DailyTech - Verbatim Announces HD DVD-R, 2X BD-R

Submit News

Hardware Verbatim Announces HD DVD-R, 2X BD-R
Purav Sanghani - June 11, 2006 12:51 PM

30 comment(s) - last by AMDcertfdbigot.. on Jun 14 at 4:57 AM

HD DVD-Rs, followed by 2X BD-R on the way

Verbatim Corporation, a Mitsubishi Kagaku Media (MKM) brand, announced July availability of HD DVD-R media in Japanese markets. The company then announced that it will be the first to offer 2X (72Mbps) single-layer 25GB Blu-Ray Recordable and Rewriteable media this July as well. Verbatim has not announced an estimated shp date for the US.

The 15GB HD DVD-R media will be thrown into production in the early part of July, however the press release says production of 30GB dual layer HD DVD-R media will begin this month.

Like its DVD-R counterparts, HD DVD-R media will feature the Metal AZO recording dye which Verbatim claims to be highly resistant to ultraviolet light and heat which can wear away at the media.

MKM HD DVD-R media is currently manufactured exclusively in the company's Singapore facility. The company's Blu-ray recordable media is manufactured exclusively at a facility in Mizushima, Japan. 30GB blue laser Ultra Density Optical (UDO) discs are also manufactured at the same Mizushima facility, and Verbatim employees assure us the transition from UDO-R to BD-R manufacturing is seamless and logical.

Pricing was not announced at time of publication. LG just announced a 4X BD-R burner, but as of now there is no 4X (144Mbps) BD-R media. Pioneer's Blu-ray recorder became available about a month ago.

Comments

Threshold

Username
Password
remember me

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By kaoken on 6/11/2006 1:37:32 PM , Rating: 2

How fast is that? I'm guessing it'll take 2 hours to burn 30gb at that speed lol

RE: 2x

By GNStudios on 6/11/2006 1:40:01 PM , Rating: 2

How many kbit/s is 1X on BD?

Parent

RE: 2x

By KristopherKubicki

(blog) on 6/11/2006 2:05:32 PM , Rating: 2

1x BD is 36Mbps. I have updated the article to reflect this.

Parent

RE: 2x

By Runiteshark on 6/11/2006 2:10:17 PM , Rating: 2

How do they even calculate this? How much data they can pull at a set RPM or what?

Because it seems like CD and DVD x's are arbitrarily chosen.

Parent

RE: 2x

By BZDTemp on 6/12/2006 7:06:20 AM , Rating: 2

CDx1 is the speed it goes when playing CD-Audio and that, if I recall correctly, equals to 150 KB/s. Similar DVDx1 is the speed used when playing a DVD movie.

I'm guessing it's similar with HD-DVD and Blue ray.

A figure in rpm would not make sense since the discs does not spin at a constant speed but in fact runs slower the longer into the movie/music you are. Disc's are written and read from the center and outwards and the change in rpm is to ensure a constant data transfer speed needed when playing music and movies.

Note that constant rpm's are used in may drives when the discs are used for datatransfer and not media playback. This also means that fx. many CD-drives claiming 50x speed may in fact only deliver that at the outer edge of the CD!

Parent

RE: 2x

By GNStudios on 6/12/2006 2:34:24 AM , Rating: 2

thank you!

Parent

RE: 2x

By Haggar on 6/11/2006 2:16:35 PM , Rating: 2

At 2x, it would take 7 mins to burn a 30gb disc.

Parent

RE: 2x

By Sunday Ironfoot on 6/11/2006 2:23:49 PM , Rating: 3

Don't you mean 55 mins? I think you're confusing 72Mbps (Bits) with 72MBps (Bytes - capital B).

72Mbps = 9MBps

Parent

RE: 2x

By Xajel on 6/11/2006 2:36:37 PM , Rating: 2

no lead-in/lead-out time taken, only data write time... so you may add 1 to 1.5 min. to the time, don't know how long these Blue-Laser things will take...

