Toshiba Touts 51GB HD DVD 236
srizah writes to mention that Toshiba plans to launch a 51 GB HD DVD, with a 1 GB advantage over Sony's Blu-ray disc. From the article: Toshiba has submitted a triple-layer, 51GB HD DVD-ROM disc to the standard's overseer in the hope the technology will be adopted as a standard by the end of the year. If approved, it allow the format to exceed the 50GB storage capacity of rival medium Blu-ray Disc. The HD DVD standard currently defines single- and dual-layer discs capable of holding 15GB and 30GB of data, respectively."
Fifty one! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
HE never said this. This is an urban myth. I can testify. I was present, when HE did not say it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Disclaimer: I'm just keeping an eye on this industry because they really indicate which standard will win from time to time - not that I'm a geek drooling in mom's basement. Seriously
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Fifty one! (Score:5, Funny)
Hitchiker: You heard of this thing the 8-minute abs?
Guy: Yeah, sure, 8-minute abs. Yeah, the exercise video.
Hitchiker: This is going to blow that right out of the water. Listen to this. 7-minute abs. Right.
Guy: Yes. OK, all right, I see where you're going.
Hitchiker: You walk into a video store. There's 8-minute abs and 7-minute abs beside it. Which one are you going to pick?
Guy: I'm... I would go for the seven.
Hitchiker: Bingo, man, bingo. 7-minute abs.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Fifty one! (Score:4, Informative)
According to Wikipedia [wikipedia.org], Blue Ray is up to 33 GB **PER LAYER** in the labs, that would give 66 Gigabytes for a *two layer* blueray disk.
And of course, a 3 layer "standard" blueray disk would be about 70GB.
And then there's reality, it looks like Sony will manage to shoot itself in the leg (head) with it's silly restrictions on content. (No pron).
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Assuming Sony is actually preventing porn from appearing on Blu-ray (the only story we have about it is what some guy said people told him at a convention), porn is freely available on the Internet anyway, and Blu-ray has more studio support (Disney in particular), so I don't see it making a lot of difference.
Re:Fifty one! (Score:4, Informative)
Apparently this is not true. See: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070112-860
200 GB blu-ray (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Priceless... (Score:5, Funny)
Marketing: More billions of dollars.
Squeezing that extra GB out of your next-gen DVD to claim your format is "better": Priceless.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Priceless... (Score:4, Interesting)
With VHS,
I rip and reauthor my kids DVDs (good backup plan too - I've had a DVD break once) to avoid that non-skip crap. It's fantastic to pop a DVD in and have the show just start.
There is one Kid G-rated DVD I have that has that seedy, loud music commercial about how illegal copying is bad. Sorry studio guys. That crap is scary to a kid. Why the hell do you force a viewing on a G-Rated DVD???????
Some of that non-skip you can fast forward through, some you fast forward the chapters.
Apparently there are DVD players on the market that actually skip this. Anyone know what they are?
I am not on the bandwagon for this BD vs HD war. I doubt I will get on it as it is very anti-consumer from my point of view. The entire HDCP over HDMI crap penalizes consumers if they make a mistake. There are still TVs that have HDMI issues and that's a lot of change to lose to have a non-compliant piece of equipment that will show crappy SD content.
In the good ole VCR days, you unpacked the thing, screwed the cable in the back of the device, screwed the other end in your 300ohm connector (or if you had a cable ready TV, right into the thing) , tuned to channel 3 OR 4 on your TV (and that was the worst decision if you could call it that) and you're good to go.
Now, you have to buy not-so-expensive-anymore HDMI cables and pray it works.
Then you may have to set on the monitor and the output device the resolution settings.
If your HDMI is flaky or doesn't work, then your $40 DVD on your $800 DVD player is downscaled (not yet but the day will come).
So really in review, this HD thing is sill untested.
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently there are DVD players on the market that actually skip this. Anyone know what they are?
Xbox Media Center, for one.
the winnar is pr0n (Score:3, Funny)
This will clearly make it victorious over blu-ray. The fact that the porn industry has chosen HD-DVD will have nothing to do with it.
Re:the winnar is pr0n (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps you should have bought it based on what games you want to play instead :)
Re: (Score:2)
I bought the 360 before Christmas because I could get a machine for the same price that came with 5 (!) free games, a universal remote, component cables, and a free HD-DVD movie. But yeah... enjoy your spec sheet.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No way (Score:2, Insightful)
The previously capacity-challenged HD-DVD grows larger than its Blue-Ray rival, therefore eliminating the last remaining advantage or BR and more or less killing it in the short-to-medium term... Along with the PS3.
This just after HD-DVD encryption was broken? I have to get my tinfoil hat.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Not a big deal... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I really don't get your comments on LCD and plasma, most of the problems were with older generation products. They still have some negative aspects but so does every other display technology. You can get a 42" 1080p CD for around $1500, which is a fantastic price for how great the picture is.
Re: (Score:2)
This should read 1080p LCD.
Re: (Score:2)
Eh. I've never seen a plasma or LCD TV that looked anywhere near as good as a plain ol' CRT. Either everything looks choppy and digitized, or things look terribly washed out, or you have to look at them directly (90 degree angle) to see anything. I'm a movie fanatic, and incredibly anal about picture quality. I've never seen one of those new TV's that I would ever consider buying (and I've look
Re: (Score:2)
Uh, no. Good, relatively cheap solutions have existed for more than a year now. I bought a 720p projector (which projects onto a 110" screen) more than a year ago that retails for around 1200 dollars right now. My monitor can handle 1080p with its 1900x1200 resolution.
Your argument has been repeated ad nauseam for a long time now, but the inflection point has hit where it is no longer even remotely valid. My blockbuster already
Re: (Score:2)
Unless you don't see the point in spending $2000 on a TV, $500-$1000 on a movie player, and $20 a movie (because I can't rent them currently) to gain access to a small library of content.
Yippie!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Just a point
" June 21, 2003
"DVD rentals outpaced videocassette rentals last week for the first time, the Video Software Dealers Association reported."
Link [washingtontimes.com]
"
Re: (Score:2)
NetFlix already carries HD-DVD and Blu-Ray discs. Remember that Blockbuster didn't start renting DVDs until years after the format gained traction.
Still not a big deal... (Score:2)
First, You call Star Wars I and II 'Top cinema productions'.
Then, you assume that HD-DVD is now superior to Blu-Ray in some meaningful way. (And no, that 1 GB of space it gains with a new format doesn't count)
Last, you assume that most people would be willing to pay $1000+ for a HD LCD Television.
If you wanted to make sense, you might say "People who are willing to pay a few thousand for a home movie experience should upgrade to HD". Then I don't think a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Can someone help me out? (Score:3, Interesting)
1 Layer = 15 gig
2 Layers = 30 gig (makes sense, 15 x 2)
3 Layers = 51 gig....wtf? 15 x 3 = 45
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
2 layers = 34
3 layers = 51
Re:Can someone help me out? (Score:5, Informative)
HD-DVD is 15GB per layer, in the current shipping product.
1 layer = 15GB
2 layers = 30GB
In this product the capacity per layer has been increased to 17GB.
3 layers = 51GB
Theoretically that will also make 17GB and 34GB HD-DVDs a possibility. However there is a wee slight issue. Current HD-DVD players may not be able to read these new 17GB layers, and quite possibly may not manage 3 layers either. The first may be fixable in the firmware, but the laser is very much hardware - although the laser power might be firmware controllable, and hence make it possible to read with firmware tweaks.
BluRay is 25GB per layer. However in a similar vein 33GB/layer BluRay discs have been done (200GB capacity in 6 layers), but some current players may read them, AFAIK. However if a firmware update would work then 66GB dual-layer BluRay discs are a possibility.
OTOH Hitachi apparently showcased a 25GB x 4 layer BluRay disc recently however: "Hitachi demonstrated reading from a 100 GB Blu Ray disc, comprising four layers of data. It is probably in reaction to the upcoming adoption of triple layer HD-DVD. The good news is that this technology seems close at hand: the device used to read is very close to the LG GBW-H10N that we tested. A firmware modification was all it took to allow all four layers to be read."
Re:Can someone help me out? (Score:5, Informative)
2 layers = 30 GB = 2 x 15 GB/layer
3 layers = 51 GB = 3 x 17 GB/layer
For 3-layer HD-DVDs, Toshiba decided to use 17 GB layers instead of 15 for the sole purpose of obtaining the upper hand in capacity over the competing 50 GB Blu-ray discs. I agree that this is a bit laughable
They are making it more and more complicated (Score:5, Insightful)
Now you have to check that:
- You are using the right disk with the right recorder BlueRay/HD-DVD
- You are using the right variety of disk that you recorder can read (triple layer won't work on old players).
- You have everything hooked using HDCP cabling.
- All of your hardware supports DRM (if it doesn't your content will be downgraded and you will be worst off than you would with a dvd player).
