Slashdot Mirror
Panasonic To Ship Form Factor-Standard Blu-ray Drive
Lucas123 writes "Panasonic plans to unveil the thinnest Blu-ray Disc drive made yet at the upcoming CES show. The drive is 9.5mm high, which allows it to fit into standard laptop form factors instead of requiring manufacturers to redesign systems to fit high-def DVD players as they've been doing. 'Panasonic has already begun offering samples of the drives to laptop makers with the hope that the companies will build it into new PCs.'"
I'm confused..
So basically, -1 troll/offtopic is really slashdots way of saying "I hate that you thought of something before me."
They are a bad role model for all the other drives that now have to canibalize themselves to keep up.
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
So what data rate is 1x for Blu-Ray? I'd assume "x" is different than for, say, CDROM.
It goes from God, to Jerry, to me.
Blu-ray 1x data rate = 36 Mbits/sec
Most of the stuff on
The new Dell XPS one machined have an option for the dual layer blu-ray drive built directly into its monitor. It's about time the announce one for standard laptop size drive bays.
Why would anyone voluntarily let a Sony product near their computer after the rootkit fiasco? Burn me once...
Burn me twice...Hey cool! This thing's rewritable!
This guy's the limit!
actualy the X isthe same for CD's as Compaft Flash cards 1x = 150KB/s = 153,600B/s = 1,228,800b/s = 0.146MB/s
..
.. 2x ment 30min.. and if i am correct that is what they are doing for DVD/Blu-Ray/HD-DVD.. soo to figure out the rate
honestly it doesn't bother me that they did that.. although i do agree that DVD/Blu-Ray/HD-DVD should have stuck to the same damn unit of measurement... but they kinda did
see the orginal 1x. ment you chould burn a full cd in 1 hour
(diskSize/((60*60)/(xRating)))'s
note that that is only for disk media and not how flash memory is done.. flash is still 1x = 150KB's
'...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
Or it could be that the announcement of a "form factor" isn't the most exciting and debatable topic. All you really need is one post, bubbling to the top, explaining that it means the drive can go into standard laptops. Someone already did that bit, so what's left?
Arguing the merits of 7mm vs 9mm sizes? Yeah that's a real hot button issue.
Umm, what Sony product are we talking about here? This is a panasonic drive that uses media developed and supported by an industry consortium, of which Sony is one of a dozen companies.
No, 1x was meant to mean the same speed that the audio played at; one-times real-time. 2x would mean you burn/read at twice the rate of playback. 1x never meant you could burn a CD in one hour. For example, a standard CD-R is 72 minutes, and takes.... 72 minutes to burn at 1x. Most CDs are 80 minutes these days. I'm sure you can figure out how long they take to burn at 1x.
1x happens to be 150KB/s, but that wasn't the original definition.
Wow, I see posters unwilling to read stories linked to before but it's been a long time since I've seen one not even willing to read the summary! Panasonic is not exactly a subsidiary of Sony.
Regardless what you think of Sony, Blu-Ray is a format with a wide range of hardware makers defining the standard - not just Sony. It's not like the Betamax situation with Toshiba and HD-DVD.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
While the media itself limited the recording speed in the past
The media itself limited recording speed in the past because the discs would shatter if you spun them too fast. It'd be nice if they let us know what has changed with BluRay that means that discs won't tear themselves apart at high rotational speeds. Are they not made of the same polycarbonate materials as HD-DVD/DVD/CD are?
He's talking about the distance from the surface of the disk to the recordable medium
While that distance is shorter, the medium in between is far less fragile than CD/DVD.
Would you (could you!) do that with a DVD?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
AFAIK, all currently available Blu-ray drives were 12.5mm-high: that is the height of most laptop optical-drive units (for nearly every consumer-oriented laptop), whereas those that are professional-oriented (Lenovo and HP) are 9.5mm high. The question is that HP has been offering a Blu-ray drive on some of its laptops (8510w and 8710w) for several months, meaning that Blu-ray 9.5mm-drives have been already available for at least several months...
Sources: http://www.thelookandsoundofperfect.com/overview.html http://www.steppininit.com/tay/hd_vs_blu-ray/about_hd-dvd.html
While I've made my choice for HD DVD, many of your comments are exaggerations or just plain silly.
HD-DVD and Blu-ray disks are about as reliable as one another. Blu-ray disc manufacturers use a protective coating to ensure reliability, whereas HD-DVD discs don't require it as they don't store data as close to the surface. The net affect is both are about the same.
HD-DVD and Blu-ray both use the same blue-violet lasers. The drives are not "cheaper to make", they're close to identical except for the differences you'd expect from slightly different formats designed by two groups aiming to do the same thing. HD-DVD discs are cheaper to make, although dollar-per-megabyte they come close in price. But the drives have no price advantage. I'm not sure why you think combo discs would be cheaper than regular discs, as you imply above, but a combo disc costs about what you'd expect a double-sided HD-DVD to cost.
Production HD-DVD does not contain 51GB. Production HD-DVD is still two layer. Three layers is coming, but there's some debate as to whether existing players will support it, and that's holding up production use. Three layer HD-DVD is coming, but lay off the word "production" until it actually goes into production, ok?
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Is it just me or does anybody else find this extreme thin fetishism to be a little bit out of control? I can see how thin, in the absence of other considerations, can be desirable from the standpoint of it takes up less space in my pocket or on my desk. However, we see device manufacturers producing products which overheat and die because they wanted that last 2mm of thinness instead of a long lasting and stable product or they put a really small battery in the device, substantially reducing uptime when running on battery, simply to save that few millimeters again. I wouldn't even mind so much except that it is becoming difficult for people like me, who value other qualities besides just "thinness", to find the electronics that we want at a reasonable price instead of planned obsolescence consumer grade junk that sacrifices the functional characteristics of the device for the physical looks and dimensions of the device (among the least important characteristics in my opinion).