Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Toshiba Touts 51GB HD DVD

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 7 years ago | from the i-thought-you-said-it-was-a-good-size dept.

Data Storage 236

srizah writes to mention that Toshiba plans to launch a 51 GB HD DVD, with a 1 GB advantage over Sony's Blu-ray disc. From the article: Toshiba has submitted a triple-layer, 51GB HD DVD-ROM disc to the standard's overseer in the hope the technology will be adopted as a standard by the end of the year. If approved, it allow the format to exceed the 50GB storage capacity of rival medium Blu-ray Disc. The HD DVD standard currently defines single- and dual-layer discs capable of holding 15GB and 30GB of data, respectively."

cancel ×

236 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Fifty one! (5, Funny)

plover (150551) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620100)

Ours goes to 51. Yes, but you see -- that's one more, isn't it? Fifty-one is one more than fifty, that's what makes it so special. It's one more.

Re:Fifty one! (3, Funny)

KUHurdler (584689) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620122)

640K of memory should be enough for anybody.

Re:Fifty one! (2, Funny)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620434)

And 650k would be sooo much better.

Re:Fifty one! (2, Funny)

jones_supa (887896) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620824)

I think 641k should be just enough.

Re:Fifty one! (2, Funny)

Tanuki64 (989726) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621322)

640K of memory should be enough for anybody.

HE never said this. This is an urban myth. I can testify. I was present, when HE did not say it. ;-)

Re:Fifty one! (1)

LordEd (840443) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620142)

No no, you're wrong. Ours goes to 51 billion bytes. Fifty-one billion is much more than fifty-billion. That's 1 billion more reasons to use our standard.

Re:Fifty one! (1)

Wavicle (181176) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620278)

Do not be too proud of this technological terror you have created. The power to store 51GB of data is insignificant next to the power of the market forces demanding pr0n.

Re:Fifty one! (1)

nbert (785663) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620468)

The problem is that the "pr0n industry" hasn't decided yet - some studios release in HD-DVD, others in Blu-Ray.

Disclaimer: I'm just keeping an eye on this industry because they really indicate which standard will win from time to time - not that I'm a geek drooling in mom's basement. Seriously ;)

Re:Fifty one! (2, Informative)

Wavicle (181176) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620708)

I've heard that Sony doesn't want it on Blu-Ray [slashdot.org] .

Re:Fifty one! (2, Informative)

binkzz (779594) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620952)

They say that's what killed Philip's superior video cassettes - that they didn't allow porn on it.

Re:Fifty one! (1)

nbert (785663) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621330)

I'm sure this plays a minor role compared to the VHS/Betamax war, because Sony not wanting it doesn't mean that they will have to face major obstacles to release it this time.

Re:Fifty one! (4, Funny)

L7_ (645377) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620280)

I always think of that hitchiker clip in "Something about Mary" when I hear of these comparisons:

Hitchiker: You heard of this thing the 8-minute abs?
Guy: Yeah, sure, 8-minute abs. Yeah, the exercise video.
Hitchiker: This is going to blow that right out of the water. Listen to this. 7-minute abs. Right.
Guy: Yes. OK, all right, I see where you're going.
Hitchiker: You walk into a video store. There's 8-minute abs and 7-minute abs beside it. Which one are you going to pick?
Guy: I'm... I would go for the seven.
Hitchiker: Bingo, man, bingo. 7-minute abs. ...

Re:Fifty one! (2)

Annirak (181684) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620370)

That's why I tagged this "pissingcontest"

Re:Fifty one! (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17620402)

I think this article needs a "ha-ha" tag. Blu-ray backers keep claiming theirs is better for storage and along comes HD DVD and proves them wrong.

Anyways, I am not buying into a so-called "next gen" optical disc solution until 128 GB is met or exceeded. It may be arbitrary, but most computers with ATA/IDE controllers can support 128 gigabytes and it is enough of an improvement in storage space for the optical medium to warrant investing money not currently being spent on DVD+/-R/RW/DL discs and hard drives.

