![]() ![]() |
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
68.19.155.144
In Reply to: RE: OK, I read they are readable with same laser and same posted by Duilawyer on July 29, 2007 at 16:49:37
Pit density and laser focus are two areas of difference. An HD DVD laser won't read a Blu-ray disc because the laser that reads Blu-ray discs has a narrower focus to be able to read a denser pit structure on a BD. While it's not the % of difference between CD and DVD, it is the reason 25GB of data fits on a single-layer BD and only 15GB of data fits on a single-layer HD DVD. The lasers in these players can be made to focus at different depths/layers, but not stricter tolerances (just like DVD lasers can read CDs, but not the other way around).
The processing of the data is pretty much the same -- it's how the data is encoded on the disc that is different. The Blu-ray format is allowed the use of direct 24p encoding, while HD DVD uses an interlaced encoding (the interlaced encoding can be translated to progressive, so the exact same output is possible).
For future use, Blu-ray has a better chance of offering even more capacity. Because a Blu-ray disc puts the data closer to the surface than HD DVD, .1mm vs .6mm, there's more room left over for additional layers. About the best HD DVD will ever achieve, if it even gets out of the lab, is a triple layer disc (51GB) -- which Blu-ray more or less equals in its dual-layer state. As I'm sure you've read/heard, TDK has 200GB Blu-ray discs in the lab. I seriously doubt we will ever see anything over 50GB for the movie formats on consumer Blu-ray players, but the computer world is an entirely different matter. Will such discs take off? If the price is right, who knows? At least the possibility exists with the BD format.
Follow Ups:
I agree that we probably won't see greater than 50G discs for movies. In fact, I suspect we'll start to see more multi-disc sets like the Pirates movies even if the 50G isn't filled, strictly for higher profit margins. Why cram one discs, when you can use two, and charge more? I question the use of BD for data storage, with portable hard drives so cheap, more spacious and easy to use, they may make optical discs moot.
Jack
It's going to depend on the cost. If they can get costs down, I don't see it as a problem. I believe 50GB memory cards are still a long way off, so optical storage may be here for a while. I'm looking at it as a portable backup for large amounts of data, as hard drives are not portable.
For movies, I think the multi-disc route is the best option. Each and every movie should be given the royal treatment with respect to audio and video. If a studio wants to include extras, whatever space is available after the royal treatment can be used along with a second disc if necessary.
They are going to have to get costs WAY down, if they want BD to be a viable data back-up system. You can get a 250 Gig portable hard drive that's 5" X 3" (approx). See link below. Granted its $180, but thats a cheaper price than 5 BD-Rs, and prices will go down.
I agree with your comments about movies.
enjoy,
Jack
I've seen ads for external cases that, with rebate or coupon, are close to $0. Throw in a sale or rebate on internal hard drives (I've bought 250GB drives for $49 and 200GB drives for $39) and you're looking at <$60 w/tax for 250 portable gigabytes. CompUSA had 200GB hard drives on sale Black Friday before last, while they lasted (less than 1 minute after the doors opened), for $29!!!
I'm sure the 50GB discs will be down to <$10 a pop in a few years. Too much competition for them not to. The question is, will it be too late?
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: