Next-generation DVD is born!

[Nemesis77]

And this time there shouldn't be several incompatible standards like we have now.

Link



<< The "next generation" of DVDs, able to hold almost six times as much information as current discs, has been unveiled by major technology companies.

The new format, the Blu-ray Disc, will store more than 13 hours of film, compared with the current limit of 133 minutes.

Nine electronics manufacturers have developed the discs, which they hope they will become the standard format, getting rid of the differences between those currently made by individual companies.

The new discs will be able to hold 27 gigabytes of information - compared with the current limit of 4.7 gigabytes. >>

 

[Rallispec]

wow thats a lot of information....


would this mean i need to get a new dvd player?

 

[kami]

DVD is getting more popular and will soon be the mainstream standard over in VHS (it will totally kill VHS within 5 years).

5 - 7 years down the road from today, HD-DVD (just more storage space and higher res video) will probably be unveiled and it will be a pro-sumer product for it's first few years, sort of like DVD in its infancy back in 1997, or Laser Disc back in the day. And maybe 10 years down the road from today HD-DVD will be as popular as DVD is today.

Studios have invested way too much into DVD. Sure there is better technology but it will not be used yet. Also there is the problem of barely anyone having high definition TVs to take advantage of the stuff.

Also, that article says the max is 4.7GB for a DVD? Maybe for a single-layer but dual layer discs (99% of current DVD releases) hold 9GB per side.

edit: with the exception of maybe a new disc that can hold more, BUT can be read by all current DVD players. Now that would be nice!!

 

[BigJohnKC]

Great, but they've got to come up with a better name than "Blue-ray disc".....come on, the American people need an acronym!

I hope this doesn't mean I have to get a new DVD player. I like the one I have - it plays VCDs on CDR discs....combine that with a cable modem, a copy of Morpheus, a few video encoding programs and a cd burner and....well, you know.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Suspect that using a different laser to burn the discs may make it hard for existing sysetms to use it. The same type of laser may be needed to read.



<< The new format is called a Blu-ray Disc because a blue laser is able to cram more data onto discs than the red rays currently used. >>



The new systems will be able to read current DVD discs.

Existing systems may be able to read the new discs only if the burning system is able to simulate the older type of burners (and waste a chunk of the media)

 

[Nemesis77]

<< Studios have invested way too much into DVD. Sure there is better technology but it will not be used yet. Also there is the problem of barely anyone having high definition TVs to take advantage of the stuff. >>



Well, I think that space is going to be needed. Besides movie-industry, it's needed by the computer-industry. We need more storage-space, that fact will never change.



<< Also, that article says the max is 4.7GB for a DVD? Maybe for a single-layer but dual layer discs (99% of current DVD releases) hold 9GB per side. >>



That article doesn't say it, but could it be that you could make those new discs in dual-layer as well? You would get 54 gigabytes per side, 108 gigabytes per disc :Q!

EDIT: From Matsushita's press-release



<< The Blu-ray Disc enables the recording, rewriting and play back of up to 27 gigabytes (GB) of data on a single sided single layer 12cm CD/DVD size disc. using a 405nm blue-violet laser.

The companies that established the basic specifications for the Blu-ray Disc are: Hitachi Ltd., LG Electronics Inc., Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd., Pioneer Corporation, Royal Philips Electronics, Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Sharp Corporation, Sony Corporation, and Thomson Multimedia

They are also aiming to further enhance the appeal of the new format through developing a larger capacity, such as over 30GB on a single sided single layer disc and over 50GB on a single sided double layer disc. >>


After SEVERAL edits, my post finally seem readable...

 

[Elledan]

<< << Also, that article says the max is 4.7GB for a DVD? Maybe for a single-layer but dual layer discs (99% of current DVD releases) hold 9GB per side. >>



That article doesn't say it, but could it be that you could make those new discs in dual-layer as well? You would get 54 gigabytes per side, 108 gigabytes per disc >>


Hmm.... so I could fit a complete backup of all of my HDs twice on such a DVD? Sounds good to me

BTW, does anyone else here think that CD-R(W)s will become more rare now? 700 MB vs. 27 GB

 

[CocaCola5]

<< Great, but they've got to come up with a better name than "Blue-ray disc".....come on, the American people need an acronym!
>>





I disagree, there is already too many going around these days, even HDVCR now, just too confusing imo. I would rather have full names like "Blue-ray" than another HD-something.

 

[Rahminator]

I thought that DVDs could hold up to ~16 GB. Each disc could be made of 2 "internal platters" and each platter (4.7 GB) could be double sided. No?

 

[Nemesis77]

OK, here's how it seems now:

1. this new DVD uses the cartridge-system.
2. There no mention of double-sided disks, so I assume it's only one-sided
3. It can scale to over 50 gigabytes with dual-layer
4. Data-transfer rate is about 36Mbps

 

[Kev]

This will never fly with the majority of consumers.

When we went from VHS to DVD, this is what we got that wasn't available with VHS:
1) Better picture quality
2) Original aspect ratio
3) Commentaries
4) Special features
5) Menus/chapters

This is what we would get going from DVD to HDVD:
1) Better picture quality


Woopdee freakin doo. I'm a techie nerd and even I wouldn't care enough to go buy a new HDVD player.