Re:Fifty one! (3, Informative)

AftanGustur (7715) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620480)


According to Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] , Blue Ray is up to 33 GB **PER LAYER** in the labs, that would give 66 Gigabytes for a *two layer* blueray disk.

And of course, a 3 layer "standard" blueray disk would be about 70GB.

And then there's reality, it looks like Sony will manage to shoot itself in the leg (head) with it's silly restrictions on content. (No pron).

Re:Fifty one! (2, Interesting)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621104)

Not only that, 100GB and 200GB Blu-ray discs were announced last year.

Assuming Sony is actually preventing porn from appearing on Blu-ray (the only story we have about it is what some guy said people told him at a convention), porn is freely available on the Internet anyway, and Blu-ray has more studio support (Disney in particular), so I don't see it making a lot of difference.

Re:Fifty one! (1)

kfg (145172) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620546)

Everbody; sing!

"A silly millimeter longer, 101."

Perhaps you have to be of a certain age for that one.

KFG

Re:Fifty one! (0, Redundant)

Intron (870560) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621172)

There's a fine line between stupid and clever.

Finally? (1, Insightful)

pete6677 (681676) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620144)

Could this be the much-needed nail in the coffin for Blu-Ray? The sooner it dies (and you know it will, its backed by Sony), the sooner the HD-DVD industry can advance. Who'd want to buy while we're still in the midst of a format war and risk having the next Betamax? (Also a Sony product)

Re:Finally? (2, Insightful)

The Slaughter (887603) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620284)

Since I already bought a PS3 and it came with a Blu-Ray as an extra (and pretty soon 1 million others will be in the same boat), I'd just prefer if Blu-Ray wins. Come on, we all know it's a superior standard. God the blu-ray discs look awesome as well.

Re:Finally? (1, Insightful)

The PS3 Will Fail (998952) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620626)

"Since I already bought a PS3 and it came with a Blu-Ray as an extra (and pretty soon 1 million others will be in the same boat),"
Ah yes, Sony is well on their way to losing this generation of consoles. I can't wait! [Sony deserves to lose. lik-sang.com lawsuits and the rootkit fiasco should not go unpunished.]
"God the blu-ray discs look awesome as well."
Great reasoning there. You are exactly the type of consumer Sony loves to have.

Re:Finally? (1)

phlegm (146308) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621238)

Why do people keep saying this. According to the official numbers released PS3 is only 100,000 units behind the WII for Dec. PS2 beat out everybody. That plus the PS3 is selling at twice the rate that the 360 did at launch. Games are getting bigger. Some are even saying that 50 gig is not enough for the latest releases. MS is going to have to release a new 360 just to keep up.

Re:Finally? (2, Interesting)

The PS3 Will Fail (998952) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621292)

What official numbers? The numbers released by Sony?

And if you know anything about the history of console sales, you would know that the technical merits of the system are not the only factor in what console sells the most.

Why is it that PS3s are widely available and languishing on store shelves while stores cannot keep the Wii in the stock? I mean, if the battle is so neck to neck as you believe, the PS3 boxes wouldn't be collecting dust - would they? Face it, Sony is a terrible company that practices anti-consumer behavior and they deserve to lose. Why would you even want to support them? They make MS look noble by comparison.

Re:Finally? (4, Informative)

plover (150551) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621366)

According to the official numbers released PS3 is only 100,000 units behind the WII for Dec.

People keep saying this because the PS3s were on-the-shelf available through most of the Christmas season, while Wiis were sold out on the morning of day one and continued to sell out immediately everywhere throughout the season. Nintendo could have easily sold two or three times what they did if they had the products on the shelves. Sony had their products out in the marketplace, which means they sold all they were capable of selling at their current price point.

There's still a lot of guesstimation, but the Wii is far more popular than the PS3. Not that the PS3 is dying (Sony won't let it) but it's not going to dominate the current console market.

Re:Finally? (1)

NineNine (235196) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620352)

Another PS3 owner here... I'd be very happy if Blu-Ray wins. I don't have a religious zeal about either format, but I've already got a Blu-Ray player.

