Slashdot Mirror


Toshiba Touts 51GB HD DVD

srizah writes to mention that Toshiba plans to launch a 51 GB HD DVD, with a 1 GB advantage over Sony's Blu-ray disc. From the article: Toshiba has submitted a triple-layer, 51GB HD DVD-ROM disc to the standard's overseer in the hope the technology will be adopted as a standard by the end of the year. If approved, it allow the format to exceed the 50GB storage capacity of rival medium Blu-ray Disc. The HD DVD standard currently defines single- and dual-layer discs capable of holding 15GB and 30GB of data, respectively."

25 of 236 comments (clear)

  1. Fifty one! by plover · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ours goes to 51. Yes, but you see -- that's one more, isn't it? Fifty-one is one more than fifty, that's what makes it so special. It's one more.

    --
    John
    1. Re:Fifty one! by KUHurdler · · Score: 3, Funny

      640K of memory should be enough for anybody.

      --
      Fix Your Own TV - RiddledTV.com Avoid the Landfill
    2. Re:Fifty one! by L7_ · · Score: 4, Funny

      I always think of that hitchiker clip in "Something about Mary" when I hear of these comparisons:

      Hitchiker: You heard of this thing the 8-minute abs?
      Guy: Yeah, sure, 8-minute abs. Yeah, the exercise video.
      Hitchiker: This is going to blow that right out of the water. Listen to this. 7-minute abs. Right.
      Guy: Yes. OK, all right, I see where you're going.
      Hitchiker: You walk into a video store. There's 8-minute abs and 7-minute abs beside it. Which one are you going to pick?
      Guy: I'm... I would go for the seven.
      Hitchiker: Bingo, man, bingo. 7-minute abs. ...

    3. Re:Fifty one! by AftanGustur · · Score: 3, Informative


      According to Wikipedia, Blue Ray is up to 33 GB **PER LAYER** in the labs, that would give 66 Gigabytes for a *two layer* blueray disk.

      And of course, a 3 layer "standard" blueray disk would be about 70GB.

      And then there's reality, it looks like Sony will manage to shoot itself in the leg (head) with it's silly restrictions on content. (No pron).

      --
      echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
    4. Re:Fifty one! by Tanuki64 · · Score: 4, Informative
      Assuming Sony is actually preventing porn from appearing on Blu-ray ...

      Apparently this is not true. See: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070112-8602 .html
  2. 200 GB blu-ray by Naksu · · Score: 5, Informative

    TDK actually has made six-layer 200 GB blu-ray disks, way back in 2006 :) http://www.tdk.com/procommon/press/article.asp?sit e=con&recid=127

    1. Re:200 GB blu-ray by Karganeth · · Score: 3, Funny

      Nonsense! A company who distributed a rootkit and lost a different format war in the past could never create a technology superior to HD-DVD. Besides, a blogger posted something about Sony not licensing his pr0n movie so, obviously, Blu-ray is bound to fail.

  3. Priceless... by andrewd18 · · Score: 5, Funny

    R&D: Billions of dollars.
    Marketing: More billions of dollars.

    Squeezing that extra GB out of your next-gen DVD to claim your format is "better": Priceless.

    1. Re:Priceless... by Ucklak · · Score: 3, Interesting
      I am so f*king tired of that no-skip crap. That is worse than VHS.
      With VHS,
      • Fast forward through ads
      • Reset Counter
      • Rewind to 0:00 after tape is over


      I rip and reauthor my kids DVDs (good backup plan too - I've had a DVD break once) to avoid that non-skip crap. It's fantastic to pop a DVD in and have the show just start.

      There is one Kid G-rated DVD I have that has that seedy, loud music commercial about how illegal copying is bad. Sorry studio guys. That crap is scary to a kid. Why the hell do you force a viewing on a G-Rated DVD???????

      Some of that non-skip you can fast forward through, some you fast forward the chapters.
      Apparently there are DVD players on the market that actually skip this. Anyone know what they are?

      I am not on the bandwagon for this BD vs HD war. I doubt I will get on it as it is very anti-consumer from my point of view. The entire HDCP over HDMI crap penalizes consumers if they make a mistake. There are still TVs that have HDMI issues and that's a lot of change to lose to have a non-compliant piece of equipment that will show crappy SD content.

      In the good ole VCR days, you unpacked the thing, screwed the cable in the back of the device, screwed the other end in your 300ohm connector (or if you had a cable ready TV, right into the thing) , tuned to channel 3 OR 4 on your TV (and that was the worst decision if you could call it that) and you're good to go.

      Now, you have to buy not-so-expensive-anymore HDMI cables and pray it works.
      Then you may have to set on the monitor and the output device the resolution settings.
      If your HDMI is flaky or doesn't work, then your $40 DVD on your $800 DVD player is downscaled (not yet but the day will come).

      So really in review, this HD thing is sill untested.
      --
      if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
  4. the winnar is pr0n by User+956 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Toshiba plans to launch a 51 GB HD DVD, with a 1 GB advantage over Sony's Blu-ray disc.

