Blu-ray expects to reveal launch details CES 2006

[Brimstone]

The point is DVD is so successful and well liked, a format that is overwhelming superior in all technical aspects (storage and speed) is the most worthy canidate to takes its throne.


HVD offers incredible benefits to consumers that are video game fans. It's greased lighting compared to Blu-Ray/HD-DVD on transfer speeds. Next gen consoles are going to have at least 2 Gigabytes of RAM, maybe even 4 Gigabytes. A format that fills the RAM up a quickly as possible is highly desirable and then the ability to stream vast quantities of data into the RAM offers a better experience for the consumer.

HVD has a lot more headroom than either Blu?ray/HD-DVD. If your going to ask consummers to switch to a new format, you need to make it as future proof as possible.

 

[Carl B]

I think both HD-DVDs and Blu-Rays planned successors are based on holographic tech anyway, so it's a moot point. Both Toshiba and Sony are pursuing it through partnerships and otherwise. I agree HVD is awesome, but for now it'll be the stuff of data archiving and such. Maybe they'll come out with some PC drives or external drives as well. But I don't see holographic catching on until the next format battle, when it will be represented by what seem to be both big camps.

Oh well we'll just have to see what happens.

 

[Bobbler]

I think both HD-DVDs and Blu-Rays planned successors are based on holographic tech anyway, so it's a moot point. Both Toshiba and Sony are pursuing it through partnerships and otherwise. I agree HVD is awesome, but for now it'll be the stuff of data archiving and such. Maybe they'll come out with some PC drives or external drives as well. But I don't see holographic catching on until the next format battle, when it will be represented by what seem to be both big camps.

Oh well we'll just have to see what happens.

Hopefully both big camps will agree next time (assuming there is another physical disc standard needed)

 

[Carl B]

Well, I *think* that there will be, I'm not one of those 'digital paradigm' converts just yet. I need some form of back-up option, ya know?

And who knows, maybe the Big Two will indeed agree, or maybe some third party will blindside them both. The exciting world of consumer electronics!

 

[scooby_dooby]

I'd say it won't.

Technology and drive sizes go up rather gradually, not in huge jumps -- its for a reason. So, how many of those 300gb discs would you be buying? How many people could fill up one disc, let alone a fraction of it on a regular basis? You going to be buying stacks of 50 of them to support those companies making the discs?

I was thinking more about corporate and business needs. 300GB recordable discs would be a god send for backing up your central servers.

We definately have a big need right now for large capacity storage medium, DVD is just not big enough, and the 25GB offered by BR still does not cut it. With HDD getting to be 200GB+ on a regular basis now, both of these techologies are insufficent for back-up, HVD recorders would find a warm reception among many in the tech industry I think.

BTW, I won't be dissapointed if HVD doesn't succeed, it's not like I have any personal vested interest in any of these formats, they're plastic discs, who cares?

 

[Bobbler]

I was thinking more about corporate and business needs. 300GB recordable discs would be a god send for backing up your central servers.

We definately have a big need right now for large capacity storage medium, DVD is just not big enough, and the 25GB offered by BR still does not cut it. With HDD getting to be 200GB+ on a regular basis now, both of these techologies are insufficent for back-up, HVD recorders would find a warm reception among many in the tech industry I think.

BTW, I won't be dissapointed if HVD doesn't succeed, it's not like I have any personal vested interest in any of these formats, they're plastic discs, who cares?

Oh, no doubt -- I really hope HVD doesn't die away, and I think/hope it does have a good place for in the backup world for now.

I don't think most average consumers would care about the difference between 25-50gb and 300gb -- most people don't burn their entire drive to a disc (just the small amount of actual important stuff, if they are backing it up)... right now at least. When consumers need the extra space and HVD read/write speeds have gone up a lot it will rock (it'd take a few hours to burn 300gb at its current speed of 160mbps, which is completely unacceptable to a normal user wanting to actually use the capacity on the disc).

 

[scooby_dooby]

YA I agree with that, but I also think the casual consumer is actually fine with DVD right now, the 25GB offered by BR is good, but as you said there's no real need for all this space outside of backups, and as far as backups go BR is better than DVD, but still far from ideal.