Re:Finally? (4, Insightful)

nonsequitor (893813) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620440)

I doubt that. Toshiba has made a 3 layer HD DVD disc. The current Blu Ray discs are only 2 layers. From what I heard Toshiba has designed discs of both formats at 10 Layers, considering that you get more data per layer of a Blu Ray disc it will still be bigger. Plus they have already made a 6 layer Blu Ray disc with a capacity of 200 GB. And we all know 51 is much less than 200. If it were an apples to apples comparison, it may have been a nail in Blu Ray's coffin. However, when you compare the largest Blu Ray disc produced, to the largest HD DVD disc produced, Blu Ray still has a clear advantage in capacity.

Re:Finally? (1)

nonsequitor (893813) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620536)

Oops, make that an 8 Layer Blu Ray Disc, at 25 GB per Layer.

Re:Finally? (1)

Tony Hoyle (11698) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620506)

Every HDDVD announcement someone posts "Could this be the much-needed nail in the coffin for Blu-Ray?"
Every Bluray announcement someone posts "Could this be the much-needed nail in the coffin for HDDVD?"

I say just let the companies have their pissing contest and I'll get a dual format player in a year or two.

Re:Finally? (2, Insightful)

Total_Wimp (564548) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620876)

So which version of DVD do I burn for Macs and which do I burn if I want to put my movie ina DVD player?

Dual format is better than nothing, but I'd rather have a "winner." I know that every one of my VHS tapes is going to work in just about every VCR you can find in a home.

Of course it's even better if we don't have a fight at all, like with CD, but I guess it's a little late for that at this point?

TW

Re:Finally? (1)

F-3582 (996772) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620544)

I thought that the pr0n industry already did that [slashdot.org] ...

Re:Finally? (2, Informative)

phlegm (146308) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620722)

Just because a blogger says that one producer will also make hddvd disks does not mean there will be no blu-porn.
Vivid which is the largest producer is exclusively blu-ray. I hate it when people take bloggers for the truth.

Re:Finally? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17620548)

midst of a format war and risk having the next Betamax?

One can't help but wonder how much Sony's previous Betamax failure will influence the outcome of this format war. More likely, the fact that the disks themselves are generally cheaper than blu-ray already signals a tipping to HD-DVD.

200GB 51GB (2, Insightful)

Karganeth (1017580) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620596)

You seem a bit over the top. This is a 51 GB disk, TDK already has a 200GB Blu-Ray disk. Also, if you RTFA you might ahve noticed the words "The snag, of course, is that today's HD DVD players will be incapable of reading the new disc, which is something of a problem for early adopters, who will presumably have to buy new kit." This is NOTHING. Blu-ray is the better technology, and everyone knows it. Nobody wants to admit it because Sony, who created a rootkit, is backing it.

Re:200GB 51GB (1)

loganrapp (975327) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621042)

Whether it's a better technology is irrelevant: Sony is being way more restrictive on content; HD DVD is not. That's where Sony will fall. If they stop trying to put a stranglehold on what can be placed on their format, they'll win. But as long as they act like Sony, they're going to lose.

Re:200GB 51GB (1)

mgabrys_sf (951552) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621320)

Right already they're legally letting HD-DVD owners transfer content to laptops and other devices.

Wait - I'm sorry - that's Sony actually and Blue-Ray. HD-DVD is restrictive as fuck. Wow - I can't believe I almost fell for your trolling. Holy fucking shit!

You'll have to illegally crack your "nonrestrictive" HD-DVD.

Good luck with the RIAA, MPAA, and those pesky lawsuits.

Re:Finally? (1)

spagetti_code (773137) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620610)

Could this be the much-needed nail in the coffin for Blu-Ray? I suspect that this is the case.

Tosh need to remove the major consumer perceived advantage of the Blu-ray format - storage space (ignoring content for now). So they simply announce a standard.

Now everyone thinks HD-DVD is as big as Blu-ray. Never mind that tosh haven't even got a proof of concept running let alone get a product to market, nor that the disc would be incompatible...

(sigh).