And off course, the way things are going, in no time your new shiny expensive hardware will be rendered obsolete by a new iteration of the technology and/or the Digital Restrictions Management schema imposed by the studios.
You have to be masochistic to refuse the easy route to High Definition, a DVI connector, P2P and a BFHD (Big F*****g Hard Drive).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The entire HD DVD versus Blu-ray discussion is academic for this very reason. Both formats are still firmly in early-adopter territory and will continue to be so for a
Amazing! (Score:4, Informative)
Someone's competitor plans to launch a product with a 2% advantage over the product you can already get, mere years after something with a 100% advantage was demonstrated [engadget.com], and within only 8 months of something with 200% advantage [engadget.com]!
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, Sony. Those 2% are the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back. Come back next gen.
The spec can't be changed now (Score:5, Informative)
The HD-DVD spec was finalized a while ago. HD-DVD players can only read two layers, therefore no movie can ever have more than two layers. All this talk about more layers is just PR wanking.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I suspect that future players will be backwards compatible with the new format.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Technically, no.
Think about it for a moment. Look at all the HD-DVDs on the market, and HD-DVD players. They're missing something. Something that has annoyed the world over (not so much North America, but the rest of the world). Blu-Ray has it alright (they've simplified it - somewhat, but it's still present).
The "featur
Digital projection (Score:2)
Now how in the world is the content industry going to accept that a major "next-gen" format will allow someone in Europe to get a high-quality movie that's probably just playing in theatres?
Digital projection has arrived, and it allows a movie to open simultaneously in at least the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, and New Zealand. (Ever notice that anglophone countries tend to come in pairs?) A week later, it opens in other countries, subbed into a dozen different languages. If that's not enough, then just delay the HD DVD release until the worldwide theatrical run has completed. Release the DVD first and then the "collector's edition" HD DVD.
Re: (Score:2)
Who would produce something on this new disc that early adopters could not use? Wouldn't it be incompetent of a producer to use one disc that alienates half your customers when the simple choice of putting it on 2 discs would be useable by all?
If people can't get up and change the disc after like 10 hours of video....
Maybe a nice big epreen battle so they can woo the people for a backup drive, but i dont think i want to trust my data to em anyway. Even if it makes to recordable media i be
Re: (Score:2)
This one goes to 51.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm old enough to remember the capacity wars between Beta/VHS. The first Beta (B-I) was 90 minutes on an L750 tape and the first VHS (SP) was 120 minutes on a T120. Not to be outdone, Sony created B-II which doubled the recording time to 180 minutes. The problem was B-II was incompatible with the first gen machines. Sony's "solution" was to eliminated B-I (except for playback via a switch on the back of the deck) on all B-II decks. JVC (VHS) followed suit with LP (240 minutes) and the same incompatibil
Re: (Score:2)
What about writing (Score:2)
And as for all existing players being unable to play these discs, that's the price you pay for being a HD-DVD early adopter. One would hope, despite their past track record, that Sony won't obsolete all their (say 500K) existing BluRay players just to squeeze out 2GB more.
Behind the curve (Score:4, Interesting)
TDK was showcasing 100GB blu-ray discs [theregister.co.uk] almost two years ago and has recently shown off 200GB blu-ray discs [xbitlabs.com]. The problem is people are slow to adopt the use of next gen optical drives for performing important back ups and at present the excess capacity is next to useless for the movie industry.
This does help HD-DVD in that the increased capacity does help them match Blu-Rays superiority in the important TV DVD market. Previous to this you could fit an entire high def season on one BR disc but would be forced to use 2 or 3 HD discs. Now they can both meet the single disc hurdle.
I just hope someone wins this battle quickly and we'll get one standard for both PCs and movies or if not at least drives/players capable of reading both.
That's a lot of eggs... (Score:2, Interesting)
...in one basket. 51 GB on a single CD-sized disc means the data is more physically compact.... which just means you lose more data if the disc gets scratched. 51GB is an improvement from 700 MB, I suppose, but I think cooler things could be being done.
The data storage technology development seems to be progressing the same way video games were/are for a while. Video games pushed for more violence, more sex, a higher polygon count, neater visuals, blah blah blah. Too many of them are just the same old crap
Re: (Score:2)
So...
Why, would they enable us to store more info in the same space..? Whoo. :-)
It's about production sizes, not disc sizes (Score:3, Insightful)
We'll just have to wait and see how long it takes before these discs become reasonable to manufacturer. Until then, I'm sticking to DVD.
