backtop


Print 59 comment(s) - last by 9nails.. on Jul 8 at 6:09 AM


TDK 25GB Blu-ray Media Rated at 6x - Image courtesy PC Watch

TDK 100GB Media - Image courtesy PC Watch
TDK takes Blu-ray to 3 times the current media speed

With the bulk of Blu-ray writers launching at 2x write speeds, a higher speed media seems a little premature. However, TDK brought Blu-ray media rated at 6x to the 8th Annual Data Storage Expo in Japan and expects to launch media rated at 4x before the end of 2006.

The 6x media is a single layer 25GB Blu-ray disc which probably won't reap benefits until 6x drives come out. We are guessing we won't see 6x drives until at least later this year or early 2007 given the launch trends of previous optical standards.

TDK was also showing off 100GB Blu-ray media which we reported on back in April. The 100GB media uses a 4-layer process which has spacer layers between. TDK's latest trend graph shows a maximum speed of 4x for 100GB media.

TDK did again hint at 200GB media on that same trend graph which also shows a 6x write speed. The 200GB media is an 8-layer media on a single side. We probably won't see that density for another year or two so we’ll have to be satisfied with the current 25GB/50GB capacities.



Comments     Threshold


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

Wishful thinking I know but still....
By rushfan2006 on 7/5/2006 2:48:53 PM , Rating: 2
Granted the mainstream game publishers are still yet to fully adoptt DVDs for game distribution, but imagine the potential years from now....a single game disc holding 100 gigs of data....good god the size, depth and immersion factor they could build into games with that kind of storage media to work with....incredible.




RE: Wishful thinking I know but still....
By bpurkapi on 7/5/2006 3:53:48 PM , Rating: 2
The capacity of the disc is much greater than the capacity of game developers to fill it up...
Most games are 2-4gb, and next gen games are on dvd-9, so you will have to wait a couple more generations to see a 100gb game.
For all the pirates out there: 25gb hd movies are gonna be a pain in the a## to download, as are 9gb games, broadband aint so broad for the next generation of media and its huge data sizes.


RE: Wishful thinking I know but still....
By One43637 on 7/5/2006 4:06:00 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
For all the pirates out there: 25gb hd movies are gonna be a pain in the a## to download, as are 9gb games, broadband aint so broad for the next generation of media and its huge data sizes.


well Fios will do well to help with speeds... or whatever else they can come up with to move on from old copper.

straight from Verizon's website. there's a one year agreement on all these.

Up to 5 Mbps/2 Mbps FREE $34.95
Up to 15 Mbps/2 Mbps FREE $44.95
Up to 30 Mbps/5 Mbps FREE $179.95

http://www22.verizon.com/content/consumerfios/pack...


RE: Wishful thinking I know but still....
By InternetGeek on 7/5/2006 5:41:10 PM , Rating: 2
quote:

Up to 5 Mbps/2 Mbps FREE $34.95
Up to 15 Mbps/2 Mbps FREE $44.95
Up to 30 Mbps/5 Mbps FREE $179.95


There is something so wrong about that.




RE: Wishful thinking I know but still....
By One43637 on 7/5/2006 7:12:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
There is something so wrong about that.


wrong in what way? FIOS isn't available to a lot of people, that's the only thing that i can recall off the top of my head.


By tigz1218 on 7/6/2006 9:22:59 AM , Rating: 2
i think he is referring to the "Free" part that had me confused too, but once you click the link you see the free is for the installation.


RE: Wishful thinking I know but still....
By mxrider on 7/5/2006 3:57:12 PM , Rating: 2
Then we would all need terabyte sized drives......


RE: Wishful thinking I know but still....
By rushfan2006 on 7/5/2006 4:23:13 PM , Rating: 2
True enough on both your point on Terabyte drives and the other poster's point on waiting before 100gb games come about. However, knowing the rate this industry moves I see this all within 10 years (especially the terabyte drive part)...the 100gb game, maybe that'll take 15 years MAX.