Re:Finally? (1)

speculatrix (678524) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621156)

maybe we should re-christen it "betaray" or "bluemax" or something?

200 GB blu-ray (5, Informative)

Naksu (689429) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620146)

TDK actually has made six-layer 200 GB blu-ray disks, way back in 2006 :) http://www.tdk.com/procommon/press/article.asp?sit e=con&recid=127 [tdk.com]

Re:200 GB blu-ray (3, Funny)

Karganeth (1017580) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620744)

Nonsense! A company who distributed a rootkit and lost a different format war in the past could never create a technology superior to HD-DVD. Besides, a blogger posted something about Sony not licensing his pr0n movie so, obviously, Blu-ray is bound to fail.

Priceless... (5, Funny)

andrewd18 (989408) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620148)

R&D: Billions of dollars.
Marketing: More billions of dollars.

Squeezing that extra GB out of your next-gen DVD to claim your format is "better": Priceless.

Re:Priceless... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17620228)

Kind of incorrect. Since present HD-DVD maxes at 30GB, a 51GB disc is a 21GB (or over 67%) improvement.

Re:Priceless... (1)

andrewd18 (989408) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620656)

Way to not even read the summary, much less TFA:

Toshiba plans to launch a 51 GB HD DVD, with a 1 GB advantage over Sony's Blu-ray disc.

Re:Priceless... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17621270)

Way to display the inability to perform critical thinking. The increase in capacity should be compared to the technology itself. At a 21GB increase, that's pretty impressive. The 1GB increase over Blu-Ray is irrelevant in judging the value of the advancement.

Re:Priceless... (1)

7Prime (871679) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620690)

Carl Sagan (aka: Butthead Astronomer ©): "Billions and Billions of Dollars"

Re:Priceless... (1)

noidentity (188756) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621246)

That's over TWO MINUTES more recording per disc! Think of all you can do with two minutes: longer can't-skip intro, menu transitions that take longer to finish, extra credits at the end of the movie. The possibilities are endless, and poor Blu-Ray can't do that.

Hmmmm.... this sucks in a way (1)

gzerphey (1006177) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620168)

I wonder if this will mean new HD-DVD players and a whole new format way on the horizon. I get tired of this crap. This is why I'm waiting until one format to emerge, even if it takes another two years. Then I will go about buying a new DVD player and tv to support it.

Thus endith the rant.

One GB to Rule them All (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17620182)

The profecy is fulfilled! Notice how 51 is 15 backwards... HD-DVD has come full circle.

the winnar is pr0n (3, Funny)

User 956 (568564) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620200)

Toshiba plans to launch a 51 GB HD DVD, with a 1 GB advantage over Sony's Blu-ray disc.

This will clearly make it victorious over blu-ray. The fact that the porn industry has chosen HD-DVD will have nothing to do with it.

Re:the winnar is pr0n (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620494)

The fact that the porn industry has chosen HD-DVD will have nothing to do with it.

Is this true?

If so it's actually a good point. One of the claimed reasons for VHS winning the format war was apparently that Sony didn't allow porn on Betamax. Of course, the 2 hour VHS tape length might have been a factor as well.

Re:the winnar is pr0n (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17620964)

Who wants to watch two hours of porn?

Re:the winnar is pr0n (1)

phlegm (146308) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621144)

It is not true. Manu producers are blu-ray exclusively.

Re:the winnar is pr0n (4, Informative)

phlegm (146308) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620782)

Why does everybody keep saying this. It is not true. Just because a blogger says something does not make it fact. This was all over Digg and thoroughly debunked in the comments there. But people still believe it. Many producers including Vivid (The biggest) are exclusively blu-ray.

Re:the winnar is pr0n (1)

Karganeth (1017580) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620936)

Why does everybody keep saying this. It is not true. Just because a blogger says something does not make it fact.
Everybody keeps saying this because they want to believe it. They don't want a sony (the so called evil rootkit company) to win the format war. Imagine if it was the other way around, and Sony was backing HD-DVD. Would you still be supporting HD-DVD? NO! It's blind to judge a technology by the actions of one company backing it.

