Along with the fact that it would be the best leg-up they could give Blu-Ray, and it's stupid for them NOT to have it in there, no matter how affects their other machines initially. There is no de-facto standard yet, so the race is in creating one--not eeking every bit of profit out of the hardware they can. DVD has no competition, while Blu-Ray does.
Multi-Laser : Supports Red And Blu-Ray Lasers
- Thread starter Spidermate
- Start date
David_South#1
Banned
Heh. 
Actually there is a Defacto Standard. Toshiba/NEC HD-DVD.
The DVD Forum voted on RW a few motnhs ago.
And a Few Days ago made it the ROM standard too.
That's ok by be. For over two years I've agreed it was the best standard to run with.
In fact on more than a few occasions I felt Sony's PS3 should use it too.
After all costs are lower and manufacturing of ROM's isn't very hard to do.
Actually there is a Defacto Standard. Toshiba/NEC HD-DVD.
The DVD Forum voted on RW a few motnhs ago.
And a Few Days ago made it the ROM standard too.
That's ok by be. For over two years I've agreed it was the best standard to run with.
In fact on more than a few occasions I felt Sony's PS3 should use it too.
After all costs are lower and manufacturing of ROM's isn't very hard to do.
David_South#1 said:Heh.
Actually there is a Defacto Standard. Toshiba/NEC HD-DVD.
The DVD Forum voted on RW a few motnhs ago.
And a Few Days ago made it the ROM standard too.
Lets see how well this "standard" will make it without Sonys support in both movies and hardware. Not to mention all the manufactors that back Blu-Ray.
And as far as i know (and has been posted here) Sony has done some extensive work in bringing the manufacturing costs down.
And i couldn't imagine the movie industry wanting to pay Microsoft everytime they sell a HD-DVD
And in regard to the WM9 HD Codec, well it does look nice but it isn't as good looking as MPEG2 HD (at DVD sized compression). And any red laser HD-DVD done with WM9 will have to use all the space it can get since it needs some fairly high bitrates, long movies will have to be split over 2 discs (unlikely instead the compression will be harder and the picture quality worse
).The one thing that can give Sony real problems is HD-DVD hardware at low prices and a big selection of HD-DVD movies before they get the Bluray movies out + the hardware down in price. But when the PS3 launches it will include Bluray (anything else would be plain stupid) and if history repeats itself (and Sony gets lucky) it will be alot cheaper than the competing HD-DVD + Bluray players and turn the market to pure bluray.
Nevetheless, i will buy both types of players and the 10th version of Bladerunner when the time comes 8)
-tkf- said:And i couldn't imagine the movie industry wanting to pay Microsoft everytime they sell a HD-DVD
If Microsoft is charging less, offering better licensing terms (including a lifetime cap on cost) and has a better technology than the guys that hold the other patents, I'm pretty sure they will choose Microsoft.
-tkf- said:
That's not what the double-blind tests which were run recently held at the DVD Forum said. Even the companies who were part of Blu-Ray all agreed WMV9 was a technically superior codec at HD resolutions in an apples to apples comparison.
I can't see the movie industry wanting to pay sony money everytime they want to sell a blueray disc either .
Whats your point ?
Hd-dvd is already much cheaper than blueray and its backwards compatabile with out any other special lasers or even more expensive versions of the blue laser in it .
I still say the blueray tech will be to expensive in the ps3.
First and foremost the ps3 has to be the best at doign what it was designed to do. Play games.
If it doesn't play games as well as the xbox 2 not only will it fail. But the blueray in it will fail
Whats your point ?
Hd-dvd is already much cheaper than blueray and its backwards compatabile with out any other special lasers or even more expensive versions of the blue laser in it .
I still say the blueray tech will be to expensive in the ps3.
First and foremost the ps3 has to be the best at doign what it was designed to do. Play games.
If it doesn't play games as well as the xbox 2 not only will it fail. But the blueray in it will fail
It's not a question of if they want to or not. The point is if they use SD or MiniSD, the format itself will be pushed by default because millions of people would need to buy them for N5. SD is already one of the standards for flash media and Panasonic was going to release an adaptor for GCN for saving game data. Why they haven't released it yet I have no idea. My guess is that Nintendo wanted consumers to buy their memory card so they can make money. If they offered the adaptor, consumers would be free to buy SD cards from anyone.
