backtop


Print 34 comment(s) - last by Odeen.. on Sep 28 at 1:17 AM


Sharp BD-HDW20  (Source: ascii.jp)

Sharp BD-AV1 series on the left, BD-AV10 series on the right  (Source: ascii.jp)
Sharp's Blu-ray Disc recorders will pack 1TB of HDD

With the gradual move from standard to high-definition television broadcasts, the recordable DVD looks a bit too small in terms of storage. Sharp will address that issue by shipping Blu-ray Disc recorders for the Japanese market.

The new Blu-ray recorders will hit the market starting October 27 as basic models without hard drives that are meant to only record television programming to single layer Blu-ray Discs. In December, Sharp will ship higher-end models with hard drives with capacities of either 500GB or 1TB, and with the ability to write to dual layer media. The 1TB recorder will be able to store up to 127 hours of high-definition video.

As expected, the Blu-ray Disc recorders will cost considerably more than DVD recorders. The lower-end, single layer models without the hard drives range from $875 to $1,040, while the higher-end, dual layer 500GB model will be $1,730 and the 1TB nearing $2,600.

Sharp currently has no plans to release the recorders in North America, but will ship its first Blu-ray Disc player this fall.



Comments     Threshold


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

Nice Colors
By mdogs444 on 9/26/2007 1:29:34 PM , Rating: 5
I like the colors of the new players - and wish more companies would start doing this.

But the day I pay $1000 - $2000 for a player, especially a Sharp branded player....will be the day I die.

We all know its just because of new technology, but watching movies isn't worth a down payment on a new leased car - at least in my opinion.




RE: Nice Colors
By PAPutzback on 9/26/2007 1:32:12 PM , Rating: 4
No kiddin. The player should not cost more than the TV.


RE: Nice Colors
By ZmaxDP on 9/26/2007 1:42:14 PM , Rating: 5
I don't know about that. Should your computer monitor cost more than your computer? Should your dashboard cost more than the engine in your car? I know that TV's have a different role than either of the comparisons I made, but I think it is interesting that as we shift from cable/broadcast TV where the TV's had a substantial amount of their cost devoted to tuners and receivers to a market where most hi-def content is either sent to the TV display from a player or a cable box (not tuned by the TV) that the TV is getting more and more like a glorified monitor and less and less the central part of an entertainment system. Heck, my TV has speakers but I have it set to mute permanently because I run all my sound through a receiver. I wouldn't even need to connect the sound from my TV to the receiver if only it had a tuner built in.

I guess my point is, the concept that the player which plays, stores, and in this instance even records the content should cost less than the thing that only displays the content isn't as valid as it used to be. To me I'm worried about the total system cost. I would be much happier to spend 2 grand on a more fully featured player/recorder if I could get the display for 500 bucks instead of paying 500 for my various players/recorders (which are cheap crap) and 2 grand on the TV when all it is really doing is the display.


RE: Nice Colors
By Melric on 9/26/2007 1:58:07 PM , Rating: 3
My monitor does cost more than my computer. I would expect it would at 30". Given that the TV is 60", then I'd say it should cost more than the storage component.


RE: Nice Colors
By MGSsancho on 9/26/2007 4:38:10 PM , Rating: 2
I have to agree in my case. I remove my tv speakers. my comp, network/dvd player, wii, cable, vcr, and zen vision W all route through my receiver. it has the ability to route everything through an hdmi line. again your correct. a tv is a display device. to me the receiver is the hub... well the cable box and network/dvd player are important as it is.

if i factor in total cost for system, 1K for onkyo receiver + 1600 in polk speakers, + 250 for wires/cables + 2000 on tv, + 380 on network/dvd player + 400 for in wall installation of wires + $20 for cooling fan = $5650USD and that does not include tv stand or stuff like that. also need to get a blu ray player and hd dvd player T_T


RE: Nice Colors
By mdogs444 on 9/26/2007 6:40:34 PM , Rating: 2
No offense, but i think you drastically overpaid for that stuff.