It's in a wierd place, where it's much bigger than the casual consumer needs for day to day use, but at same time much to small for serious use as a backup medium in the business world.

I dunno, it will be interesting to see whether either of these formats really take off as storage mediums, or if they stick mainly to movies, with the odd tech-junkie having a burner.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Oh, no doubt -- I really hope HVD doesn't die away, and I think/hope it does have a good place for in the backup world for now.

I don't think most average consumers would care about the difference between 25-50gb and 300gb -- most people don't burn their entire drive to a disc (just the small amount of actual important stuff, if they are backing it up)... right now at least. When consumers need the extra space and HVD read/write speeds have gone up a lot it will rock (it'd take a few hours to burn 300gb at its current speed of 160mbps, which is completely unacceptable to a normal user wanting to actually use the capacity on the disc).

How long do you think it will take to burn a BR disk at 36mbps?

 

[aaronspink]

How long do you think it will take to burn a BR disk at 36mbps?

105 minutes or so.

 

[Bobbler]

How long do you think it will take to burn a BR disk at 36mbps?

Well, considering I doubt we'll see any 1x drives (and I'd bet on it), and 2x would yield a ~46minute burn - 4x would be ~23minutes... that's certainly more tolerable than 4 hours. Then again, if someone does release a 1x burner then I'd consider that pretty unacceptable too -- not a big concern for me, regardless, I plan on watching movies, not burning stuff.


And...

Scooby, I agree -- I'm still perfectly fine with using CDs. I think DVDs will be fine for most people up to around 2008-2009, really.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Well, considering I doubt we'll see any 1x drives (and I'd bet on it), and 2x would yield a ~46minute burn - 4x would be ~23minutes... that's certainly more tolerable than 4 hours. Then again, if someone does release a 1x burner then I'd consider that pretty unacceptable too -- not a big concern for me, regardless, I plan on watching movies, not burning stuff.

I agree you won't see 1x drives, they wouldnt even be able to support HD content, so it's still born. (Although It does make me question how and why they determined that to be the base speed for the device). Burning 1/12th of the data in 1/6th of the time is not all that exciting a revelation to me and I am not sure how you sell that to consumers as an advantage. They've already demonstrated they can develop lower capacity HVD devices if that is desired.

And...

Scooby, I agree -- I'm still perfectly fine with using CDs. I think DVDs will be fine for most people up to around 2008-2009, really.

DVD's are already inadequate for anyone who wants to store HD content.

 

[MechanizedDeath]

I don't think anyone is gonna argue that HVD isn't a superior format to BD with what is known. It is a much more pronounced jump than BD. But WTF does it have to do with these BD threads? Every damn time, it is stirred into the pot. Why? There are no studio announcements and nothing even close to a proposal to use it as a media format. Who really cares about a format with no content? It has nothing to do with this topic. You guys are arguing in circles over two formats that aren't even going to be competing. Why not argue for HD-HVD. You know that's probably gonna happen eventually. Why not wait for that? PEACE.

 

[jvd]

I don't think anyone is gonna argue that HVD isn't a superior format to BD with what is known. It is a much more pronounced jump than BD. But WTF does it have to do with these BD threads? Every damn time, it is stirred into the pot. Why? There are no studio announcements and nothing even close to a proposal to use it as a media format. Who really cares about a format with no content? It has nothing to do with this topic. You guys are arguing in circles over two formats that aren't even going to be competing. Why not argue for HD-HVD. You know that's probably gonna happen eventually. Why not wait for that? PEACE.

beats me i came into the thread and it was being talked about .

Well, considering I doubt we'll see any 1x drives (and I'd bet on it), and 2x would yield a ~46minute burn - 4x would be ~23minutes... that's certainly more tolerable than 4 hours. Then again, if someone does release a 1x burner then I'd consider that pretty unacceptable too -- not a big concern for me, regardless, I plan on watching movies, not burning stuff.

Do you think hvd is only going to come out at its base speed ? a 2x drive would cut the time down greatly .


Aside from that there are tons of uses for hvd

1) large data base back ups

2) Thearter digital screens .