Re:the winnar is pr0n (1)

phlegm (146308) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621050)

I'm backing blu-ray based on tech specs. I bought a PS3 based on tech specs. If I bought hd-dvd just because I hated Sony I would have a hard time because MS is the major backer of HD-DVD and they have done far far more to hurt the consumer then Sony ever has. (Former Deskview user, then OS/2 user, then Beos user, and now Linux user)

Re:the winnar is pr0n (1)

pinkstuff (758732) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621340)

OMG! Someone supporting Sony and BR! I was beginning to think I was the only one left!

Yes, Sony has done some dumb things, but come on - we are comparing them to MS. Personally I would prefer it if the even less evil Sega or Atari came back into the console biz, but for now my money is with Sony mainly because their hardware is superior. IMHO, when it comes to BR vs HD-DVD there really isn't any question BR is superior, at least in these early days of the tech.

Re:the winnar is pr0n (1)

Guzzitza (1000386) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620960)

Interestingly, this article http://www.theage.com.au/news/home-theatre/highdef -porn-has-stars-spooked/2007/01/15/1168709667041.h tml/ [theage.com.au] suggests that although the porn producers/directors may be happy about HD, a few of the stars aren't that sure about it all.. Also, you know if Apple are sending their Rep's to the porno convention, we should be watching this space... perhaps more so than we do now.. ; P

Re:the winnar is pr0n (1)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621146)

People, this is not VHS vs. Betamax. It is 2007, and porn is freely available on the Internet. Not to mention that companies like Vivid are Blu-ray exclusive. And so is Disney. You can't go around forming your worldview based solely on Digg and Slashdot headlines. It's just plain ignorant!

The Important Question (-1, Redundant)

cashman73 (855518) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620214)

51 GB is meaningless to the slashdot crowd. Most of us just want to know how much porn is that? ;-)

Re:The Important Question (1)

dbIII (701233) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620376)

51 GB is meaningless to the slashdot crowd. Most of us just want to know how much porn is that? ;-)

Three football feilds and a volkswagen full.

Re:The Important Question (1)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620678)

We're talking volume here - I think you're going to have to go Metric and convert to Olympic-sized swimming pools as your measurement in this case.

Re:The Important Question (5, Funny)

sharkey (16670) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620754)

A REAL slashdotter wouldn't have to ask. A REAL slashdotter would already know.

No way (1, Insightful)

koh (124962) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620230)

Are you kidding me?

The previously capacity-challenged HD-DVD grows larger than its Blue-Ray rival, therefore eliminating the last remaining advantage or BR and more or less killing it in the short-to-medium term... Along with the PS3.

This just after HD-DVD encryption was broken? I have to get my tinfoil hat.

Re:No way (1)

HThead (607256) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620392)

I think the potential for larger capacity discs is greater with BD than it is HD-DVD. After all, BD already has a 50GB standard, and there has been recent announcements of BD going much higher. In any case, I think BD is going to win by default because of the PS3. Even if PS3 sales are mediocre compared to the PS2, that will still mean tens of millions of BD players out there. That should be enough to convince the content people to stick with BD.

Re:No way (2, Interesting)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621182)

Blu-ray can go up to 200GB. With HD-DVD being publicly cracked before Blu-ray, that's pretty much the death knell in my eyes. The movie studios are even more paranoid about DRM than the music industry.

Take that Sony! (0)

EvilGoodGuy (811015) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620244)

I'm just going to start calling Sony Mario, because they just got 1-uped!

Not a big deal... (4, Insightful)

NineNine (235196) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620286)

None of these high capactiy DVD formats are going to get any traction at all for at least the next few years. DVD has just recently become ubiquitous, and I'm willing to bet that nobody is buying these new players yet (except for the ones in the XBox 360 and the PS3). The TV technology (plasma and LCD) is still unbelievably crappy and overpriced, so there's no real reason for these new formats yet.

Re:Not a big deal... (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620560)

The XBox 360 requires a $199 add-on.