Wiring should not cost $250, unless you bought into the "monster cable is better" scam. Also, I'm sure you could have done the wiring yourself. Those are just minor opinions though.

I have 4 polk tower R50 speakers ($200 new for all 4), a Polk CSi center channel ($50 new), Velodyne 10" sub ($100 new), Sony 3-1 HDMI 1.3 receiver ($250 new), and my home made HTPC with an internal custom HD-DVD player from an external 360 HD-DVD player hooked up to the network, and a 42" Westinghouse 1080p LCD Tv. The wires were purchased from Monoprice (about $6 for each HDMI cable, and about $10 for all the speaker wiring).

All in all, I paid about $2100.


RE: Nice Colors
By psyph3r on 9/26/2007 2:45:40 PM , Rating: 2
in order to even get the true benefits of a player such as this, you already have a tv that is more expensive than this player.


RE: Nice Colors
By mdogs444 on 9/26/2007 2:47:29 PM , Rating: 2
Not true - theres many 1080p televisions out there for $1000 +/- $200.


RE: Nice Colors
By psyph3r on 9/26/2007 5:27:47 PM , Rating: 2
I said true benefits, but you are right in the common consumer sense. I can't stand cheap hd. most of them are walmart material. The only decent tvs that live up my standards that are ~$1000 are all 720p.


RE: Nice Colors
By mdogs444 on 9/26/2007 5:43:44 PM , Rating: 2
I really think thats an answer based on the fact that price = quality, which many times it does.

But lets not forget that so many brands out there carry the same performance and quality, yet you pay a premium for the plastic/sticker name on the outside of the product.

I agree that many "walmart specials" really are lower cost, lower performance, lower quality alternatives that cater to the budget oriented consumer.

However, there are many units out there that are very affordable, and carry as good, if not better quality than other products costing much more.

A simple example in the HD world are Westinghouse and LG. Westinghouse has a very nice and low price point, just the reviews are almost all very good in terms of performance and quality, while comparable units from Samsung, Pioneer, Sony (etc) do cost much more.

We all have our own biases, but what id really like to see is numerous displays - Vizio, Spectre, Westinghouse, LG, Samsung, Pioneer, Sony, etc - all side by side showing identical content while not knowing the brands, paper specifications, and price of each unit.

But that will never happen. For me, price/perforance ratio works - i dont need the best, but i dont want the worst.


RE: Nice Colors
By onelittleindian on 9/26/2007 4:04:35 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
No kiddin. The player should not cost more than the TV.
My TV was almost $5K and a friend has a $12K projector in his house. Not everyone is watching TV on a $1K off-brand LCD.


RE: Nice Colors
By mdogs444 on 9/26/2007 5:45:28 PM , Rating: 2
I think you are definately at the top of the bell curve on that one. Perhaps in the top 2%.


RE: Nice Colors
By luhar on 9/27/2007 11:45:43 AM , Rating: 2
I think the top 2% is exactly what first generation consumer electronics manufacturers are trying to target. Early adopters aren't going for bang for the buck, they're trying to get the best they can afford. How much were the first gen DVD burners? $1000 is a reasonable price for early adoption.


RE: Nice Colors
By mdogs444 on 9/27/2007 12:00:11 PM , Rating: 2
We arent at first gen anymore. Third gen (i believe) is coming out as we speak.


RE: Nice Colors
By mikeyD95125 on 9/26/2007 5:59:19 PM , Rating: 2
To put that in perspective I don't know anyone with a 15K projector. I only know one person with a 1080P TV. And I do live in San Jose.


RE: Nice Colors
By Locutus465 on 9/27/2007 2:40:12 PM , Rating: 2
There are other affordable options to get into HD... I got a very nice Toshiba 50" slim DLP that displays up to 720P. Sure it's not 1080P, but the picture @ 720P is great, and it's nice to have that screen realestate, I got the unit for just over $1,000 at my local best buy.

