backtop

Print 24 comment(s) - last by Gio6518.. on Dec 31 at 11:23 PM
Panasonic says the thinnest Blu-ray drive ever made will be on display at CES 2008 in January

Ardent road warriors are always on the lookout for smaller, thinner and lighter notebook computers. With Blu-ray movies becoming more commonplace the same road warriors are also looking to systems with Blu-ray drives as well.

The problem with Blu-ray drives is that the typical Blu-ray drive for notebooks is about 0.5 inches thick. The typical standard DVD drive for a notebook is only 0.28 inches thick. This represents almost twice the heft for the Blu-ray drive compared to the standard DVD drive.

Panasonic announced a new ultra-thin Blu-ray drive aimed at notebook computers and UMPC systems that measures in at only 0.37 inches thick. This new drive is capable of reading Blu-ray discs and writing to Blu-ray media as well.

The thin drive will also read and write to standard DVD and CD media. InformationWeek reports Toshiba will have an equally thin HD DVD drive as well. While Blu-ray drives that both read and write Blu-ray media have been available in notebooks for some time, only recently were notebooks touted HD DVD writable drives.

Toshiba announced new notebook systems this month that feature the first rewritable HD DVD drives. Panasonic says its new thin Blu-ray drive will be on display in January at CES 2008.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Apple
By Zandros on 12/29/2007 1:28:01 PM , Rating: 2
One step closer to a Blu-ray enabled Macbook Pro then.

I think Apple severely limited its options when it chooses to make the laptops thinner every new iteration. I do not think it is possible from a PR standpoint to make a thicker laptop now.




RE: Apple
By BikeDude on 12/29/2007 3:22:16 PM , Rating: 1
The thin form factor is the main reason I bought my 15.4" 1" thick MBP... Anything thicker would simply not fit into my backpack (a LowePro PhotoTrekker).

Which makes me curious... Will I eventually be able to retrofit blue-ray (or HD-DVD) into my MBP, or will I have to buy a new laptop? :)

(FWIW: My MBP is a pure Windows box -- I did not buy it to run OSX, I only bought it because it is thin, has LED LCD backlighting and doesn't weigh a ton)


RE: Apple
By Etsp on 12/29/2007 4:16:19 PM , Rating: 3
I understand you only run windows on it but... you bought a notebook based on what suited your backpack?!? For most people, they would probably do it the other way around...


RE: Apple
By MADAOO7 on 12/29/2007 4:30:00 PM , Rating: 5
Ya, your logic is way out of whack if instead of spending $30 on a new backpack, you spent $2000+ on a new laptop.


RE: Apple
By ebakke on 12/30/2007 12:33:28 AM , Rating: 5
No no no. Camera first, laptop second. If you don't capture the picture, there's no point in bringing the laptop.


RE: Apple
By BikeDude on 12/30/2007 9:38:12 PM , Rating: 2
Uhm... I have a Canon EOS 1Ds-II and a 1D-II. I do have a larger backpack (LowePro NatureTrekker IIRC), but I usually fill it with a 500mm lens and again it is vitally important that the laptop remain thin . I haven't travelled with that backpack for two years now, so I'm not sure I'll still be able to get in onboard, but I am on the very limit of what can be brought as carry-on in either case.

The LowePro backpacks btw, do not cost $30...

(I'm very surprised your comment got rated that high)


RE: Apple
By Frank M on 12/30/2007 12:53:19 PM , Rating: 2
So you paid 2K for an Apple when you could have bought an ultra-portable, which is significantly smaller, for less? That's not very bright.


RE: Apple
By BikeDude on 12/30/2007 9:42:37 PM , Rating: 2
It was a hard choice, but the ultra-portables I found could at most accomodate 2GB memory. I wanted a laptop that could serve as my main computer for work, and I was forced to make a few tradeoffs.

I still have my old Fujitsu-Siemens P7010 if I really have to use something small, but it isn't too tempting. It served me well in the past, but it is just too slow and limited for real work.


yay!
By SSJGohanMlm on 12/29/2007 1:24:43 PM , Rating: 3
gooOOoO bluray!




RE: yay!
By Gio6518 on 12/29/2007 10:43:50 PM , Rating: 2
blu-ray is getting integrated into all areas very quickly, panasonic also has blu-ray players for auto, was talking to honda, chevy and ford all talking about adding it to their vehicle line up, minivans and family vehicles first


RE: yay!
By pattycake0147 on 12/30/2007 1:10:08 PM , Rating: 2
Do you think Ford is going to start equipping their vehicles with blu-ray drives when they just started SYNC with Microsoft, who is one of the biggest supporters of HD-DVD. Seems to me like they'd go HD-DVD first.


RE: yay!
By rmaharaj on 12/31/2007 2:51:03 AM , Rating: 2
This must be for all the people with 1080p displays in their cars/vans.

Wait...


