Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Hardware

Sanyo Invents 12X High-Speed Blu-ray Laser 194

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the twelve-is-way-more-than-eleven dept.
Lucas123 writes "Today Sanyo said it has created a new blue laser diode with the ability to transfer data up to 12 times as fast as previous technologies. The laser, which emits a 450 milliwatt beam — about double that of previous Blu-ray Disc systems — can read and write data on discs with up to four data layers, affording Blu-ray players the ability to store 100GB on a disc, or 8 hours of high-definition video."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sanyo Invents 12X High-Speed Blu-ray Laser

Comments Filter:
  • Re:I don't get it (Score:3, Informative)

    by MightyYar (622222) on Monday October 06, 2008 @11:57AM (#25274009)

    It's still the cheapest way to distribute data. CDs/DVDs are produced for a few pennies - and even Blu-Ray is produced at a cost significantly lower than flash or magnetic media of the same capacity.

    For backup, it probably will still make sense to use some kind of magnetic media.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 06, 2008 @12:06PM (#25274125)

    archiving MP3, I guess not many people have >100GB of MP3s?

    root@Thesaurus:~# du -sh /space/stuff/audio_collection/
    240G /space/stuff/audio_collection/
    root@Thesaurus:~#

  • Re:450mw beam (Score:5, Informative)

    by Maddog Batty (112434) on Monday October 06, 2008 @12:07PM (#25274135) Homepage

    When encapsulated within a system so that it is not possible for the beam to escape under normal usage then the whole system can be given a class 1 rating and a class 1 label. The laser itself is a class 3B and would have to have this rating if removed from the player. Current Blu-ray recorders are 250mW but are considered safe as they are encapsulated.

  • Re:How fast in m/s? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Spatial (1235392) on Monday October 06, 2008 @12:21PM (#25274319)
    Offhand, the read speed for 1x in bluray is 36Mbit/s. So we get 432Mbit/s.

    For comparison, 1x DVD is 10Mbit/s.
  • Re:I don't get it (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 06, 2008 @12:30PM (#25274451)

    Can't speak to other cars as it's the only one I seriously considered when I bought a few months back, but any basic Honda Civic with at least air-conditioning (ie not the cheapest of the cheap) has an aux/"iPod" port.

  • Re:I don't get it (Score:4, Informative)

    by cream wobbly (1102689) on Monday October 06, 2008 @01:06PM (#25274833)

    Optical media, even in its most primitive form, has always been far more robust than magnetic media were it to be distributed in the same, unshielded manner.

    Optical media used to come in "caddies", not unlike the caddies that 3.5" and Zip floppy disks still use. An early sign of optical media's robustness was the fact that mass-market CDDA drives operated caddyless; while early CD-ROM and CD-WORM drives came with a single caddy, into which you'd interchange the disc itself prior to loading into the drive.

    Improvements in error correction, the manufacturing process of both the media and the drives, and the improved errorless reading of optical media have led to optical media far outstripping other disc media for robustness.

    So: "sucks"? You only see it that way because it gets into situations where other media cannot. Knocking around for a couple of weeks in the footwell of your car, for instance. As an interesting exercise for the reader, try this with a platter of a hard disk containing verifiable information. (Hint: it's only cheating if you work at a forensic data recovery lab.)

    Now consider other media: Iomega Jaz and Syquest removable magnetic media were distributed with caddies; yet the market never got off the ground. But consider that these hard disks are finely machined pieces of equipment: an optical disc is simply a pressed piece of crud. Maybe magnetic media could learn something from it, by pressing a cheap plastic disk painted with a layer of magnetic film. Basically a floppy on a hard substrate...

    This format would have to lose its caddy, too, if it were to compete on cost terms with the optical disc. Maybe it could do it gradually, the same way the optical disc did. A crutch until the loading, head alignment, and error correction technologies improve sufficiently to do without caddies.

    Flash memory? Please, just visit the Apple store and compare the prices of iPods with flash and HD storage.