30GB disc ( 1GB = 1000MB, this is general for storage calculations )
at 01x... it will take (30x1000) / (036/8) = 1:51:06
at 02x... it will take (30x1000) / (072/8) = 0:55:33
at 04x... it will take (30x1000) / (144/8) = 0:27:46
at 08x... it will take (30x1000) / (288/8) = 0:13:53
at 16x... it will take (30x1000) / (576/8) = 0:06:56

Parent

RE: 2x

By xdrol on 6/11/2006 4:57:38 PM , Rating: 2

Does BD use packetwrite tech, doesn't? If so, add 1-1,5 sec, instead of min.

Parent

RE: 2x

By Aesir on 6/11/2006 7:34:22 PM , Rating: 2

Probably even slower at 4x+, because then the drive would probably have to burn in CAV (I assume) and then you need to use a logarithm to calulate the time... either way, its slower than the theoretical limit.

Parent

RE: 2x

By KristopherKubicki

(blog) on 6/11/2006 8:07:14 PM , Rating: 2

Yes good point, 4X is the maximum -- so you have to give the drive time to ramp up to that speed (which for CD/DVD burners is the absolute last second of the burn). External hard drive for me!

Parent

RE: 2x

By BigLan on 6/12/2006 12:24:07 AM , Rating: 3

I don't know if 8x will ever catch on in the mainstream. You're talking 36Mbyte/sec continuous write speed, which most consumer level drives would struggle to provide (even high-end drives have a minimum sustained read rate of 40mbyte/sec at the edge.) As soon as a user tries to open IE, play an MP3, has bittorrent open or hits the swap file the harddrive throughput plumets and the bluray drive is going to hit it's cache and maybe rely on burnproof technology.

I think even 4x might be a struggle, especially with laptop hard drives.

Parent

RE: 2x

By Xajel on 6/12/2006 1:43:24 AM , Rating: 2

the 36MB/s is exactly 8x speed here... so they may really stop at 8x...

+ they may have something like benchmarking to enable 8x and more... most peoples will go for 4x...

currently I already uses 4x for DVD's and 8x - 16 x for CD's even I can burn at 16x for DVD's and 52x for CD's

20 min for DVD worth the wait if I want good quality burning... and I think 30 min for BD or HD worth more considring the diff in sizes between DVD's ad BD/HD

Parent

RE: 2x

By AMDcertfdbigot on 6/14/2006 4:57:15 AM , Rating: 2

wow a 30gig burning for less than an hour.sweet

Parent

Who needs this ?

By armagedon on 6/11/2006 4:16:41 PM , Rating: 2

I really don't see the need for such big capacity disk for the home user (beside their extravagant price). I still used mainly CD-R and sometime DVD for movies but never had any need for larger one. Beside double-layers DVD have now become cheap too.

RE: Who needs this ?

By Gooberslot on 6/11/2006 4:36:59 PM , Rating: 1

I actually think 25gb is way too small. 300gb might be a nice start. I'd like to be able to back up all my data on a few discs and then store them offsite somewhere, like a safety deposit box or something. It's really hard to do that with hundreds of cds and dvds.

Parent

RE: Who needs this ?

By TiberiusKane on 6/11/2006 5:26:03 PM , Rating: 2

Have you seen the deterioration tests on burned discs? They're horrendous for long-term storage. Given the costs, you might as well buy a hard drive+enclosure and chuck that into a safety deposit box. That and the hard drive is rewriteable on the fly.

Parent

RE: Who needs this ?

By TiberiusKane on 6/11/2006 5:26:56 PM , Rating: 2

Of course there's the tape route, but I'm not that dedicated.

Parent

RE: Who needs this ?

By BZDTemp on 6/12/2006 7:12:19 AM , Rating: 2

Tape is by far the most safe for long term storage.

I've seen hard discs left alone in 3-4 years not being able to run anymore but tapes will last a long time. Especially when stored correctly.