 

[Elledan]

<< OK, here's how it seems now:

1. this new DVD uses the cartridge-system. >>


Where do you get that information from?


<< 2. There no mention of double-sided disks, so I assume it's only one-sided >>


=(


<< 3. It can scale to over 50 gigabytes with dual-layer >>


Nice


<< 4. Data-transfer rate is about 36Mbps >>


So it will take like ages to fill the 50 GB?

 

[Spooner]

X951: Well said.

 

[kami]

<< This will never fly with the majority of consumers.

When we went from VHS to DVD, this is what we got that wasn't available with VHS:
1) Better picture quality
2) Original aspect ratio
3) Commentaries
4) Special features
5) Menus/chapters

This is what we would get going from DVD to HDVD:
1) Better picture quality


Woopdee freakin doo. I'm a techie nerd and even I wouldn't care enough to go buy a new HDVD player. >>



You have a point, BUT have you ever seen high definition? It's like looking through a window...it's that clear.

 

[CocaCola5]

<< This will never fly with the majority of consumers.

When we went from VHS to DVD, this is what we got that wasn't available with VHS:
1) Better picture quality
2) Original aspect ratio
3) Commentaries
4) Special features
5) Menus/chapters

This is what we would get going from DVD to HDVD:
1) Better picture quality


Woopdee freakin doo. I'm a techie nerd and even I wouldn't care enough to go buy a new HDVD player. >>





Its all about the picture. This drive will allow true High Definition 1920 x 1080 progressive.

 

[bigalt]

i thought we were talking about dvd porn?

 

[Nemesis77]

<<

<< OK, here's how it seems now:

1. this new DVD uses the cartridge-system. >>


Where do you get that information from? >>



From the Matsushita press-release



<<

<< 2. There no mention of double-sided disks, so I assume it's only one-sided >>


=( >>



What, 50+ gigs is not enough for you ?



<<

<< 4. Data-transfer rate is about 36Mbps >>


So it will take like ages to fill the 50 GB? >>



I don't know that is that read-speed or write-speed (or both). So yes, it could take a long time to fill the disc. But we ARE talking about very big capacity here, I guess it's just understandable that it takes time to fill it . And I would think that you could write the data in several sessions.

 

[kami]

That 36Mbps is probably single speed transfer rates as well.

 

[Viper GTS]

<< 4. Data-transfer rate is about 36Mbps >>


So it will take like ages to fill the 50 GB? >>

The fastest IDE drive on the planet right now can only top out at just under 50 megs/second. I really don't think 36 is all that unreasonable. 50 GB = 51,200 MB / 36 = 1423 seconds = approximately 25 minutes.

Viper GTS

 

[Elledan]

<<

<<

<< OK, here's how it seems now:

1. this new DVD uses the cartridge-system. >>


Where do you get that information from? >>



From the Matsushita press-release >>

Alright, no more scratches



<<

<<

<< 2. There no mention of double-sided disks, so I assume it's only one-sided >>


=( >>



What, 50+ gigs is not enough for you ? >>


if (maximum_size == size) {
echo "Not enough!!";
}
else if (maximum_size == size *2) {
echo "Not bad...";
}
else if (maximum_size == size * infinity) {
echo "Now we're talking!";
}






<<

<<

<< 4. Data-transfer rate is about 36Mbps >>


So it will take like ages to fill the 50 GB? >>



I don't know that is that read-speed or write-speed (or both). So yes, it could take a long time to fill the disc. But we ARE talking about very big capacity here, I guess it's just understandable that it takes time to fill it . And I would think that you could write the data in several sessions. >>


Still, 36 Mbit per second is extremely low. Even a FDD doesn't go much slower (okay, perhaps a bit ).

 

[KrazymanJL]

i think you guys are looking over something price if the price of HDTVs dosent go down this new "HD DVD" player will never take off

i see regular DVDs ruling the market for at least 5 more years

 

[Nemesis77]

<< if (maximum_size == size) {
echo "Not enough!!";
}
else if (maximum_size == size *2) {
echo "Not bad...";
}
else if (maximum_size == size * infinity) {
echo "Now we're talking!";
}

>>



LOL! That's funny because it's true !

 

[Elledan]

<<

<< if (maximum_size == size) {
echo "Not enough!!";
}
else if (maximum_size == size *2) {
echo "Not bad...";
}
else if (maximum_size == size * infinity) {
echo "Now we're talking!";
}

>>



LOL! That's funny because it's true ! >>


One of the few occassions where (PHP) code leads to laughter instead of screams of agony

 

[Nemesis77]

OK, there's some confusion whether the transfer-rate it megabits or megabytes. Let's go with the worst-case scenatio:

36 / 8 = 4.5 megs/sec

(51,200 / 4.5) / 60 = 190 minutes

With multi-session, is that so bad? How often do you burn 50+ gigs in one go?

EDIT: typo

 

[Nemesis77]

<<

<< LOL! That's funny because it's true ! >>


One of the few occassions where (PHP) code leads to laughter instead of screams of agony >>



Hey, I'm a nerd, didn't you know that by now ?