"Blu-ray support a last minute switch, Microsoft says..."

Huh?

Ok, for straight HD DVD 30:

You don't need to have precise spinning of the bonding layer in HD DVD. The even pressure from the two substrates will insure the thickness is right.

You put one data layer on one substrate, then the other data layer on the other substate, then you sandwich them together.

http://www.disctronics.co.uk/images/gif/dvd9.gif

HDDVD30 is the same physical structure as DVD9.

For hybrid DVD5/HDDVD 15:

It's the same. You just put DVD5 on one substrate and HDDVD15 on the other substrate, and sandwich them.

For hybrid DVD9/HDDVD30:

It's no different than making a dual sided DVD18. (Which is admittedly much harder than any of the single sided dual layer formats, but has been sucessfully done in production in the past.)

All are relatively well understood processes that don't require tolerances beyond what production lines can match today with only slight modifications.

 

I'm not going to give a straight answer, but some personal observations on business. What I've learnt with years of keeping my ears open is business is invariable a hectic mish-mash dash to try and get a product working on time to meet deadlines, and to promote the business for even bald-faced lies as long as you can secure funding, which at the end of the day is what it's all about. People want money to pay the bills and feed the family, and there aren't too many people willing to go cold and hungry over scruples.

Let's see some examples.

First to mind is the old Starwars Defense program; Reagan's brainchild. There was a TV programme here in the UK a few a couple of years ago that had the people developing weapons explaining how their LIVE REALTIME tests were rigged movie special effects. They believed they could develop the weapons technology as their contracts said, but when the deadline hit for some examples to justify all this funding, they didn't have a working product. So they lied. I remember clearly a demo where what looked like a large water holder, a corrugated iron vat, was apparently shot with some death-ray. This TV programme had the people that worked on this demo explaining the special effects used. I think it was some cables and a movie explosion effect. What the military observers saw was a big gun thing being switched on, and a big metal thing going boom, and the developers of the big gun things saying 'yep it's working, look what it does,' and they believed it. If the scientists had been honest their funding would have been cut and they'd have been out of a job.

Another story is from a friend working on a computer system for a national government enterprise. I won't go into details as to what and where. Only it's big, relevant to every person in the UK, and due to happen at a point in time (no, it's not subversive monitoring implants so UK citizens be at ease!). The government announced it's plans and excepted proposals from the private sector to provide a solution. These are divided by region. The South East contract was awarded to a BIG company with absolutely no experience whatsoever in the field ofthe government's project. This big company approached my friend's company to provide part of the solution; the software. Someone else was to provide the computer hardware. The software was currently at say, version 3, and in use. It needed more features for version 4 to satisfy big company's requirements.

Development of the software was riddled with management cockups and typical business crap. Buck passing, coorporate power struggles as middle management fight for bigger cars, and the employees having their fair share of stress, breakdowns, low morale, the usual. The manager of the development department left a year after being awarded the contract to big company, with absolutely no progress at all, and my friend was wondering how exactly he had secured the contract in the first place when in his management he showed no understanding at all of the technology or the market. Finding a copy of the original proposal given to big company, it made for laughable reading. It made all sorts of claims about software version 3 that just weren't true. He had lied outright in order to secure the contract, and lied during matters about the progress of version 4 and what it would add.

This would place the software company in a bad position you'd think, as the big company would demand the results of their contract but the software company hasn't got the goods. However, the big company has ALSO failed to deliver on all it's promises and requirements and deadlines regards the contract with the government...

The reality of people working is that they make huge mistakes, fail to predict progress, and suffer from inefficiencies ALL THE TIME, in all industries. Go into any small office or large engineering firm of massive telecommunications company, and somewhere along the line you can be sure someone's made a cockup of biblical proportions and there's a desperate scramble to recover, all the while trying to save face by pretending to those that ask that everything's progressing swimmingly.

Now back to your show...

We see working hardware and are told it's all lovely and will be out at such-and-such a date. This might be true. this might be exactly what the state of the technology is. But it also might be a sham. As an example...

"Hi. I've called you here to this meeting to discuss the upcoming tech demos we have to give at the expo. As you all know we're demoing our own implementations of BluRay with our own drives. And as you all know we haven't actually got working drives yet. There's been a ballsup in the bloody diodes and none of them are working. We haven't time to make some more so we're suggesting we use a standard DVD drive instead but rejig the encoding with HD media."
"That's what that memo was about?"
"Yes. We can supply the encoder software and you can burn the hidefinition movies with a standard burner. We can only fit 30 minutes onto a DVD but that should be enough. No-one's going to be sitting there watching a demo real for a couple hours sitting."
"What about live rewritable access? We need to demo 15 gigs of data with random access."
"Yes. Now for that we've rigged this phoney BluRay burner software. It's a standard DVD burner but we've got all these fake files listed with a hack. Basically it shows more data on the drive then there really is. As long as you only access the files that are really on the disc, no-one'll be the wiser."
(Nods of assent)
"Now regards the paraphenalia and marketting gumph we've revised the information you should include. We can add that we've got 8 layer BluRay discs working..."
"I thought you weren't making any progress."
"There were difficulties, but using a liquid nitrogen cooler and a gold based substrate we have got a working 8 layer BluRay disc."
"How much does that cost?"
"About ten thousand dollars per disc at the moment, but they won't need to know that. As long as we can improve the process and get the price down in two years that's al that matters. We can also confirm 25 gigabytes a layer."
"Have you managed that? Our experimental readers have trouble reading the outer tracks and we actually only have 15 gigabytes of readable data."
"Well we've made a little progress. Last count was, what...18 gigs. We'll get there eventually. But if anyone asks just confirm that we have working 25 gigabyte layers..."

I'll stop there. You see how it goes? There's no way of knowing for sure what's happening in the background, on any material. Whether it's some company promoting their latest hardware, or a science lab with their groundbreaking discovery, or some government spokesman saying 'there's nothing wrong. Everything's fine', as long as they have something to lose there's the possibility that they aren't presenting a full and naked truth. If they may lose investment because they admit to having difficulties in their tech that their opposition doesn't admit to having in theirs, or may lose funding because after years of research they haven't actually found anything new, or may lose votes because public perception would turn against a government that shows it makes mistakes instead of covering them up and pretending there's no problems, there's reason for people to be dishonest.

The way I approach information is to take everything at face value. If someone says something is the case, I trust it is, from their POV. But I also accept that the reality might not be so clear cut, and maybe something will come along to change my mind, and things are normally never quite as wonderfully fantastic or disasterously bad as public figures make out, because their communications are always driven by some agenda (promoting their way of thinking) rather than being driven by a desire to communicate the truth. I wish it were different. I would rather everyone were just plain and open, and admitted when there were problems accepting these things happen. But I guess mostly because of competition and the fact the opposition will seem much better than you if they take liberties with the truth and you don't, people feel compelled to present this fictious idea of the world being populated by people who make amazing progress and have fantastic successes without any blips or upsets at all.

In the case of the format wars, I hear nice things about BluRay and think 'hey, that's cool. It can do 8 layers and on paper too.' Then when someone else comes along and says 'BRD has all these troubles I adjust my view and think 'hey, okay, BluRay can have 8 layers and be made with paper, but isn't perfect yet and maybe won't get quite as good as it can be.' Unless the source of information is one that appears to be makng trouble and spreading FUD

 

Can those play BD-ROMS?

 

Which as you must now realise was what was actually being discussed in my original post ...

Whereas putting the BR data layer ontop of what essentially is a conventional DVD9 should not make the manufacture of the BR data layers or the DVD data layers any harder, the fact that the DVD data layers are essentially seperate from the BR ones actually makes life easier.

 

And none of those are consumer spec BR discs. They all require a caddy system. They are not the final design.

 

Yes, but that is the dead-end BR product. The consumer product is not suppose to have a caddy.

 

EVERYONE? seriously, a nice transition is to just start shipping ALL your movies as hybrids. The marginal cost shouldn't be too high, and it allows the retails to actually stock them. In todays market, most retailers will not be devoting large amounts of space to a new format.

 

No, the idea with the hybrid disks, is the manufacturer only ships the hybrid version. You wouldn't have most retails stocking a dvd and a HD-DVD, and a hybrid for the same reason most retails won't stock HD-DVD/BR AND DVD. Shelf space. The hybrid model also allows the studios to get the shelf space for the HD-DVD/BR discs at a time when the market justification from a retailer perspective doesn't justify the floor space for HD-DVD or BR disks.

 

The primary purpose of the original dual layer discs was to allow the distrobution of both full screen and widescreen versions of a movie. A LOT of the original DVDs were done like this. In the intervening years, the public has decided that widescreen is the standard and the prevalence of even stand alone full screen DVDs has greatly diminished.

Aaron Spink
speaking for myself inc.

 

Case in point, anyone see the shelf space DVD-Audio and SACD get? Didnt think so.

J

 

This is what i feel too, I think 3rd party bluray hardware makers will have trouble selling and trying to compete against the ps3. I remember we saw the same problem with dvd and ps2. At the time it was causing a lot of dvd player makers lots of pain because people were choosing the cheaper ps2 over the standalone player. It forced them to reduce prices and margins. But ps2 came out around 2-3 years after the first gen dvd player, so makers had some time to milk early adopters, this time around it seems like they won't have that window and i think that will cause lots of problems and quite possibly cause makers to move to hd-dvd players.

Overall ps3 screws things for both side though, since hd-dvd makers will need to be competitive too on price, ie i don't think they can get away with $1000 players this time around. It's odd though because i thought the big push behind a new format was due to japanese makers wanting to have a high margin media player, since the chinese have killed their dvd player business.

 

Sure. But that doesn't change the fact that BD is much harder to manufacture in the first place. If it's hard to make a BD disc, then that automatically means all BD hybrids are hard as well, since all BD hybrids are BD discs.

I would bet that right now, that the process definition for a dual sided 30/9 hybrid HD DVD disc is stable and has a good chance of working at decent yields, simply because it resembles DVD18 so closely, and duplicators can already make that.

I would not bet that right now that the spin-coating process for BD works for any practical mass production, hybrid/single/double or whatever.

Now when/if they get this issue ironed out, sure the picture changes. But who knows when that will happen. No one from BD has stepped up yet and given independent analysis for yields for BD that the industry can rely on.

 

Blue-Ray

I dont think it would be a wise business move since PS3 will sell many millions of units each year and define the new standard by making superior format available at ow price. Not only will game-players buy PS3 but also those merely wanting superior format but at lower price than $1000. PS2 did not offer Sony a chance to define the standard the way PS3 will. If you doubt effectiveness of this strategy, look at sudden success of UMD with PSP. Blu-ray will be much more successful.

 

Huh?? Sorry, but i'm entitled to an opinion just like anybody else.
I know what I need and want, do you caim to knowthat much better what the consumers in genereal need and want?
Besides, I think my wants and needs are very mainstream.

 

I think his point about your comment was that, it's not about what you want, its what universal and columbia (et al.) want it's what wal-mart wants. It's about retailing content media. Hybrid makes a lot of sense when they can package up one product and hit multiple markets with minimal extra cost.
Wal-marts want >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your want.

 

They are likely to push back the release of their low to midrange standalone Blu Ray players, so as not to coincide or preceed the release of PS3.
They might have difficulties selling the cheaper standalones (if they even have such in their catalogue) for some time after PS3 is released, but there are people who don't care for videogames, so they are likely to buy a standalone that could be better quality and has better acceptance in the home theater inside circles
PS2 didin't stop DVD player sells, why would PS3 stop BR player sells.

Again, I'm going to state what I'd want (sorry alpha spartan), but I know as soon as I buy the PS3, I'll be eyeing the classy standalone BR players(/recorders) because teh internet says PS3 is a crappy BR player... and the standalones do have that class these flimsish video consoles are lacking.

 

But that's not realistic in the longer run.
Hybrid HD-DVD wouldn't be the first product that seemed as a good idea in retailing pov, but had been left sitting in the shelves because I and the public didn't want it.

 

It's not about the long run, its about a transition which will take several years. In the long run, BD and hd-dvd don't matter at all, because they will inevitably be replaced by something else.

Thats ridiculous. If the implementation of the hybrids is seamless and cheap 99% of consumers will either not care (early HD adopter who still gets his HD media product) or see it as a benefit(DVD owner who gets to start an HD media library and can still watch his new release today in DVD quality). If it's not seamless and cheap it's a failure and no one will use it.

 

Realistically, I do not expect the hybrid discs to replace the standard DVD's on shelves.
If indeed there will be hybrid discs at retail, they will exsist alongside the standard DVD and a full HD-DVD, making it at least theree versions of the same movies to choose from.

If the movies would come only on hybrid discs and HD-DVD/Blu-Ray, then the implementation would be seamless and the 99% (where's that number coming from, some market research, or just what you want? ) of consumers wouldn't care.

But I don't believe that will be so. Hybrids and non-hybrids will exsist alongside, will the 99% of consumers really choose the more expensive hybrid disc if they are unsure of their future format? Or will they just wait, buy the non hybrid DVD's as before, and start buying the full-blown non-hybrid HD-super-special-edition-directors-cut-extra-footage-iHD commentary-full-rate-dts-double-disc-HD-edition discs after they've bought their first HD player.

Was there a hybrid VHS-DVD while transitioning to DVD? NO, and it did not stop the consumers.
Was there hybrid SACD/CD discs, Yes, and it did little to make the SACD the new standard.
Edit: I have to argue myself here: Did the hybrid SACD/DVD-A come until later into the lives of HD music formats? Were there hybrid discs when SACD and DVD-A launched, I really don't remember.

Hybrids are no solution to the transition period, it's just PR to reassure the consumers they will be safe even though they weren't that afraid until told so