Then again in 10 years look how far graphics and sound in games have come, so I say in 10 more years live-action game play graphics will look as good as graphics only seen in cutscenes and introductions now. And I imagine that level of graphic detail will be a space hog too.

So who knows -- purely from the gamer side of me..its all pretty exciting stuff to think about.



By dagamer34 on 7/5/2006 4:24:54 PM , Rating: 2
While all this technology is nice, it's probably going to fall into a niche market just like DVD+/-DL and DVD Audio.

It doesn't really matter if it can hold 1TB if it isn't affordable.


By RMTimeKill on 7/5/2006 4:49:25 PM , Rating: 2
10 years for 1TB drives? they already have 750GB drives... I say in the next 18-24 months max for 1TB HDD. Still... very exciting stuff. Movies are gonna look better at home then in the theater (provided you have a 1080p+ TV of course)


RE: Wishful thinking I know but still....
By clementlim on 7/5/2006 7:23:00 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Most games are 2-4gb, and next gen games are on dvd-9, so you will have to wait a couple more generations to see a 100gb game


Hmm...100GB does not necessary need to be installation files you know. Could be HD sound and/or CG videos. A couple of generations you say? Hmm, thought PS3 is coming out end of this year with games on BD-ROM. Guess sooner or later, they will be using those 100GB discs.


RE: Wishful thinking I know but still....
By Xavian on 7/5/2006 7:55:07 PM , Rating: 2
unless you have you head in the sand, the fact even at the very end of the PS3's lifespan there wont be one PS3 game that will require two 25GB Blu-Ray discs, its just not possible to even use up 25GB of assets.

Compression of textures (which is exceptionally good quality, i doubt anyone would see the different between compressed and non-compressed textures nowadays) means textures take up a lot less space then 10 years ago.

FMV's would have to be 1080p (which i doubt they will be, even top PC games that use FMV's only use a low resolution and simply scale upwards) plus last longer then 2 hours plus the adddition of all game data for the limit of blu-ray to be even reached.

The fact is, by the end of the PS3's lifespan i'd be surprised if even DVD-DL discs are at their limit when it comes to games. With graphics progressing forwards, FMV's dont even need to be used (as has been noticed theres been a sharp increase in cut-scenes using the in-game engine over the past 3-4 years).

HD sound (as you call it) has been around for eons in the form of lossless codecs and these take up next to nothing compared to the sizes of movies. Besides there is no such thing has 'HD' sound, since sound has pretty much reached the pinnicle with lossless (bitrates dont matter with lossless if the exact audio is there, just organised more efficently), sound is simply not a progressive technology.

You people really need to read up about effective compression use in games, music and movies, before going round spouting 'Blu-ray is gonna make games awesome!!'.

Programmers are CPU and GPU bound, they are certainly not space bound by any means, not for quite a while.


By masher2 (blog) on 7/6/2006 12:12:39 PM , Rating: 2
> "its just not possible to even use up 25GB of assets."

25 years ago, people were saying it wasn't possible to use up 64K of RAM. Not 64 Meg-- 64K.

We can assume at least a five-year lifespan for the PS3. I feel quite confident that more than one game will exceed 25GB by then. My son is currently beta-testing a (PC-based) game that requires 20-25GB. Who knows what the market will be like in 5 years?

> "even top PC games that use FMV's only use a low resolution and simply scale upwards) "

Yes of course...but WHY do they do so? Primarily because they don't have the space to ship the resultant video...not unless they want to create a higher-cost multidisk installation.


By robber98 on 7/6/2006 12:33:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
its just not possible to even use up 25GB of assets.


Nothing is impossible; imagination and creativity make everything possible ;)


8 layers ...
By VooDooAddict on 7/5/2006 2:36:20 PM , Rating: 1
Wow ... 8 layers? Can HD-DVD layer like that? If not that looks like the first serious advantage I've seen for Blu-Ray. Sure I knew blu-ray had more storage then HD-DVD but I had no idea it could layer that deep.