    And just in case you're wondering: I switch between disc and disk because I'm English, and because disk in British English is an abbreviation of diskette, which is imported from U.S. English. There is no spelling of diskette with a c.

  • by bennomatic (691188) on Monday October 06, 2008 @01:24PM (#25275047) Homepage
    I used to work in the UC Berkeley library's conservation department, and what they did for scanning purposes--really, archiving rare works to microfilm--was to set the to-be-preserved books in a frame, manually flip a page, lower a non-glare glass cover over it to flatten the book, and snap a picture from a camera above.

    I imagine that the process is the same for precious books now, just with digital cameras instead of microfilm.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 06, 2008 @02:35PM (#25275863)

    I dunno how rolfwind does it, but I used to work for a State University that had some of this equipment to do it:

    http://www.merrittgraphics.com/services/scanning/bookscan.php

    But IIRC, you are talking about 6 figures to even get up and running with this kind of kit...

    But they were pretty sweet to watch run, they could photograph all the odd or even pages in a in a ~500pg book in about an hour, of course then you had to reset it to get the pages on the other side of the binding, but still scanning a whole ~500pg book in ~2hrs with nearly 0 user intervention is pretty good.

  • Re:I don't get it (Score:3, Informative)

    by RulerOf (975607) on Monday October 06, 2008 @02:44PM (#25275961)

    Remember that the reason Nintendo abandoned cartridges was because a 8.5 gigabyte DVD was cheaper than the equivalent ROM.

    Two things:

    First, those were probably EPROM's, not flash, but don't quote me on it.

    Second, supply+demand+moore's law = totally different situation today.

    ...I wouldn't be suprirsed if a 1GB EPROM costs more than used car....

  • by nine-times (778537) <nine.times@gmail.com> on Monday October 06, 2008 @02:48PM (#25275995) Homepage

    Well first, even if you buy a legal version of video, that doesn't necessarily mean you get media. iTunes movies and TV shows, for example, are sold without media. If you want to back that stuff up, you'll need something additional. Second, even if you have a legal DVD or Bluray version, you might want to backup that purchased copy. Third, I wasn't specifically talking about movies or TV shows. I'm not even necessarily talking about video.

    And then beyond all that, backing up to an external USB drive doesn't necessarily serve my purposes unless I'm buying new USB drives on a regular basis. I'm not just talking about maintaining a running mirror of my current hard drive contents, but maintaining a backup. By that, I mean that sometimes you want to keep copies at set increments, like having a monthly backup that you keep and don't overwrite. Not only does this protect you from a catastrophic failure of your hard drive, but also protects you from data being deleted or overwritten.

    Ideally, those backups should be on some kind of WORM media (so I don't accidentally erase something while I'm restoring) that's cheap, reliable, and lightweight. Even for my personal stuff, I can burn a bunch of DVDs and mail them to someone. Since they're light and small, shipping won't be expensive. Since there are no moving parts, I don't have to worry very much about them breaking in transit, but since they're cheap it's not a big problem even if they do break.

  • Re:Worthless. (Score:2, Informative)

    by sanosuke001 (640243) on Monday October 06, 2008 @04:21PM (#25277047)
    How is this insightful? He said nothing. Sony's players are defective how? I have a PS3 and it plays BD movies. Doesn't seem defective to me. Also, you won't be hooking this up to a Sony player as it's a Sanyo product. Sanyo != Sony even though a lot of the letters are the same.

    You were an HD-DVD fanboy weren't you? Bitter that your format ate dirt? I can understand the viewpoint of HD vs. SD, cost vs. utility increase but the Sony bashers are just useless to any conversation. Yes, you don't like Sony. Yes, they've made some stupid moves. No, not all their products suck.

    Aside from the DRM in BD (which is pretty much par for the course and not a Sony-only issue) what's wrong with BD? If you don't like HD video, stick to DVDs. Nobody is forcing you to upgrade. And if you're going to bash Sony, do it on a Sony article.

I tell them to turn to the study of mathematics, for it is only there that they might escape the lusts of the flesh. -- Thomas Mann, "The Magic Mountain"

Working...