I really don't get your comments on LCD and plasma, most of the problems were with older generation products. They still have some negative aspects but so does every other display technology. You can get a 42" 1080p CD for around $1500, which is a fantastic price for how great the picture is.

Re:Not a big deal... (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620598)

1080p CD

This should read 1080p LCD.

Re:Not a big deal... (1)

NineNine (235196) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621086)

I really don't get your comments on LCD and plasma, most of the problems were with older generation products.

Eh. I've never seen a plasma or LCD TV that looked anywhere near as good as a plain ol' CRT. Either everything looks choppy and digitized, or things look terribly washed out, or you have to look at them directly (90 degree angle) to see anything. I'm a movie fanatic, and incredibly anal about picture quality. I've never seen one of those new TV's that I would ever consider buying (and I've looked at a lot of them). The specs may be better, but the picture quality on these things is pretty rotten. I guess it's like vinyl vs. CD's, except much, much more pronounced in the TV comparison.

Re:Not a big deal... (1)

AnnuitCoeptis (1049058) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620568)

Pardon me, IT IS A BIG DEAL. Top cinema productions like StarWars I, II were filmed using Sony CineAlta camera in 1920x1080, so this HD-DVD IS exactly what we want. True movie resolution for our money and not that downsampled and overpriced crap of DVD. You can buy a Full HD LCD-TV (1920x1080) at about $1000-$2000 so there is really no reason to wait.

Re:Not a big deal... (1)

HappySqurriel (1010623) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620898)

You can buy a Full HD LCD-TV (1920x1080) at about $1000-$2000 so there is really no reason to wait.

Unless you don't see the point in spending $2000 on a TV, $500-$1000 on a movie player, and $20 a movie (because I can't rent them currently) to gain access to a small library of content.

Yippie!

Still not a big deal... (1)

paladinwannabe2 (889776) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621010)

There are several problems with your rant.
First, You call Star Wars I and II 'Top cinema productions'.
Then, you assume that HD-DVD is now superior to Blu-Ray in some meaningful way. (And no, that 1 GB of space it gains with a new format doesn't count)
Last, you assume that most people would be willing to pay $1000+ for a HD LCD Television.
If you wanted to make sense, you might say "People who are willing to pay a few thousand for a home movie experience should upgrade to HD". Then I don't think anyone would disagree.

Sony still make a good TV (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17621348)

FWIW - My 36" Sony CRT HD television has an amazing picture

Can someone help me out? (2, Interesting)

bherman (531936) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620288)

Ok, I'm a tad confused

1 Layer = 15 gig
2 Layers = 30 gig (makes sense, 15 x 2)
3 Layers = 51 gig....wtf? 15 x 3 = 45

Re:Can someone help me out? (3, Informative)

InsaneGeek (175763) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620320)

1 layer = 17 not 15
2 layers = 34
3 layers = 51

Re:Can someone help me out? (4, Informative)

this great guy (922511) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620932)

1 layer = 15 GB
2 layers = 30 GB = 2 x 15 GB/layer
3 layers = 51 GB = 3 x 17 GB/layer

For 3-layer HD-DVDs, Toshiba decided to use 17 GB layers instead of 15 for the sole purpose of obtaining the upper hand in capacity over the competing 50 GB Blu-ray discs. I agree that this is a bit laughable :)

They are making it more and more complicated (4, Insightful)

javilon (99157) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620298)

Will current HD-DVD players be able to read three layers disks? If that is not the case, they are adding to the DRM nightmare.

Now you have to check that:

- You are using the right disk with the right recorder BlueRay/HD-DVD
- You are using the right variety of disk that you recorder can read (triple layer won't work on old players).
- You have everything hooked using HDCP cabling.
- All of your hardware supports DRM (if it doesn't your content will be downgraded and you will be worst off than you would with a dvd player).

And off course, the way things are going, in no time your new shiny expensive hardware will be rendered obsolete by a new iteration of the technology and/or the Digital Restrictions Management schema imposed by the studios.

You have to be masochistic to refuse the easy route to High Definition, a DVI connector, P2P and a BFHD (Big F*****g Hard Drive).

Re:They are making it more and more complicated (1)

alen (225700) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621394)

in a few years when there is mass adoption of HD-DVD this won't matter because the early adopters will buy the cheaper and better players that will be out. Just like they did when DVD first came out

Amazing! (3, Informative)

oGMo (379) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620368)

Someone's competitor plans to launch a product with a 2% advantage over the product you can already get, mere years after something with a 100% advantage was demonstrated [engadget.com] , and within only 8 months of something with 200% advantage [engadget.com] !

Re:Amazing! (1)

koh (124962) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620466)

Someone's competitor plans to launch a product with a 2% advantage over the product you can already get, mere years after something with a 100% advantage was demonstrated, and within only 8 months of something with 200% advantage!

Sorry, Sony. Those 2% are the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back. Come back next gen.

Re:Amazing! (1)

eclectro (227083) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621074)

I suspect that that technology could work with HD-DVD too. I don't think that its format specific.

The spec can't be changed now (5, Informative)

Wesley Felter (138342) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620474)

(This article appears to be a dupe, so I might as well repost my comment from last time.)

The HD-DVD spec was finalized a while ago. HD-DVD players can only read two layers, therefore no movie can ever have more than two layers. All this talk about more layers is just PR wanking.

Re:The spec can't be changed now (2, Insightful)

eclectro (227083) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620604)

HD-DVD players can only read two layers, therefore no movie can ever have more than two layers.

I suspect that future players will be backwards compatible with the new format.

A firmware update might do the job (1)

F-3582 (996772) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620672)

...well, on the other hand this would propably mean massive product recalls which might most likely be not worth it.

Re:The spec can't be changed now (2, Insightful)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620682)

The HD-DVD spec was finalized a while ago. HD-DVD players can only read two layers, therefore no movie can ever have more than two layers. All this talk about more layers is just PR wanking.


Technically, no.

Think about it for a moment. Look at all the HD-DVDs on the market, and HD-DVD players. They're missing something. Something that has annoyed the world over (not so much North America, but the rest of the world). Blu-Ray has it alright (they've simplified it - somewhat, but it's still present).

The "feature" that's missing in HD-DVD? Region coding. Yes, HD-DVDs are region-free. HD-DVD players have region numbers alright - that's for the DVD playback. HD-DVDs, nope. HD-DVD flippers, yes, for the DVD side. Now how in the world is the content industry going to accept that a major "next-gen" format will allow someone in Europe to get a high-quality movie that's probably just playing in theatres?

The other thing is well, HD-DVD supports managed copy, which I don't think is quite standardized yet (managed copies is a DRM way of letting you take your HD-DVD, copy it to your hard drive to play on your laptop, or move it to an iPod to play, or other thing).

Anyhow, it's not like more layers can't be put into the spec - I believe there is future capability for 4 layer HD-DVDs. 2 layers was put into the spec because it's trivial to produce using existing DVD processes (HD-DVD's main strength is how one can recycle existing DVD plants to make HD-DVDs - basically very little is needed to upgrade it from DVD-only to DVD-and-HD-DVD. Hence all the DVD/HD-DVD flippers out there - it's no biggie to the production line).

51 == more DRM (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17620566)

Since an MP4 at 51 Gig really provides little quality improvement over a 30G movie, the only real reason for this change is to Add more DRM.

What about writing (1)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620590)

Is there going to be a triple-layer writer as well, or will this work only for manufactured discs?

And as for all existing players being unable to play these discs, that's the price you pay for being a HD-DVD early adopter. One would hope, despite their past track record, that Sony won't obsolete all their (say 500K) existing BluRay players just to squeeze out 2GB more.

Sony should (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17620648)

Release an update to blu-ray with 51.1 GB for spite.

Behind the curve (4, Interesting)

Straif (172656) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620750)

I'm not a big fan of Blu-Ray (lack of standards is going to play havoc on first gen adopters) but if this was a fight about capacity HD-DVD would have been dead before it ever began. Capacity is about the only aspect of the next gen formats where there is a clear winner and it is not HD.

TDK was showcasing 100GB blu-ray discs [theregister.co.uk] almost two years ago and has recently shown off 200GB blu-ray discs [xbitlabs.com] . The problem is people are slow to adopt the use of next gen optical drives for performing important back ups and at present the excess capacity is next to useless for the movie industry.

This does help HD-DVD in that the increased capacity does help them match Blu-Rays superiority in the important TV DVD market. Previous to this you could fit an entire high def season on one BR disc but would be forced to use 2 or 3 HD discs. Now they can both meet the single disc hurdle.

I just hope someone wins this battle quickly and we'll get one standard for both PCs and movies or if not at least drives/players capable of reading both.

hey guys, help me make a decision (0, Flamebait)

moochfish (822730) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620856)

Should I tag this as "sony", "nail", or "coffin"?

Re:hey guys, help me make a decision (3, Insightful)

phlegm (146308) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621176)

You should tag it as FUD since it obviously is. 200 gig is far bigger then 51 gig.

50, 51. . . (1)

Hamoohead (994058) | more than 7 years ago | (#17620982)

. . .whatever it takes.

That's a lot of eggs... (2, Interesting)

suparjerk (784861) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621022)

...in one basket. 51 GB on a single CD-sized disc means the data is more physically compact.... which just means you lose more data if the disc gets scratched. 51GB is an improvement from 700 MB, I suppose, but I think cooler things could be being done.

The data storage technology development seems to be progressing the same way video games were/are for a while. Video games pushed for more violence, more sex, a higher polygon count, neater visuals, blah blah blah. Too many of them are just the same old crappy first-person shooters, with prettier graphics. Hardly anything ground-breaking or new. So now we have a disc that holds more than the last disc.... Whoo.

I guess it's not really data storage's job to be exciting or entertaining, so comparing with video games might not be the most appropriate thing to do. On the other hand, where are those super-cool hologram storage things I remember hearing about years ago??

Re:That's a lot of eggs... (1)

Tim Browse (9263) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621336)

So now we have a disc that holds more than the last disc.... Whoo.

So...

On the other hand, where are those super-cool hologram storage things I remember hearing about years ago??

Why, would they enable us to store more info in the same space..? Whoo. :-)

It's about production sizes, not disc sizes (3, Insightful)

dagamer34 (1012833) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621036)

It's not about the amount of storage space a HD-DVD or Blu-Ray disc can hold, as both formats have proven adequate to storing HD movies with amazing quality. No, it's about being able to get those discs into mass production with little increase in costs. That's why that 200GB Blu-Ray disc is pointless if it costs 10 or 20 times more to produce. Blu-Ray lost out earlier last year because while it did HAVE 50GB discs in it's initial spec, it took until late November to use them in movies. HD-DVD has been using dual layer 30GB discs from the start.


We'll just have to wait and see how long it takes before these discs become reasonable to manufacturer. Until then, I'm sticking to DVD.

flash is the future (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17621066)

all of this is a dead technology.

the future is flash.

Personally (1)

smoker2 (750216) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621242)

i would rather have the Bluray
they were first to propose the idea, they came up with the best format(capacity wise) and they are the only ones to produce a PC-writer AFAIK. I don't care about past mistakes (Sony Media), they produce good shit.

No need to do that anymore (2, Insightful)

melted (227442) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621298)

The war is already won by HD-DVD, for three reasons:
1. It's cheaper to produce
2. There's porn on it
3. Higher capacities don't matter for H.264/VC-1 encoded content

These map very closely to VHS vs Betamax war:
1. VHS was cheaper to product
2. There was porn on it
3. Higher image quality didn't matter much

Except #3 is not even about image quality this time around. Image quality is identical between two standards, they use the same codecs at the same bitrates.

Reality Check (1)

protomala (551662) | more than 7 years ago | (#17621360)

Here in Brazil is almost impossible to find a double layer DVD media for recording, and when found it's way to expensive (R$ 15,00 against R$ 2,00 for a single layer, or in U$: 6.50/0.85).

So, who cares? It's news just for big players :-P

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?