|
8 Feb 2006, 21:32
|
#1
|
Caveat Lector
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Posts: 3,038
|
Blu-Ray Discs vs HD DVD
I can't wait until these get adopted:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc
Over 20gb of storage on each disk! I wish they would develop some kind of complex anti-scratch protection for them. It's not guaranteed these things will beat out the competition, but as the PS3 is coming out with it as a player. I think it has more potential than the HD DVD's
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD_DVD
What do you think? 15GB of storage for single layer.
|
|
|
8 Feb 2006, 23:46
|
#3
|
no
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: in a chair
Posts: 329
|
Re: Blu-Ray Discs vs HD DVD
they HAVE developed some kind of complex anti-scratch protection for them
--wikipedia----
Hard-coating technology
TDK 100 Gigabytes four-layer Blu-Ray disc.
Because the Blu-ray standard places data so close to the surface of the disc, early discs were susceptible to dust and scratches and had to be enclosed in plastic caddies for protection. Such an inconvenience, the consortium worried, would hobble Blu-ray's adoption in the face of the rival HD DVD standard; HD DVDs can be handled bare (caddyless) like CDs and DVDs, making them familiar to consumers as well as attractive to manufacturers and distributors who might be deterred by additional costs of caddies.
The solution to this problem arrived in January 2004 with the introduction of a clear polymer coating that gives Blu-ray discs unprecedented scratch resistance. The coating, developed by TDK Corporation under the name "Durabis", allows BDs to be cleaned safely with only a tissue — a procedure that can damage current CDs and DVDs. Presumably HD DVDs are similarly frail, as they are manufactured by the same process as the older optical media. Bare BDs with the coating are reportedly able to withstand attack by a screwdriver. [6]
---
but yeah, this is some pretty cool news, it's a lot of storage for 1 disc. Going to keep an eye on this.
[edit]
I just read belgareths comment and that is such good news that it's allmost hard to believe . It's probably going to take a while till we can use those holo discs.
|
|
|
8 Feb 2006, 23:59
|
#4
|
Caveat Lector
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Posts: 3,038
|
Re: Blu-Ray Discs vs HD DVD
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belgarath The Sorcerer
|
Interesting. I noted though that it looks like it's all Japanese companies supporting this technology and without US companies' backing it wont get the support it needs to thrive (ie studios putting content on it, manufacturers creating players for it, etc).
|
|
|
9 Feb 2006, 00:08
|
#5
|
Clerk
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 13,940
|
Re: Blu-Ray Discs vs HD DVD
Physical removable media like this are a bit unnecessary these days.
Having said that, I don't really mind who "wins" the format battle between Blu-Ray vs HD-DVD. Apparently HD-DVD is slightly less annoying, DRM-wise so I guess that'd be preferable.
|
|
|
9 Feb 2006, 00:14
|
#6
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,174
|
Re: Blu-Ray Discs vs HD DVD
Quote:
Originally Posted by s|k
I can't wait until these get adopted:
|
I can't wait for multiformat players to be released so I don't have to care.
__________________
If one person is in delusion, they're called insane.
If many people are in delusion, it's called a religion.
|
|
|
9 Feb 2006, 00:53
|
#7
|
Tilting at windmills
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 579
|
Re: Blu-Ray Discs vs HD DVD
Quote:
Originally Posted by s|k
Interesting. I noted though that it looks like it's all Japanese companies supporting this technology and without US companies' backing it wont get the support it needs to thrive (ie studios putting content on it, manufacturers creating players for it, etc).
|
There is no real demand from the studios perspective for such high density media. At this point Blu ray discs are an ideal size for high definition content, and can be gradually upscaled to meet future image quality standards.
For example, a single layer blue ray disc can store roughly 2 hours of HD content (ie a 1080p movie). The latest LCD and Plasma TV's for home use are only just catching up to this level of resolution (ie Sony Bravia LCD TV's).
There really is no real need for anything larger than blu ray at this point from the movie perspective.
And as Dante has already said, physical removable storage is becoming less important these days, given the size of hard drives, the internet etc
|
|
|
9 Feb 2006, 01:18
|
#8
|
cynic
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Bishop Auckland Co. Durham
Posts: 8,809
|
Re: Blu-Ray Discs vs HD DVD
i prefer blu ray, however its about 50/50 support for the 2 and i cant believe that no one has mentioned VHS vs betamax yet...
__________________
lazy
|
|
|
9 Feb 2006, 02:51
|
#9
|
Caveat Lector
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Posts: 3,038
|
Re: Blu-Ray Discs vs HD DVD
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cooling
For example, a single layer blue ray disc can store roughly 2 hours of HD content
|
There are a *lot* of movies over 120 minutes, are people going to have to change discs?
|
|
|
9 Feb 2006, 03:23
|
#10
|
Born Sinful
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Loughborough, UK
Posts: 4,059
|
Re: Blu-Ray Discs vs HD DVD
Bluray will almost certainly win due to being in every PS3 shipped out.