While a "Slim DLP" deisgn isn't quite asa slick (not to mention thin) as the average LCD/Plasma TV, it's thin and light enough to be easily moved around and will fit on most reasonbly sized TV stands.


$900 to upgrade from 500 GB to 1 TB?
By Anonymous Freak on 9/26/2007 2:13:10 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
...the higher-end, dual layer 500GB model will be $1,730 and the 1TB nearing $2,600.


Uh, $870 to move from a 500 GB model to the 1 TB model? Really?

According to Pricewatch right now, the least expensive 500 GB drive is $89 for a SATA 500 GB hard drive. The *MOST* expensive 1 TB hard drive is $450. Even if you used a RAID-1 with two 1 TB drives, so the most expensive "upgrade" from 500 GB to 1 TB I can contrive right now is $811. Still less than the "upgrade" price on this Blu-Ray player.

For contrast, the cheapest 1 TB drive I can find is $238. So this upgrade from 500 GB to 1 TB should really only cost about $150.




By mdogs444 on 9/26/2007 2:15:34 PM , Rating: 2
And those are also retail prices - not what the manufacturers get them for...


RE: $900 to upgrade from 500 GB to 1 TB?
By theapparition on 9/26/2007 4:09:03 PM , Rating: 2
Prices of retail items are not the sum of their component parts. Rather, it's the price the company thinks the market will bear. If this is worth it to some, and it sells then they have set the price right.

Look at the cost of processors. It's not based on how much it costs to manufacture, because they pretty much all cost the same. It is the perceived value that a faster model gets that allows it to be priced higher.


RE: $900 to upgrade from 500 GB to 1 TB?
By Anonymous Freak on 9/26/2007 7:36:58 PM , Rating: 2
I fully understand (I used to work for Intel,) but this isn't about two devices where one has such significantly higher demand as to warrant such a significantly higher price. These are off-the-shelf parts inside that are the only difference, and those off-the-shelf parts do *NOT* Have an $870 price difference. These parts to *NOT* add to Sharp's development cost, the way tuning production for a 3.0 GHz Core 2 Duo vs. a 1.83 GHz model affects Intel's development costs. (Yes, the actual raw physical part costs of producing a 3.0 GHz and a 1.83 GHz model may be the same; but there are development differences that warrant price increases. Sharp is not experiencing these. They are buying a more expensive commodity component and charging SIGNIFICANTLY more for that slightly more expensive commodity component.)


By theapparition on 9/27/2007 11:46:23 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
but this isn't about two devices where one has such significantly higher demand as to warrant such a significantly higher price.

Says you, just don't buy it. The market will correct itself, if this price is too high, then it won't sell and the price will be forced down. The only reason it is priced so high, is because there *IS* a market for it (so Sharp thinks) and they believe plenty of people will pay for the *VALUE* that 1TB of storage brings.

quote:
These are off-the-shelf parts inside that are the only difference, and those off-the-shelf parts do *NOT* Have an $870 price difference. These parts to *NOT* add to Sharp's development cost

Your still arguing component cost. You'll get nowhere with that argument. The price is based on perceived value, even if it only cost $.01 to make.

To clarify, I believe the item is overpriced myself, and it will come down in price soon. This isn't the first item that's been way overpriced. You should only buy anthing when the cost meets what you think it's value is. But complaining about it won't help anything.


By StevoLincolnite on 9/26/2007 5:00:05 PM , Rating: 2
I agree it is a little inflated (A little?)
But even if they grabbed 2 500gb HDD and whacked them into some sort of raid, it would be significantly cheaper.


Red Icon?
By ninjit on 9/26/2007 1:34:25 PM , Rating: 2
What's the red icon on the left indicate?

I can make out the Blue BD icon to the right, but can't quite read the red one.