RE: 8 layers ...
By lucyfek on 7/5/2006 2:50:19 PM , Rating: 2
how many dl-dvd do you buy? close to none? is it because of price? i think the same will happen with br media. single layer will be the most affordable and purchased option out of all to come. 25GB is fine especially at high burn speed. more layer is great but not at n times the price of single layer (where n exceeds the square of the number of layers, linear relation would be welcome, but nowhere to be seen).


RE: 8 layers ...
By robber98 on 7/5/2006 7:18:25 PM , Rating: 2
Well... you are right, I didn't get any DL-DVD. Price is only part of the reason. The main reason is DL-DVD isn't enough for my video files in 1080P. I need something like Blue-ray or HD-DVD to store my video files. It seems to me that Blue-ray solution is more scalable then HD-DVD and price should come down within a year or 2.


RE: 8 layers ...
By 9nails on 7/8/2006 6:09:20 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
...It seems to me that Blue-ray solution is more scalable then HD-DVD and price should come down within a year or 2.


...which is just about the time that I will be looking to replace my home movie camera and needing to archive those birthday and holiday videos. And DRM in either BD or HD DVD have me looking for alternatives. In a year or two, perhaps I'll simply employ an inexpensive storage array for my movies and bypass disc storage all together.


RE: 8 layers ...
By Visual on 7/5/2006 9:16:17 PM , Rating: 3
recordable dl dvds are expencive because they use totally different specifications. they are like a strap-on extension to the original specs.

bluray was intended for high-capacity rewritable media from the ground up, so there won't be such significant price differences.

the launch prices for single and dual layer discs have already been announced, and duals are roughly just double the price. linear relation, as good as it gets i think.
we'll have to see if they drop in price equally fast though, and also at what prices the 4 and 8 layer discs might launch at.

and just for the record (and for those that asked) hd-dvd current specs top out at 2 layers, and there were plans to extend it to 3 but that'd take more than half the disc depth and i think they decided just making the discs double-sided, double layer is better.


RE: 8 layers ...
By namechamps on 7/6/2006 12:05:22 AM , Rating: 2
HD triple layer was never canceled. It is a writable format only just like this.

Both HD triple layer (45GB) and BlueRay 4 layer (100GB) are for data storage not movies. ie R & RW not ROM.

So this 100GB disk WILL NOT play in your set top blueray player. The BlueRay video format top outs @ dual layer. Your set top player would not understand what to do with this disk.

So big question comes down to cost. If Blueray can deliver of $$ / GB and equal HD-DVD then I think it will win in data storage. Funny thing is one format could win in video/movie industry and another could win in data storage relm.

I personally think HD-DVD will be cheaper in terms of $$/GB than BlueRay and will get cheaper quicker. Capacity will ramp up quickly for HD-DVD since it can using DVD-R production equipment.

If in say 18months the costs are something like:
HD-DVD 15GB ($3)
HD-DVD 30GB ($7)

BlueRay 25GB ($10)
BlueRay 50GB ($20)
BlueRay 100GB ($50)
BlueRay 200GB ($120)

then I think HD-DVD will win. However if Blueray can deliver similar value in terms of $$/GB then it will likely win. BlueRay doesn't need to be cheaper because it has a higher capacity, but higher cap at much higher prices means it will be skipped. Just look at DVD-R and DVD-DL.


RE: 8 layers ...
By yyrkoon on 7/6/2006 1:22:39 AM , Rating: 3
I think the whole point is moot, unless they come down lower than PATA, or SATA storage, people are going to start migrating to HDD storage instead. whats the point of buying a flimsy disk, when you can buy a USB 2.0 enclosure / HDD much cheaper ?

Interresting times indeed, but I personally think the time of removable storage is nearing an end, we'll see.