My guess the lubrication in hard discs dry out over time or something. Else I have no explanation for perfectly good drives not running after being unused for a longer period. To be really safe I think migrating about every year or so would be a good idea. That way one don't have to rely on keeping old computers running.

Parent

RE: Who needs this ?

By OddTSi on 6/11/2006 5:34:50 PM , Rating: 3

quote:
Beside double-layers DVD have now become cheap too.

I guess cheap is a relative term because I definately don't think they're cheap. In fact I don't think they're even close.

Even the 2nd-/3rd-class crap media is over $1.50 per disc. The 1st-class is still hovering at $2 and above. Considering that 1st-class single layer DVD-Rs can be had for $0.30/disc any day of the week (no need to wait for specials or coupons) I don't see how you can call the DL discs cheap. When 1st-class DL discs reach $1/disc is the day that I'll say "they've now become cheap."

Parent

RE: Who needs this ?

By SLCentral on 6/11/2006 6:14:35 PM , Rating: 2

http://www.shop4tech.com/z/DVD_R_9.4GB/1_286_876

Not sure where you're seeing $2 per disk prices...

Parent

RE: Who needs this ?

By SLCentral on 6/11/2006 6:15:42 PM , Rating: 2

Eek, my mistake. These are double-sided, not DL.

Parent

RE: Who needs this ?

By armagedon on 6/11/2006 9:51:59 PM , Rating: 2

man if you find $2 too expensive for a 9GB DVD-DL, you're surely the wrong customer for BR. Compare to $25+ for a single BR disk, i'll take a box of those $2 DL anytime to go along my $35 DVD burner instead of a $1000 BR version.

Parent

RE: Who needs this ?

By Xajel on 6/12/2006 5:20:04 AM , Rating: 2

it will change later you humans.. remember the first DVD-Writer, or even the First CD-Writer ??

I'm just srpriced that BD already started with writers. as I remember both CD and DVD started with readers for a while then we found the writers around... I know DVD-writer came to the market very quickly after DVD-ROM/Combo... comparder to the time taken between CD-ROM and CD-Writer @ Market...

Parent

RE: Who needs this ?

By BZDTemp on 6/12/2006 7:29:16 AM , Rating: 2

LOL - I remember the first CD burner I used. It would do 2x if the planets was aligned correctly and it only cost something like $6.000 plus you needed a BIG PC (In thoose days anything with SCSI and 600+ MB disc space was BIG!).

The process was also a lenghtly one and all done from DOS. Step one was to create an image file and it had to be a none-fragmented one. And step two was the burning so making one full CD (74 miniutes was the max CD-R at the time) took 2-2½ hours where the PC could be used for nothing else.

Also discs was exspensive at around $20 a pop plus they was in very short supply. I remember having 10 discs flow in meaning they ended up costing around $120 a piece!

On the up side producing a encyclopedia on a disc back then had automatic copy protection since almost no one had burners let alone hard discs big enough to hold even a single CD :-)

Parent

RE: Who needs this ?

By AGAC on 6/12/2006 7:33:57 PM , Rating: 2

Over an hour to fill a disk. Disks overpriced. Format wars... Count me out! Just give me an HD-DVD BD PLAYER so I can enjoy high def content and I´ll take care of my backups on an external hard disk.

Parent

umm

By shabby on 6/11/2006 1:26:26 PM , Rating: 2

Where are the burners?

RE: umm

By shecknoscopy on 6/11/2006 1:28:36 PM , Rating: 2

quote:
Where are the burners?

Just > $1000 and a dream away, my friend. Keep reaching for that rainbow. :)

Parent

Pioneer DVDR-A05

By shaw on 6/12/2006 10:56:29 AM , Rating: 2

My very first DVD burner was the Pioneer A05 when it first came out. $300 for 4X DVD-R burning! Then a year later the dual format burners are out at like $60 on newegg, blah.

"Google fired a shot heard 'round the world, and now a second American company has answered the call to defend the rights of the Chinese people." -- Rep. Christopher H. Smith (R-N.J.)