Other than that, the formats are pretty similar. The only significant difference is that HD DVD is backward compatible so HD DVD tech will play standard DVDs. For Bluray players to play standard DVDs, they need another laser which pushes the price up slightly.
However, many multiformat DVD re-writers use multiple laser systems and these days cost about £30, so I don't see it being a significant issue. Frankly, until there's a clear winner I'm not buying any equipment or media for either of them. This is going to end up like betamax/vhs all over again, except that this time neither format is obviously superior - not that being superior to vhs helped betamax at all.
__________________
Worth dying for. Worth killing for. Worth going to hell for. Amen.
|
|
|
9 Feb 2006, 04:28
|
#11
|
Old Man O Deh *****s
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: In spelelpee land
Posts: 3,516
|
Re: Blu-Ray Discs vs HD DVD
Quote:
Originally Posted by s|k
Interesting. I noted though that it looks like it's all Japanese companies supporting this technology and without US companies' backing it wont get the support it needs to thrive
|
USA! USA! USA!
__________________
Dead_Meat
You dont need to keep beating a dog to get it to stop shitting on the carpet
|
|
|
9 Feb 2006, 04:49
|
#12
|
Tilting at windmills
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 579
|
Re: Blu-Ray Discs vs HD DVD
Quote:
Originally Posted by s|k
There are a *lot* of movies over 120 minutes, are people going to have to change discs?
|
Dual Layer Blu Ray discs hold twice that amount.
Single Layer DVD ~4.7 gb Dual Layer DVD ~ 8.0gb
Single Layer BRD ~20gb Dual Layer BRD ~ 40 gb
240 min of 720p, 1080i or 1080p content is more than enough for anyone.
Wiki explains HDTV.
|
|
|
9 Feb 2006, 08:12
|
#13
|
Caveat Lector
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Posts: 3,038
|
Re: Blu-Ray Discs vs HD DVD
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dead_Meat
USA! USA! USA!
|
Kura? Is that you?
|
|
|
9 Feb 2006, 08:13
|
#14
|
Caveat Lector
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Posts: 3,038
|
Re: Blu-Ray Discs vs HD DVD
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cooling
Dual Layer Blu Ray discs hold twice that amount.
Single Layer DVD ~4.7 gb Dual Layer DVD ~ 8.0gb
Single Layer BRD ~20gb Dual Layer BRD ~ 40 gb
240 min of 720p, 1080i or 1080p content is more than enough for anyone.
Wiki explains HDTV.
|
I'm sure a dual layer player will cost more than a single layer, and not everyone will have them so I doubt they're going to sell those standard or make them available for rent at Blockbuster or Netflix.
|
|
|
9 Feb 2006, 09:08
|
#15
|
Tilting at windmills
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 579
|
Re: Blu-Ray Discs vs HD DVD
Actually on rereading Wiki the single sided Blu Ray discs can apparently hold up to 4 hours of HD content. Not sure of the resolution though.
And I would think that dual layer players will be standard in any case. With the recorders being more expensive for dual layer capability (ala DVD).
|
|
|
9 Feb 2006, 11:25
|
#16
|
The Twilight of the Gods
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 23,481
|
Re: Blu-Ray Discs vs HD DVD
Quote:
Originally Posted by meglamaniac
Bluray will almost certainly win due to being in every PS3 shipped out.
|
The PS3 doesn't even exist yet, and Microsoft are supporting HD-DVD. The fight is in no way won or lost by either side.
Quote:
Originally Posted by meglamaniac
not that being superior to vhs helped betamax at all.
|
It depends what you mean by "superior". It was called superior, but if they weren't analysing it with the requirements of the consumer in mind, VHS, with such things as a longer play/record time, could be thought to be superior.
|
|
|
10 Feb 2006, 18:10
|
#17
|
Throwing Shapes
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 797
|
Re: Blu-Ray Discs vs HD DVD
Quote:
Bare BDs with the coating are reportedly able to withstand attack by a screwdriver
|
This is the same kind of PR lines we heard about CDs ("Oh yes you can spread jam on them and everything and they'll still work).
__________________
Time is an Illusion, Lunchtime doubly so.
|
|
|
10 Feb 2006, 18:12
|
#18
|
The Twilight of the Gods
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 23,481
|
Re: Blu-Ray Discs vs HD DVD
Quote:
Originally Posted by CjC
This is the same kind of PR lines we heard about CDs ("Oh yes you can spread jam on them and everything and they'll still work).
|
Some of the things you can do to CDs are pretty insane - you can pepper a music cd with (say) 1mm drill holes and it will still play ok.
Data CDs are a lot more variable, though.
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 17:41.
| |