RE: 8 layers ...
By robber98 on 7/6/2006 12:19:35 PM , Rating: 2
Imagine taking 25 hours movies in 1080P format on the road, would you take a HDD or 1 Blue-ray disc that only weight few ounce? ;)


RE: 8 layers ...
By Shivian on 7/6/2006 8:12:54 AM , Rating: 2
Only a matter of time. Single layer DVDs weren't reasonably priced all that long ago compared to CD-Rs. Dual layer DVDs are only going to come down in price too.


By hmurchison on 7/5/2006 6:14:17 PM , Rating: 2
And why would I want it to? TDK certainly isn't offering up any projected pricing but considering 50GB discs are damn near $1 a Gigabit I'd expect to pay $150 for these discs.



Removable media is obsolete
By yyrkoon on 7/6/2006 1:59:15 AM , Rating: 2
As I posted above, I think TDK, and who ever else the market technology leaders are concering removable media, are going to end up making themselves extinct. In the past, I've seen the birth of CD's to current disk media technology, and every time, they get greedy, and price media / writters too high for the general public.

My forecast is this: they are going to do the same thing, trying to squeeze blood from a turnip, and suddenly most people are finally going to realize (and its already been like this for awhile), that buying an external USB enclosure / HDD will yield far more storage, for a fraction of the cost, and for all intents and purposes (in the household) removable media will die. people will stop using set tops for watching movies etc, but in fact will be using some form of a media PC, with a removable storage system, and perhaps someday soon, when the new MP3 format protection scheme gets implemented into movies, everyone will be allowed to download movies (for a fee), and be charged per viewing.

As it stands right now, there is no place for a DVD or better writter in our place, we've all already migrated to HDD, since its cheaper, can hold much more data / movies, etc. I still have a DVD-DL burner, but it never gets used for other than reading any more. Sure HDDs are larger, but if you compare how much a 250 GB drive can hold, and count out enough disks, and even using slimline cases, you'll see the HDD with enclosure is actually smaller :)

How about them apples TDK . . .


RE: Removable media is obsolete
By yyrkoon on 7/6/2006 2:05:17 AM , Rating: 2
scratch 'removeable' and insert external -----> 'but in fact will be using some form of a media PC, with a removable storage system'


RE: Removable media is obsolete
By robber98 on 7/6/2006 12:29:14 PM , Rating: 2
Keep in mind that no matter how good HDD is, HDD won't last longer then removable media (e.g. CD, DVD... etc). From price per storage standpoint, you are right on that, removable media has no match to HDD. But removable media is great for backup and contents distribution, they will not extinct from storage market. Imagine you have a 50 GB video file that in 1080P format and you want to send it to your friends and family, you aren't going to copy it to HDD and ship it over, are you? ;)


BluRay Wins!!!
By Exodus220 on 7/5/2006 2:58:17 PM , Rating: 1
Well, looks like the format wars are over!!! BluRay holds far more than HDDVD ever will so they can just give up now. Finally I fell confident going out and spending my two month salary on a BD burner...




RE: BluRay Wins!!!
By brystmar on 7/5/2006 3:03:17 PM , Rating: 2
...that can't even read CDs


RE: BluRay Wins!!!
By michal1980 on 7/5/06, Rating: -1
RE: BluRay Wins!!!
By Trisped on 7/5/2006 4:47:40 PM , Rating: 2
The issue is that CDs are still very prevalent and should be 100% compatible with the new players. It isn't like a major media change took place, as it is still optical disks at 12cm using refraction to indicate data. Unlike your analogy where the only similarities are shape, and the fact that they spin when they are played.


RE: BluRay Wins!!!
By killerroach on 7/5/2006 3:39:38 PM , Rating: 2
Not that I'd be playing CDs on a set-top movie player anyways... I mean, how many people use a DVD player for anything other than playing DVDs, even if they have the potential to play audio CDs, JPEG Photo CDs, or VCDs (well, the last one might appeal to some people, just not me)?