RE: yay!
By Gio6518 on 12/31/2007 11:17:49 PM , Rating: 2
here you go children

http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/26/panasonic-showc...

and honda and acura use panasonic now


Ultra thin.
By ice456789 on 12/30/2007 8:38:50 AM , Rating: 2
I don't need an ultra thin blu-ray player, I need an ultra CHEAP blu-ray player. Make that and I'll buy it.




One more useless blu-ray device
By bigboxes on 12/30/07, Rating: -1
RE: One more useless blu-ray device
By Christopher1 on 12/30/2007 1:08:02 AM , Rating: 2
No one is going to 'win' the battle between Blu-Ray and HD-DVD. At worst (best) we will have devices that can read and write both formats, or we will simply skip a generation (like with S-CD and S-DVD) and move on to the next generation of discs, which are coming out quite soon and have higher capacities than even the current generation discs.


RE: One more useless blu-ray device
By bigboxes on 12/30/2007 1:40:39 AM , Rating: 1
Dammit, you're no fun. I was trying to bait a Blu-Ray fanboy and you go ahead and espouse logic. Well, yeah I'll have to agree. I wish they'd support both formats, but I seriously don't think they'll do that. Sony wouldn't do anything logical as that. :p


RE: One more useless blu-ray device
By maverick85wd on 12/30/2007 7:04:51 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
or we will simply skip a generation (like with S-CD and S-DVD) and move on to the next generation of discs, which are coming out quite soon and have higher capacities than even the current generation discs.


This is true. What you are missing is that everyone that already owns a PS3 or bought a stand-alone blu-ray player (or HD-DVD player) doesn't already have a player based on next-generation medium. And I don't see any S-CD or S-DVD players for sale for under $300 at Best Buy, either. Meantime, people in Japan especially are buying Blu-Ray recorders and are now blu-ray watchers automatically. Also, with a 3-layer blu-ray movie you have 75 GB which is plenty of space to support 1080p. Perhaps when things get into 2160p and movies take up 200GB+ we can worry about holographic drives (which are already available for record-only functions).

And I'm sorry but I don't see HD-DVD doing much of anything after Blu-Ray dominates the desktop market because of it's greater capacity for backup purposes.
http://img139.imageshack.us/my.php?image=recorders...


RE: One more useless blu-ray device
By rmaharaj on 12/31/2007 2:54:33 AM , Rating: 2
Name one film released or announced on triple-layer Blu-ray. Go on - I dare you.


RE: One more useless blu-ray device
By maverick85wd on 12/31/2007 6:41:46 AM , Rating: 2
I never said there was, I was saying that at 1080p triple layer blu-ray should be able to accommodate near-future capacity requirements.

I didn't think about the current players potentially not playing triple-layer discs. Even so, at 45GB for triple-layer HD-DVD or 51GB for a double-layer BD we are apparently still in the green. And according to wikipedia most movies sold in HD-DVD are the 30GB discs anyways, so for movies even just 30 GB is apparently enough for now... which is why I suggested BD will be more competitive as writers/re-writers become more readily available


RE: One more useless blu-ray device
By zombiexl on 12/31/2007 11:20:17 AM , Rating: 2
Just one problem with your post.

Dual layer BR is 50GB and the newer 3-layer HD is 51GB.
Other than that, yes BR is larger per layer. Although as you said 30GB seems to be enough for now.

I think they will both either fail or we will see better priced dual format players. These $999 players are insane considering you can get HD-DVD (1080p) and BR players for under $400 each, I've seen them both under 300.


By maverick85wd on 12/31/2007 12:01:43 PM , Rating: 2
my mistake, I got my numbers mixed up

I think because HD-DVD was so much cheaper at first it won't go away totally but with Blockbuster supporting BD that seemed the clincher to me. Now if HD-DVD had been built into every 360, the market would be going the opposite direction.


RE: One more useless blu-ray device
By Gio6518 on 12/31/2007 11:23:40 PM , Rating: 2
theyre not going to release the 51gb triple layer HD-DVD since the current players wont support it even with a firmware upgrade (I do respect them for that), which is either going to severly shorten the life span for HD-DVD or theyre just gonna say awwww screw it and release the 51gb disc and make everyone buy a new player


RE: One more useless blu-ray device
By winterspan on 12/30/07, Rating: -1
"We can't expect users to use common sense. That would eliminate the need for all sorts of legislation, committees, oversight and lawyers." -- Christopher Jennings



Latest Headlines
2/10/2012 Daily Hardware Reviews
February 10, 2012, 5:50 PM
2/9/2012 Daily Hardware Reviews
February 9, 2012, 11:54 AM
2/8/2012 Daily Hardware Reviews
February 8, 2012, 1:11 PM
Ex-Acer CEO Slapped With Lawsuit for Joining Lenovo
February 7, 2012, 5:38 PM
2/7/2012 Daily Hardware Reviews
February 7, 2012, 12:23 PM
2/6/2012 Daily Hardware Reviews -- Intel 520 240GB SSD Edition
February 6, 2012, 12:04 PM
botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki