relieved to hear that Blue-Ray was going to be in caddies, but I heard they changed their minds? Anyone know? Sony had it right with Mini-disc and UMD physically, just wrong with the proprietary BS
Anyhow, the cynic in me says that the movie houses are counting on us having to buy an new, full-price copy every time a stray piece of dust ruins the new unprotected HD-DVD-DualSided-Quadlayer-ShinyGod.
"Cheeze it!" - Bender