But I did see a demonstration of Blu-Ray at a local electronics store... Samsung had a display with their set-top Blu-Ray player and a 62" DLP television, which was nothing short of phenomenal (and made me wish that I had the $4200 needed to walk out of the store with both of them). There's still some minor niggles with the technology, but comparing it side-by-side with even HD content on digital cable wasn't even close (although I was impressed by the color vibrance on HD digital cable, this was only really taken full advantage of on commercials, something I could do without looking spiffy in HD). The first thing that came to mind was "I wonder what Advent Children will look like when it comes out on Blu-Ray".


RE: BluRay Wins!!!
By rushfan2006 on 7/5/2006 4:31:38 PM , Rating: 2
You don't HAVE to move on to Blue-ray or HD-DVD....UNLESS you *want* to.

CD's are still very much mainstream and I see it being that way for a quite awhile (re: YEARS). Why? Well most home users don't really get into backing up things (sad to say, but its true)...and if they do the cheapo CD's are their first choice, even DVD's are cheap next to blueray media.

Finally, its not like CD's are ancient now -- when the majority of the PC using world STOPS using them...yes THEN you can say "Dude, time to move on don't you think?".

Personally I see nothing overly exciting about a Blueray burner, especially at current prices...If you do video work or write programs I can see value in it, CD's and tapes are still all the backup I need.



RE: BluRay Wins!!!
By Visual on 7/5/2006 9:35:02 PM , Rating: 2
and which exactly recorder are you reffering to?
because there are plenty that can read and record cd, dvd and bd.
so just don't buy junk, instead of bitching about what it can't do.


RE: BluRay Wins!!!
By Filibuster on 7/5/2006 10:46:08 PM , Rating: 2
People still use music cds? ;)


RE: BluRay Wins!!!
By Trisped on 7/5/2006 3:14:39 PM , Rating: 2
It is one THEORETICAL advantage. As we learned with Beta/VHS the winner isn't always the one with the most options and nicest set up.

Personally, I can’t think of any PC user that would use a disk larger then 50GB. For the cost of 20-30 disks you could buy a tape backup system and a hard drive array with the same or greater capacity. That isn’t mentioning the cost of the burner or the fact that hard drives are a lot faster.


RE: BluRay Wins!!!
By Exodus220 on 7/5/2006 3:22:53 PM , Rating: 2
That is true but it would be awfully difficult to port around your hard drives and install them in a buddies in order to share that info with him...and how many people have a tape backup system anyways? I know it is an expensive technology right now but I think it also offers convenience not provided by other technologies...it is just too darn expensive for me...


RE: BluRay Wins!!!
By bunnyfubbles on 7/5/2006 4:05:46 PM , Rating: 1
external USB/Firewire/SATA HDDs... much easier to mess with than using a disc, although admittedly more bulky if you're only dealing with one disc vs. the enclosure (otherwise you might have to worry about a disc wallet).

The 8 layer stuff is interesting for all users in general, as it should be nice to have mere single discs (imagine the 4 disc LOTR expanded versions all on one disc, even with the movies in HD)

Granted, PC users are now finally starting to see DVD verions of games and the DL DVD @ ~8.5GB should be enough for the coming year or so, however it would be nice to know that the next format could last for quite some time instead of running out of steam before too long (which could be the case with HDDVD)


RE: BluRay Wins!!!
By RMTimeKill on 7/5/2006 4:55:57 PM , Rating: 3
they used to say the same thing about DVD-/+R discs/recorders being too expensive when they came out, now they are bought in packs of 100, whats preventing BR from doing the same in the future? Seems everyone is focusing on release date pricing... its not called "Cutting Edge" technology for nothing, its because they cut into your wallet and bleed you dry for fresh releases. It will come down a lot, just give it 6 months...