Personally (Score:2)
they were first to propose the idea, they came up with the best format(capacity wise) and they are the only ones to produce a PC-writer AFAIK. I don't care about past mistakes (Sony Media), they produce good shit.
No need to do that anymore (Score:3, Insightful)
1. It's cheaper to produce
2. There's porn on it
3. Higher capacities don't matter for H.264/VC-1 encoded content
These map very closely to VHS vs Betamax war:
1. VHS was cheaper to product
2. There was porn on it
3. Higher image quality didn't matter much
Except #3 is not even about image quality this time around. Image quality is identical between two standards, they use the same codecs at the same bitrates.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, people may still by porn on physical media, but it is not going to have such an impact.
What really matters is the name and the price. WTF is "Blue Ray"? HD has become the standard acronym for High Definition and DVD is
Re: (Score:2)
Reality Check (Score:2)
So, who cares? It's news just for big players :-P
Aww hell, just jump to holographic disks! (Score:2)
How many GB - who cares? (Score:2)
So, I lean to HD-DVD, just to pimp-alap Sony and Disney a bit. You know?
Do I care about the GB? As long as its lots, and (reasonably) reliable, no. Now, if they came up with a disc/changer that was affordable
Toshiba reads /.? (Score:2)
That means you'd need 51 GB just to store the same length movie as a dual-layer DVD.
I'd like to ask that no one remind me that this would have taken more than a couple days to develop, and just let me go on thinking I inspired this technological breakthrough. And for my next trick, I'd like to suggest that HD-DVDs need to go to 200 GB. Are you listening Toshiba?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
And if you know anything about the history of console sales, you would know that the technical merits of the system are not the only factor in what console sells the most.
Why is it that PS3s are widely available and languishing on store shelves while stores cannot keep the Wii in the stock? I mean, if the battle is so neck to neck as you believe, the PS3 boxes wouldn't be collecting dust - would they? Face it, Sony is a terrible company that practices anti
Re:Finally? (Score:5, Informative)
People keep saying this because the PS3s were on-the-shelf available through most of the Christmas season, while Wiis were sold out on the morning of day one and continued to sell out immediately everywhere throughout the season. Nintendo could have easily sold two or three times what they did if they had the products on the shelves. Sony had their products out in the marketplace, which means they sold all they were capable of selling at their current price point.
There's still a lot of guesstimation, but the Wii is far more popular than the PS3. Not that the PS3 is dying (Sony won't let it) but it's not going to dominate the current console market.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Finally? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Every Bluray announcement someone posts "Could this be the much-needed nail in the coffin for HDDVD?"
I say just let the companies have their pissing contest and I'll get a dual format player in a year or two.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Dual format is better than nothing, but I'd rather have a "winner." I know that every one of my VHS tapes is going to work in just about every VCR you can find in a home.
Of course it's even better if we don't have a fight at all, like with CD, but I guess it's a little late for that at this point?
TW
200GB 51GB (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Apparently the 'no porn' policy does not exist. See:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070112-860
Re: (Score:2)
Tosh need to remove the major consumer perceived advantage of the Blu-ray format - storage space (ignoring content for now). So they simply announce a standard.
Now everyone thinks HD-DVD is as big as Blu-ray. Never mind that tosh haven't even got a proof of concept running let alone get a product to market, nor that the disc would be incompatible...
(sigh).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I do not care which one dies. I'm not buying into the thing until it reaches price tag of 100€ per PC drive and say 2.50€ per recordable disk.
I do not care which one wins. Even if both do. I just want to have affordable recordable disks. Even if I would need to take the disks with me - I can always buy external (usb/firewire) drive.
P.S. I'm going to boycott the movie disks anyway - unless DRM would be completely cracked (just as I did with DVDs). And not that I am movie/tv customer anyway.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Vivid which is the largest producer is exclusively blu-ray. I hate it when people take bloggers for the truth.
No.. (Score:2)
I don't know the porn industry, but I do know BS when I see it.
Re: (Score:2)
Three football feilds and a volkswagen full.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The Important Question (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The first reason is that content sells. The "Collector's Edition." The second reason is that one pressing can do the work of many. Dialog and captioning for every language in your target market. Content edited for use with parental controls.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
More capacity means mrore bits for error correcting codes. [wikipedia.org] This is why you can play a CD with a huge scratch and not have it skip.
Re: (Score:2)
When I see "flash" I think of animated advertisements on web pages. Do you mean animated packaging on products like in Minority Report? Hell no.