It needs two lenses? (edit: or a complex lense assembly) and they're made of glass too. HD-DVD needs only a single simple plastic lense.
Well then you would have to have a recordable drive which would be expensive.
How so? I'm talking about recordable dual layer drives that will be appearing in 2004. How much is a BR recorder in 2004? By the time PS3 arrives these dual layer red laser recordable drives from 2004 would be even cheaper.
I doubt the BR drive would be able to record at all because of the simple fact that it would cost too much to add a recordable drive to PS3.
David_South#1
Banned
PC-Engine,
Right now BR-RW is cheaper than ROM, both as a player and especially as a disc.
That may change in the future.
But right not this is the reality that may exist even then.
Right now BR-RW is cheaper than ROM, both as a player and especially as a disc.
That may change in the future.
But right not this is the reality that may exist even then.
zidane1strife
Banned
bond, james bond... spider... man... 1... 2.... little nemo... incredible...s...
Can blu-ray be stopped? With both the content and the h/w and such a cool name was it not... but meant to be?
David_South#1
Banned
I base it on two simple facts:
A) That ROM drives, don't exist and RW drives do.
It's much cheaper to buy an existing techology than one that doesn't exist.
B) The well known fact that ROM is much more complicated to fabricate. Making the billions of fine pits happen evenly and CONSISTENTLY in the write layer without production errors has been a nightmare. BR-RW just involves a phase change chemical layer.
Later on when ROM player production surpasses RW then prices will reverse.
At this time the method of producing a consistant ROM layer or even the best material to use is unproven. According to Sony's plans last January real ROM disc production wouldn't begin until late 2005.
Even in PC's BR-ROM isn't expected until sometime in 2005.
As you can see it's early 2004 and ROM still hasn't happened yet.
In fact the whole site only has positive news on the RW front, and hope for ROM.
Anyways things can change. But right now RW is cheaper and more common than any ROM options.
A) That ROM drives, don't exist and RW drives do.
It's much cheaper to buy an existing techology than one that doesn't exist.
B) The well known fact that ROM is much more complicated to fabricate. Making the billions of fine pits happen evenly and CONSISTENTLY in the write layer without production errors has been a nightmare. BR-RW just involves a phase change chemical layer.
Later on when ROM player production surpasses RW then prices will reverse.
At this time the method of producing a consistant ROM layer or even the best material to use is unproven. According to Sony's plans last January real ROM disc production wouldn't begin until late 2005.
Even in PC's BR-ROM isn't expected until sometime in 2005.
As you can see it's early 2004 and ROM still hasn't happened yet.
In fact the whole site only has positive news on the RW front, and hope for ROM.
Anyways things can change. But right now RW is cheaper and more common than any ROM options.
How can A be cheaper than B if B doesn't exist? That kind of logic just doesn't work sorry. You picked a flawed example to try and apply economies of scale. Is a wooden bicycle more expensive than a car? According to your logic it must be since wooden bicycles don't exist.
Well known to whom?
That other part about the Hollywood studios you quoted doesn't prove any of your theories about BD-ROM being more difficult to produce therefore being more expensive. It only says the spec hasn't been finalized, therefore it'll come out later. Obviously the movie studios aren't going to release films on BD-ROM if the spec isn't finalized. The same thing applies to HD-DVD. The DVD Forum was smart in finalizing HD-DVD-ROM first.
Well known to whom?
That other part about the Hollywood studios you quoted doesn't prove any of your theories about BD-ROM being more difficult to produce therefore being more expensive. It only says the spec hasn't been finalized, therefore it'll come out later. Obviously the movie studios aren't going to release films on BD-ROM if the spec isn't finalized. The same thing applies to HD-DVD. The DVD Forum was smart in finalizing HD-DVD-ROM first.
What kind of tests were these, test based on 1080i at 7mbit or higher?
It's a given that VM9 at 25mbit should look better than mpeg2 at 25mbit. What i was referring to was WM9 at 6-7mbit since this is the max bitrate for HD on 4.7~8.5GB Red laser DVD.