RE: BluRay Wins!!!
By namechamps on 7/6/2006 12:57:54 AM , Rating: 2
Um because BR needs a new process, new equipment and lots ot capital to produce blank media. BR is sooo cutting edge that even Sony couldn't get the yields high enougb for dual layer disks and released its first 7 movies in single layer crap.

CD & DVD are basicly the same. Same size, same thickness, same size, same top layer etc. They are made on the same machines. Now the machines needed to be upgraded to handle the new wavelength, new dyes and tigher density but it was a rather minor. So what u saw happen was price of CDR stay basicly the same as price of DVD-R dropped as capacity shifted from CD-R to higher margined DVD-R.

Blueray needs new equipment so u wont see the same shift. DVD-R and DVD-R9 will get cheaper at a different rate than BR. If anything the current DVD media producers will try to cut costs even more to make the price between DVD-R & BR larger. They will do everything possible to keep the current $$$ machine alive for as long as possible.

This doesn't meant that BR will fail (or that it will succeed either) but dont assume the same thing that happened to DVD-R will happen to BR.

IF DVD-R9 (dual layer) 8x media from quality brands drops to less than $1 per disk in next year and BR drops to say $25 from $38 today for 50GB which is a better deal to you? 9GB for $1 or 50GB for $25? Even if you switch if 99% of people dont then BR will get cheaper but it will get cheaper slowly because it lacks a critical mass. Eventually the cost of DVD-R9 will be down to CD prices (pack of 100 16X disk for $20) then their will be an economic reason to ramp up BR disks as there simply isn't enough money in DVD-R9. Till then BR will get cheaper over time but dont expect the massive price drops of DVD-R which went from $10 disk to less than $1 in 3 years.

To make it more complicated their is a competitor HD-DVD. Now BR is more high tech but that could work against them. see HD-DVD is basicly an upgraded DVD (smaller wavelength, tighter pits) and can be produced from same equipment/materials. The dye is new but not much else is revolutionary more like evolutionary. So HD-DVD is cheaper than BR and if a large # of media companies decide to switch some (not all) of their production lines to HD-DVD it "could" get cheaper much quicker. So you could have a situation like:

BR 50GB $25
HD-DVD 30GB $8
DVD-R9 9GB $1

What would you do?


!
By One43637 on 7/5/2006 2:45:33 PM , Rating: 2
damn 100GB storage on a single disc? i can't wait till those become available to the masses and come down in price.




RE: !
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 7/5/2006 2:49:51 PM , Rating: 1
The question is how resistant is it to scratching, and can it be produced enmasse cheaply? If not, forget it. Dual-Layer DVD's have still not caught on with the mainstream, most DVD's and movies are still single layer. Layering is fine and dandy but it seems to complicate the production process immensely, and costs for 2 layers and up multiply just as fast, regardless of medium.


RE: !
By brystmar on 7/5/2006 3:02:21 PM , Rating: 3
Actually, almost all studio-release DVDs produced in the past few years have used dual-layer media. DVD-9 just hasn't caught on in the mainstream recordable market because of its price.


RE: !
By One43637 on 7/5/2006 4:01:31 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Actually, almost all studio-release DVDs produced in the past few years have used dual-layer media. DVD-9 just hasn't caught on in the mainstream recordable market because of its price.


yep, was going to say the same thing. you can till it's a DL disk when you notice on movies a slight pause if you have a cheapo Dvd player.


RE: !
By captchaos2 on 7/5/2006 11:41:02 PM , Rating: 2
I'll never pay big bucks for a disk that can have 50 gig rendered useless from a few scratches.


...
By shabby on 7/5/2006 5:40:58 PM , Rating: 2
Funny how theres so many difference speeds of media and burners for bluray... yet none of them are out.




RE: ...
By BigLan on 7/5/2006 7:53:57 PM , Rating: 2
I was kinda thinking the same thing. Until there's actually a use for these discs, I bet they're nothing more than prototypes that don't even work. It's not that hard to print a drive label that says 10 layer disc.