    This will clearly make it victorious over blu-ray. The fact that the porn industry has chosen HD-DVD will have nothing to do with it.

    --
    The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
    1. Re:the winnar is pr0n by phlegm · · Score: 4, Informative

      Why does everybody keep saying this. It is not true. Just because a blogger says something does not make it fact. This was all over Digg and thoroughly debunked in the comments there. But people still believe it. Many producers including Vivid (The biggest) are exclusively blu-ray.

      --
      tabooki.com
  5. Not a big deal... by NineNine · · Score: 4, Insightful

    None of these high capactiy DVD formats are going to get any traction at all for at least the next few years. DVD has just recently become ubiquitous, and I'm willing to bet that nobody is buying these new players yet (except for the ones in the XBox 360 and the PS3). The TV technology (plasma and LCD) is still unbelievably crappy and overpriced, so there's no real reason for these new formats yet.

  6. They are making it more and more complicated by javilon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Will current HD-DVD players be able to read three layers disks? If that is not the case, they are adding to the DRM nightmare.

    Now you have to check that:

    - You are using the right disk with the right recorder BlueRay/HD-DVD
    - You are using the right variety of disk that you recorder can read (triple layer won't work on old players).
    - You have everything hooked using HDCP cabling.
    - All of your hardware supports DRM (if it doesn't your content will be downgraded and you will be worst off than you would with a dvd player).

    And off course, the way things are going, in no time your new shiny expensive hardware will be rendered obsolete by a new iteration of the technology and/or the Digital Restrictions Management schema imposed by the studios.

    You have to be masochistic to refuse the easy route to High Definition, a DVI connector, P2P and a BFHD (Big F*****g Hard Drive).

    --


    When his defense asked, "Which computer has Jon Johansen trespassed upon?" the answer was: "His own."
  7. Re:Can someone help me out? by InsaneGeek · · Score: 3, Informative

    1 layer = 17 not 15
    2 layers = 34
    3 layers = 51

  8. Amazing! by oGMo · · Score: 3, Informative

    Someone's competitor plans to launch a product with a 2% advantage over the product you can already get, mere years after something with a 100% advantage was demonstrated, and within only 8 months of something with 200% advantage!

    --

    Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage

  9. Re:Finally? by nonsequitor · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I doubt that. Toshiba has made a 3 layer HD DVD disc. The current Blu Ray discs are only 2 layers. From what I heard Toshiba has designed discs of both formats at 10 Layers, considering that you get more data per layer of a Blu Ray disc it will still be bigger. Plus they have already made a 6 layer Blu Ray disc with a capacity of 200 GB. And we all know 51 is much less than 200. If it were an apples to apples comparison, it may have been a nail in Blu Ray's coffin. However, when you compare the largest Blu Ray disc produced, to the largest HD DVD disc produced, Blu Ray still has a clear advantage in capacity.

  10. The spec can't be changed now by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 5, Informative

    (This article appears to be a dupe, so I might as well repost my comment from last time.)

    The HD-DVD spec was finalized a while ago. HD-DVD players can only read two layers, therefore no movie can ever have more than two layers. All this talk about more layers is just PR wanking.

    1. Re:The spec can't be changed now by Hamoohead · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm old enough to remember the capacity wars between Beta/VHS. The first Beta (B-I) was 90 minutes on an L750 tape and the first VHS (SP) was 120 minutes on a T120. Not to be outdone, Sony created B-II which doubled the recording time to 180 minutes. The problem was B-II was incompatible with the first gen machines. Sony's "solution" was to eliminated B-I (except for playback via a switch on the back of the deck) on all B-II decks. JVC (VHS) followed suit with LP (240 minutes) and the same incompatibility with first gen VHS decks (although LP decks retained SP recording capability).

      Sony followed with B-III (4h30m) and JVC with EP (SLP on Matsushita made decks - 6 hour). The only company to maintain recording capability for all speeds was JVC. But both formats shared playback incompatibility on previous generation decks with tapes recorded at the higher capacity, slower tape speeds. After three speed VHS decks became commonplace, content providers started releasing long (over 2 hour) movies in the LP (and occasionally) EP/SLP speeds, leaving anyone who still owned an older deck to either buy multi-tape copies, buy a new VCR, or do without. Sony actively dicouraged releases in B-III speed, claiming inferiority of the longer recording times. (Interesting enough, although it had a slightly better S/N ratio, the B-II speed was actually prone to more crosstalk and flagging than B-III, making B-III much better spec-wise.)

      While it makes for good press and scuttlebutt on /. (and I know I am risking flames for this) Betas demise had less to do with pr0n and more to do with JVCs higher initial capacity. Sony's 90 minute capacity was too little for the movie industry. Sony's shortsightedness in assuming people would only use the deck for time-shifting gave JVC the initial edge that Sony was never able to catch up with after the MPAA vs. Sony lawsuit was decided in Sony's favor and the movie industry embraced the VCR.