Did they test the new Sony format as well?
jvd said:
Who would want Microsoft in "control" of something as important as the future Movie codec i can't believe that Hollywood would like that.
Doesn't matter now, it's what the mainstream will be presented with in the future that matters.
So was DVD believed to be.
The PS3 will not fail in either regard.
David_South#1
Banned
PC-Engine,
Actually wooden bicyles do exist and are more expensive then some cars.
And the logic isn't invalid.
You would be buying a protoype ROM and paying for it's cost.
(I suspect you didn't know BR-ROM wasn't out yet.)
"Well known", applies to Widescreen Review readers like myself. 8)
You also made another mistake.
The DVD Forum finalized HD-DVD-RW first, not ROM as you state.
Actually wooden bicyles do exist and are more expensive then some cars.
And the logic isn't invalid.
You would be buying a protoype ROM and paying for it's cost.
(I suspect you didn't know BR-ROM wasn't out yet.)
"Well known", applies to Widescreen Review readers like myself. 8)
You also made another mistake.
The DVD Forum finalized HD-DVD-RW first, not ROM as you state.
David_South#1 said:PC-Engine,
Actually wooden bicyles do exist and are more expensive then some cars.
And the logic isn't invalid.
You would be buying a protoype ROM and paying for it's cost.
(I suspect you didn't know BR-ROM wasn't out yet.)
"Well known", applies to Widescreen Review readers like myself. 8)
You also made another mistake.
The DVD Forum finalized HD-DVD-RW first, not ROM as you state.
Wrong! It's seems you're grasping at straws with NOTHING to back up your argument. How can you pay for something when it isn't even for sale?
Also I already knew the BD-ROM spec would be out after the RW spec. I just didn't think someone with any common sense would resort to using that fact as an argument of it being more difficult and expensive to manufacture with NOTHING to back it up.
If it's "well known" then there should be a source that supports that claim. Got any factual data from the BR Group to support that? Didn't think so.
Also the HD-DVD-ROM spec was approved long before the RW spec. That's FACT not the BS you're spewing. I've posted the relevent articles in this forum. Nice desparate failed attempt by you to prove otherwise though.
Oh and finally, even if wooden bikes do exist, they could be sold at a premium because it's rare, not because it cost a lot or is difficult to manufacture unlike your flawed BR-ROM example.
It's really very simple man. SONY needed to sell the BR units on something and that something had to be it's recording function. They didn't have a choice. There's no BD-ROM movies on the market in any significant number if any to sell a BD-ROM only machine. It has nothing to do with difficulty in manufacturing unless you've got factual data that can backup your argument. Time to wake up and smell the coffee man.
David_South#1 said:Heh.
Actually there is a Defacto Standard. Toshiba/NEC HD-DVD.
The DVD Forum voted on RW a few motnhs ago.
And a Few Days ago made it the ROM standard too.
In the same way that DVD+R is a "standard" and DVD-R is a "standard" and DVD+-RW-ROM+HDBRSOMETHINGORANOTHER is also a "standard."
Those, however, were minor and had easy-enough interoperability. HD-DVD and Blu-Ray, however, aren't going to meet in the middle. The chances are extremely low that there will be a single player for both, and the media are going to be much more divergent.
The "industry standard" has yet to be determined, and is still playing out over time. For Hollywood. In PC-dom. For personal players and recorders and consoles and...
Being as intrinsic an "industry standard" as DVD's were is a goal everyone wants, and has a pretty huge financial impact depending on which goes what way and how. The final outcome is as yet unknown, but we certainly know what each player WANTS it to be.
Genuine question:
Now that Sony (and i'm sure others will follow) have a single lens that can read/write with both blue and red laser, what's stopping them to use the same for HD-DVD? It's still the same red laser, right...
Then we'd have a single player/writer that can pretty much play/write any kind of disc based format ever (well, almost... I guess it won't do vinyl)
Now that Sony (and i'm sure others will follow) have a single lens that can read/write with both blue and red laser, what's stopping them to use the same for HD-DVD? It's still the same red laser, right...
Then we'd have a single player/writer that can pretty much play/write any kind of disc based format ever (well, almost... I guess it won't do vinyl)