RE: ...
By Gatt on 7/6/2006 2:06:14 AM , Rating: 2
You do realize Pioneer's been selling a drive for awhile now? Alienware offers it as a component, and Sony's laptops have it.


RE: ...
By masher2 (blog) on 7/6/2006 12:03:53 PM , Rating: 2
> "You do realize Pioneer's been selling a drive for awhile now? "

'Awhile now' is what, two weeks? And it doesn't even burn dual-layer discs, much less these hypothetical 10-layer prototypes.


6X sounds too fast to me
By AnnihilatorX on 7/6/2006 5:39:22 AM , Rating: 2
25GB, 6X?
How fast is that in terms of transfer speed of the Interface?

52X CD has almost same transfer rate as 8X DVD
I would suppose 6X BD would be higher than 8X DVD

It depends on codec of the video compression
But I am not sure how to calculate the interface speed




RE: 6X sounds too fast to me
By namechamps on 7/6/2006 1:56:46 PM , Rating: 2
BR 1x = 36.00 Mbit/s
HD-DVD 1x = 19.00 Mbit/s
DVD 1X = 11.08 Mbit/s
CD 1x = 1.20 Mbit/s

1x BR ~= 1.5X HD-DVD ~= 3X DVD ~= 30X CD
6X BR = 216 Mbit/s ~= 20X DVD-R ~= 180X CD

All rates drawn from wikipedia (www.wikipedia.org)


RE: 6X sounds too fast to me
By AnnihilatorX on 7/7/2006 3:52:12 AM , Rating: 2
That would be great
Much more efficient speed of data backup

In the past we see generally not much price difference bewtween media of higher and lower speed


I might be jumping the gun here but...
By Wonga on 7/5/2006 3:32:58 PM , Rating: 2
I'm getting the feeling that Blu-Ray is jumping ahead here. All the headlines seem to be about Blu-Ray and HD-DVD appears to be calling by the wayside.

I guess things could change...




By Trisped on 7/5/2006 4:56:50 PM , Rating: 3
The only news about Blue Ray I hear is bad. Delays, more DRM, over priced players, over priced disks, over priced PC drives. You have to hand it to the Sony PR machine, for a while they had everyone thinking that Blue Ray had the higher quality picture, when they were both the same. Now they dominate the headlines with bad news, yet they are all anyone thinks about. Brilliant, simply brilliant.


8 Layers
By hechacker1 on 7/5/2006 2:49:33 PM , Rating: 2
Another reason I am waiting for Blu-Ray instead of HD-DVD. I believe the reason why it can have more layers is because each layer is thinner. Blu-Ray uses a more precise laser than HD-DVD, hence the overall increase in cost.

still, we all lose because of the copy protection schemes. I can only hope the protection is broken ASAP because I would like to backup my Blu-Ray disc and preserve the originals. At least that is supposed to be our right (in the states).




RE: 8 Layers
By mendocinosummit on 7/5/2006 2:59:35 PM , Rating: 2
Backing up would be nice. A more percise laser usually means shitty resistance to wear and tear. There goes NCAA Football 2XXX again, Gotta go buy another. "SONY ;)"


Speed 6x -> 0.5x
By photoguy99 on 7/5/2006 4:16:21 PM , Rating: 2
How about reducing the write speed to 0.5x and charging only $5 a pop for each disc?




RE: Speed 6x -> 0.5x
By CryptoQuick on 7/5/2006 5:23:12 PM , Rating: 2
Mmm. That's certainly a logical correlation. Nevermind the royalties; the companies involved will understand.


The future looks promising.
By Nocturnal on 7/5/2006 2:42:25 PM , Rating: 3
Interesting times await us.




"I mean, if you wanna break down someone's door, why don't you start with AT&T, for God sakes? They make your amazing phone unusable as a phone!" -- Jon Stewart on Apple and the iPhone

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki