Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Kutaragi Confirms End to Blue-Ray Talks

Posted by Zonk on from the they-can't-get-along dept.

Ken Kutaragi, SCE President, confirmed that after a long period of talks Toshiba and Sony cannot see eye to eye on the next generation of DVD format. Blu-ray discs, then, will be the only supported format on the upcoming Playstation 3 console. From the article: "Negotiations began back in February, but the two companies failed to reach an agreement on storage capacities. Blu-Ray discs can hold 50GB of data while HD-DVD discs only hold 30GB, but the HD-DVD camp argues that lower manufacturing costs make for a cheaper, more consumer-friendly product."

6 of 79 comments (clear)

  1. What i never understood... by YellowCyclone · · Score: 4, Insightful

    is why is there a debate on this to begin with...

    blu-ray holds more, shouldn't that be the final blow? even though hd-dvd is cheaper and will save the companies money, if blue-ray is introduce,d costs will eventually go down.....i'm sure this is what sony is betting on (as it did with dvd for the ps2), but will somebody explain it to me why hd-dvd has lots of rich backers?

    1. Re:What i never understood... by egomaniac · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's a matter of what's good enough.

      At 30GB, you have enough for over three hours of HDTV, which means most movies, even with special features, won't need any more than that. Why use a more expensive format when you'll hardly ever need the extra space?

      I agree, and that's why not all blu-ray disks will be 50GB. A 25GB single-layer blu-ray disk holds almost as much as a 30GB dual-layer HD-DVD disk. Fitting the entire movie on a single layer both eliminates layer transition pauses and reduces the cost of the disk. Even a 50GB dual-layer disk will generally only use one layer for the movie itself (the rest for extras) and so not require a mid-movie layer transition.

      On top of that, it's not clear that a single-layer blu-ray disk will be more expensive to manufacture than a dual-layer HD-DVD disk. The HD-DVD group conveniently ignores the fact that their opposition doesn't have to use two layers to store a full-length movie.

      --
      ZFS: because love is never having to say fsck
    2. Re:What i never understood... by jensen404 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      CDs offer me about 90% of the audio quality of real life.

      DVD's offer about 1% of the visual quality of real life.... They have a lot more room for growth.

    3. Re:What i never understood... by KDR_11k · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But stratch resistant disks would mean the consumer would never have to buy an extra copy if his old one gets scratched! We can't have that!

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  2. Higher capacity != better by yotto · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I don't know much about blue-ray but just because they hold more data doesn't make them instantly better. A 4-point font can display more text on the screen, but that doesn't make it better than a 10-point font.

    --
    Pulp Audio Weekly - Geek News and Reviews
  3. Sony probably wasn't willing to budge by Drakino · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm betting with as late in development the Playstation 3 was, Sony wasn't willing to budge.

    For me, while I like that Blu-Ray holds more, I think HD-DVD is the way to go. DVD is still in the name because it is an evolution of existing DVDs, and many components on both the manufacturing and player side just need to be retooled slightly to support the new format. Kinda like jumping from 720k to 1.44 MB 3.5 inch floppies.

    Since the switchover to the next format won't be instant, it makes sense to go with the format that allows the manufacturers continue to crank out DVDs and newer HD discs on the same line.

    I'm just dreading a format war after the products hit the market here in the US. Odds are, I'll end up plopping down cash on a multi laser product to play either, and one will wither and die a year or two later.