3) The mini hvd is 30 gigs in the size of a credit card that be good for
a) mp3 players
b) camcorders

4) You can do 1080p uncompressed and fit hours and hours of video on the disc. With tivo type devices becoming so popular people can now just download thier tivos to a hd-dvd disc and store thier eps .



As for bluray , some here are talking like its already won the format war . From what i see , they still have to go up aganst hd-dvd . If neither win movie stuidos may want to support another tech.

 

[Bobbler]

3) The mini hvd is 30 gigs in the size of a credit card that be good for

Touche. A 30gb disc would be much more appropriate for normal users (while a 300+gb would be grand for few more uses, but not really necessary for most consumers). HVD still lacks any sort of backing, for now at least, making the entire format dead in the water to compete with BR/HD-DVD on what they were made for (movies, and software).

Also.

AlphaWolf -- I realize that 1/12th the size at 1/6th the speed isn't exactly great (worse ratio than HVD, thats for sure), however a user is still going to be waiting a long time to fill up 300gb (just like having a 1tb disc and waiting 8 hours or more would be completely unacceptable -- it should be sub 1hr, preferably sub 30 minutes, to fill an entire disc regardless of size if you want it to be commonly used), as you and jvd pointed out though a 30gb disc at the 160mbps would be nice and certainly a lot more suited for consumers (honestly, I had forgotten about those 30gb cards).

 

[AlphaWolf]

AlphaWolf -- I realize that 1/12th the size at 1/6th the speed isn't exactly great (worse ratio than HVD, thats for sure), however a user is still going to be waiting a long time to fill up 300gb (just like having a 1tb disc and waiting 8 hours or more would be completely unacceptable -- it should be sub 1hr, preferably sub 30 minutes, to fill an entire disc regardless of size if you want it to be commonly used), as you and jvd pointed out though a 30gb disc at the 160mbps would be nice and certainly a lot more suited for consumers (honestly, I had forgotten about those 30gb cards).

So don't burn all 300GB at the same time?

 

[jvd]

Well bobber just as we don't expect 1x bluray drives (that were sold but whatever) we shouldn't expect 1x drives when they get into end users hands for hvd .

What would a 2x be , 320mbps ? 4x would be what 640mbps ?

Anyway remember 300 gigs is a single layer .


I believ elike dvd each layer u add on bluray would slow down its write speed of the drive and that dual and quad burning (if quad burning exists ) will be much slower than a hvd while approaching the size of hvd .

When i bought my dvd burner it was 16x and then 2.4x dl . I believe now there are 16x /4 not sure if there are faster ones . But they do lag behind . Writing 50 gigs or a 100 gigs at 2x speeds would suck as much as writing 300 gigs at 1 x with hvd

 

[Dave Baumann]

A somewhat curious report:

http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000293070178/

 

[Carl B]

That's just what Sony's movie studios plan on using with their own releases on Blu-ray, not any sort of limitation of the format itself. Blu-ray the format still supports MPEG-4 and VC-1/9.

 

[MasaC]

I don't think anyone is gonna argue that HVD isn't a superior format to BD with what is known. It is a much more pronounced jump than BD. But WTF does it have to do with these BD threads? Every damn time, it is stirred into the pot. Why? There are no studio announcements and nothing even close to a proposal to use it as a media format. Who really cares about a format with no content? It has nothing to do with this topic. You guys are arguing in circles over two formats that aren't even going to be competing. Why not argue for HD-HVD. You know that's probably gonna happen eventually. Why not wait for that? PEACE.

There is a very simple reason. Some people on this forum hate Sony and therefore hate anything Sony is involved in. They used to bring up HD-DVD against BD and argue to death for it but lateley even they feel HD-DVD is dead on arrival. So, what to do? Oh yeah, bring up a next-next generation format competitor and use it to argue against BD. Not really smart though, as that format has even less widespread support than HD-DVD.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

A somewhat curious report:

http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000293070178/

This was discussed extensively in a totally unrelated to MPEG thread. As I understand existing digital movie content is already on MPEG2 and in very low compression, using lots of BW which BRD has to spare. As the existing hardware and services are geared towards MPEG2 there's no economical point to going with h.264. Apparently. h.264 is more for higher-compression, lower bandwidth, lower overall quality but better than high-compression MPEG2 quality streamed media, it seems.