      The bottom line is, JVC's decision to go with a 120 minute initial capacity and maintain it throughout the life of the format at least gave early adopters the ability to play prerecorded content on their decks. But neither company was averse to breaking the compatibility with current decks to increase capacity. I suspect this will be the case with the future HDDVD/BluRay battle. Future gen decks will be backward compatible with the current standard (including BluRay if Sony is smart about it), and the movie industry will most likely release content only in the initial format reserving future higher capacity releases for a time when the higher capacity players have better market penetration. But early adopters will be out of luck if they want to play the new content on their old first-gen decks.

      --
      "If your parents never had children, chances are you wonât either." -Dick Cavett
  11. Behind the curve by Straif · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm not a big fan of Blu-Ray (lack of standards is going to play havoc on first gen adopters) but if this was a fight about capacity HD-DVD would have been dead before it ever began. Capacity is about the only aspect of the next gen formats where there is a clear winner and it is not HD.

    TDK was showcasing 100GB blu-ray discs almost two years ago and has recently shown off 200GB blu-ray discs. The problem is people are slow to adopt the use of next gen optical drives for performing important back ups and at present the excess capacity is next to useless for the movie industry.

    This does help HD-DVD in that the increased capacity does help them match Blu-Rays superiority in the important TV DVD market. Previous to this you could fit an entire high def season on one BR disc but would be forced to use 2 or 3 HD discs. Now they can both meet the single disc hurdle.

    I just hope someone wins this battle quickly and we'll get one standard for both PCs and movies or if not at least drives/players capable of reading both.

    --
    Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
  12. Re:The Important Question by sharkey · · Score: 5, Funny

    A REAL slashdotter wouldn't have to ask. A REAL slashdotter would already know.

    --

    --
    "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
  13. Re:Can someone help me out? by this+great+guy · · Score: 4, Informative

    1 layer = 15 GB
    2 layers = 30 GB = 2 x 15 GB/layer
    3 layers = 51 GB = 3 x 17 GB/layer

    For 3-layer HD-DVDs, Toshiba decided to use 17 GB layers instead of 15 for the sole purpose of obtaining the upper hand in capacity over the competing 50 GB Blu-ray discs. I agree that this is a bit laughable :)

  14. It's about production sizes, not disc sizes by dagamer34 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    It's not about the amount of storage space a HD-DVD or Blu-Ray disc can hold, as both formats have proven adequate to storing HD movies with amazing quality. No, it's about being able to get those discs into mass production with little increase in costs. That's why that 200GB Blu-Ray disc is pointless if it costs 10 or 20 times more to produce. Blu-Ray lost out earlier last year because while it did HAVE 50GB discs in it's initial spec, it took until late November to use them in movies. HD-DVD has been using dual layer 30GB discs from the start.


    We'll just have to wait and see how long it takes before these discs become reasonable to manufacturer. Until then, I'm sticking to DVD.

  15. Re:hey guys, help me make a decision by phlegm · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You should tag it as FUD since it obviously is. 200 gig is far bigger then 51 gig.

    --
    tabooki.com
  16. Re:Finally? by plover · · Score: 4, Informative

    According to the official numbers released PS3 is only 100,000 units behind the WII for Dec.

    People keep saying this because the PS3s were on-the-shelf available through most of the Christmas season, while Wiis were sold out on the morning of day one and continued to sell out immediately everywhere throughout the season. Nintendo could have easily sold two or three times what they did if they had the products on the shelves. Sony had their products out in the marketplace, which means they sold all they were capable of selling at their current price point.

    There's still a lot of guesstimation, but the Wii is far more popular than the PS3. Not that the PS3 is dying (Sony won't let it) but it's not going to dominate the current console market.

    --
    John
  17. Re:Can someone help me out? by hattig · · Score: 5, Informative

    You've got to +5 Informative by giving incorrect information.

    HD-DVD is 15GB per layer, in the current shipping product.

    1 layer = 15GB
    2 layers = 30GB

    In this product the capacity per layer has been increased to 17GB.

    3 layers = 51GB

    Theoretically that will also make 17GB and 34GB HD-DVDs a possibility. However there is a wee slight issue. Current HD-DVD players may not be able to read these new 17GB layers, and quite possibly may not manage 3 layers either. The first may be fixable in the firmware, but the laser is very much hardware - although the laser power might be firmware controllable, and hence make it possible to read with firmware tweaks.

    BluRay is 25GB per layer. However in a similar vein 33GB/layer BluRay discs have been done (200GB capacity in 6 layers), but some current players may read them, AFAIK. However if a firmware update would work then 66GB dual-layer BluRay discs are a possibility.

    OTOH Hitachi apparently showcased a 25GB x 4 layer BluRay disc recently however: "Hitachi demonstrated reading from a 100 GB Blu Ray disc, comprising four layers of data. It is probably in reaction to the upcoming adoption of triple layer HD-DVD. The good news is that this technology seems close at hand: the device used to read is very close to the LG GBW-H10N that we tested. A firmware modification was all it took to allow all four layers to be read."