RE: Red Icon?
By mdogs444 on 9/26/2007 1:38:01 PM , Rating: 2
Im not sure either - i wonder if that lights up to differentiate between a BD-DVD and an standard defition DVD, since they were based on a red laser.


RE: Red Icon?
By ZmaxDP on 9/26/2007 1:43:37 PM , Rating: 2
probably the recording light. Like with camcorders and almost any other CE device, there is always a little red light somewhere that lights up when you're recording.


RE: Red Icon?
By ZmaxDP on 9/26/2007 1:45:10 PM , Rating: 2
Nope, you were right. It is the DVD icon. I blew up the image a bit and it was clear enough to make it out... I still would bet there is a red light somewhere for record though...


RE: Red Icon?
By 3kliksphilip on 9/26/2007 3:43:20 PM , Rating: 2
It looks very much like Cola.


Region locked?
By Murst on 9/26/2007 2:25:07 PM , Rating: 2
Will these be region free? My dad lives in NZ, but watches lots of European / US movies. He's got a Pioneer DVR-745H-S. It cost him the equivalent of $1800 down there, but this thing isn't that much more expensive especially for added HD functionality and larger drive size.

He'll probably be switching to HD pretty soon, so he might be interested with this (me on the other hand... I can only wish I had that kind of cash to blow on this stuff =/)




RE: Region locked?
By walk2k on 9/26/2007 4:01:58 PM , Rating: 2
If they have dual-tuner CableCard 2.0 that is not a bad deal.

An equiv. Vista computer to do that, if you can even find one with dual-CC2.0 tuners, would be priced about the same, or more.


No way
By DeepBlue1975 on 9/27/2007 9:39:31 AM , Rating: 2
I'd rather build and HTPC for not much more than half the price, including a 1TB drive.
But obviously these things are not meant for the DIY market nor the HTPC people market, so I guess people with money to spend that don't like the idea of an HTPC will buy it.




RE: No way
By mdogs444 on 9/27/2007 9:55:56 AM , Rating: 2
Alot of people that buy things like this are people who do have lots of spare money to spend on these things, as well as people who dont want to deal with an HTPC. People just like to hit a button, and have it work. An HTPC really is alot of learning and getting used to - especially for a middle aged person without much PC experience.


MAD EXPENSIVE!
By rsasp on 9/26/2007 8:00:31 PM , Rating: 2
What's the point for this unit? i mean with $1,500 i can get a pretty high end computer that include a Blu Ray burner as well as the 1TB HDD. I bet only 1:100000 will personally own this item.




By Odeen on 9/28/2007 1:17:09 AM , Rating: 2
Keep in mind that there are A LOT of capabilities that a BD recorder could have beyond just dumping OTA HD onto a BD disc.

If all it is a TiVo with a BD burner, it's overpriced. In order to be an HD-TiVo, you don't need an A/D converter, or an MPEG2 (or MPEG4, or VC-1) video compressor. You simply record the compressed MPEG2 video and call it a day. Not worth nearly $2000.

Any additional capabilities, though, make the price more palatable. Recording hundreds of hours of video from SD analog inputs onto a single Blu-Ray disc and compressing the video with VC1 instead of garden-variety MPEG2 can be useful to a video archivist.

A high-def recorder should, by rights, have uncompressed HD video inputs that it digitizes (if necessary), compresses with a high-quality codec, and records onto the disc. If this device had the horsepower to receive high-def video over HDMI, VGA, or component inputs, compress it in realtime, and then record it, it would make the price more worthwhile.

If it had the capability to play H264 or VC-1-compressed AVI's from a burned DVD or BD disc, thus replacing an HTPC, it would, likewise, add more value to the unit.




edit
By realist on 9/26/2007 1:49:04 PM , Rating: 1
500GB model will be $1,730 and the 1GB nearing $2,600.

you made a made a mistake here you said 1GB which is supposed to be 1TB lol small mistake :P




"Vista runs on Atom ... It's just no one uses it". -- Intel CEO Paul Otellini

Related Articles













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