|
Highest Capacity possible w/HD DVD?
|
|
|
ivymike
Member
|
30. November 2006 @ 20:21 |
Link to this message
|
What's the highest capacity that will be available with HD DVD?
I know that Toshiba is developing a 200 GB disc for Blu Ray. I'm hoping that the same is true for HD DVD because there is not going to be a BD-RAM, just a BD-RE which is similar to the crappy DVD-RW types. There *is* going to be a HD DVD-RAM however.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
dblbogey7
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
1. December 2006 @ 04:00 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
|
Balaam
Senior Member
|
1. December 2006 @ 06:15 |
Link to this message
|
BD will never have more then a dual layer movie disc. They can barely produce that. But of course, BD was designed from the beginning to be a computer storage device, while HD-DVD was designed from the beginning to be a movie format, so it's kind of absurd to say that the potential capacity of BD is some advantage it has for storage purposes. That's what it was designed for!
But as for the top capacity for HD-DVD movie disks, the DVD forum researched the possibility of triple layer disks earlier this year, Toshiba developed them, and they will most likely be written into the specs for adoption next summer. So the answer to your question is that in the future there will be 45 gig triple layer movie disks:
http://www.physorg.com/news4052.html
|
|
dblbogey7
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
1. December 2006 @ 08:07 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Balaam:
BD was designed from the beginning to be a computer storage device, while HD-DVD was designed from the beginning to be a movie format, so it's kind of absurd to say that the potential capacity of BD is some advantage it has for storage purposes.
I disagree. BD was designed for both High Definition Video distribution AND mass data storage. From the BluRay Disc Association website:
http://www.blu-raydisc.com/general_infor...3579/Index.html
Quote:
This new format has arrived with the advent of Blu-ray Disc, the only format that offers a considerable increase in storage capacity with its 25 to 50 GB data capacity. This allows for the next big application of optical media: the distribution and recording of high definition video in the highest possible quality. In fact, no other proposed format can offer the data capacity of Blu-ray Disc, and no other format will allow for the same high video quality and interactive features to create the ultimate user experience.
http://www.blu-raydisc.com/general_infor...3578/Index.html
If BD was primarily a computer storage device then what about the increasing number of standalone BluRay players (Samsung, Panasonic, Sony, Philips) not to mention the Playstation3? Add to that the overwhelming majority of movie studios backing BluRay. I think your statement claiming that BD is primarily designed for computer storage is as you say, absurd.
|
|
Balaam
Senior Member
|
1. December 2006 @ 10:42 |
Link to this message
|
Well, that's just because you don't know what you're talking about. And the fact that you, with a straight face, would throw out there the simplistic BD talking points shows that you're obviously a fanboy. I'm not going to bother educating a fanboy, but I will say that BD has been out in Japan as a computer format for over 4 years, before the DVD Forum met to design an HD optical disk format. When those meetings began to take place, Sony proposed to adapt it's BD computer format into a pressed disk movie format, but they were rejected because it was much more expensive and much less reliable to use BD tech as a pressed disk then it was to use the tech they went with, HD-DVD. That's why there are two competing formats. Because Sony was unsuccessful in adapting it's computer technology to be used as a movie format to the extent that it could beat out the HD movie format Toshiba and others designed from the ground up.
Don't be too embarrassed. People put their foot in their mouth all the time. Though the fact that you linked to pages on the BDA's marketing website to prove your point is kind of hilarious.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 1. December 2006 @ 10:45
|
|
dblbogey7
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
1. December 2006 @ 11:49 |
Link to this message
|
|
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 1. December 2006 @ 11:50
|
|
error5
Senior Member
|
1. December 2006 @ 12:23 |
Link to this message
|
dblbogey7 and diabolos have been the one - two punch of the HD-DVD camp in these forums from day 1.
dblbogey7 a Sony/BluRay fanboy? I don't think so.
|
|
Balaam
Senior Member
|
1. December 2006 @ 15:03 |
Link to this message
|
Fair enough dblbogey7. I don't visit this forum enough to know your posting history. It's just that this part you wrote:
Quote:
If BD was primarily a computer storage device then what about the increasing number of standalone BluRay players (Samsung, Panasonic, Sony, Philips) not to mention the Playstation3? Add to that the overwhelming majority of movie studios backing BluRay. I think your statement claiming that BD is primarily designed for computer storage is as you say, absurd.
While not exactly false, is what you hear when you go to BB and listen to the BBB (Best Buy Bastards for those not familiar with the term ;)) regurgitate the talking points they're fed by the Sony reps that educated them when the format launched. BD has that support, though in reality it's not much more then a paper tiger, because after their plan was rejected by the DVD Forum, they marketed their butt off to keep their format from being still born as a movie disk.
My point was not to make a disparaging remake about BD. I was simply stating the fact that BD was originally designed for the computer world, so it was designed with high capacity in mind. While HD-DVD was designed to be a movie disk, and so has enough capacity to get the job done with its current 30 capacity no problem.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 1. December 2006 @ 15:03
|
|
dblbogey7
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
1. December 2006 @ 17:07 |
Link to this message
|
Be careful of what you say - diabolos (Ced) works at Best Buy and he's a bigger fan of HD-DVD than me.
|
|
Balaam
Senior Member
|
1. December 2006 @ 17:58 |
Link to this message
|
|
heh. I'll say what I want. If someone doesn't understand generalities it's not my responsibility to censor myself just because they're the exception to the rule.
|
|
eatsushi
Senior Member
3 product reviews
|
1. December 2006 @ 18:51 |
Link to this message
|
|
@dblbogey7: I can't believe someone accused you of being a BluRay fanboy. LOL! It's like accusing Pres. Bush of supporting a nuclear Iran!
"The emergence of a single, high-definition format is cause for consumers, as well as the entire entertainment industry, to celebrate."
-Craig Kornblau, president of Universal Home Entertainment Feb 19, 2008
|
|
Balaam
Senior Member
|
1. December 2006 @ 20:12 |
Link to this message
|
|
It's like a bizarro world here! Nobody reads the posts they respond to! :-O
|
|
dblbogey7
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
1. December 2006 @ 21:11 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Balaam:
heh. I'll say what I want. If someone doesn't understand generalities it's not my responsibility to censor myself just because they're the exception to the rule.
True you have that right but the point is there's no need to resort to name-calling and personal insults just because someone disagrees with you.
BTW, I've just finished an A-B comparison b/w the HD-DVD version of Superman Returns (HD-30/DVD9 Combo/VC-1) and the BluRay version (BD-50/VC-1). I have a monoprice HDMI switcher running Silver Serpents to a Sony Pearl Projector (110" Carada Screen) from a Toshiba HD-A1 and a Panasonic DMP-BD10. Picture quality wise there is practically no difference between the two. My only complaint with the BluRay release is the lack of a Dolby TruHD soundtrack. Overall, not bad for a computer storage format.
|
|
Balaam
Senior Member
|
1. December 2006 @ 21:35 |
Link to this message
|
|
Dude, grow up. BBB is a well know, oft thrown around, half humorous label that anybody with half a sense of humor would read and move on without being offended like a fragile little girl. How embarrassing to be offended by something as harmless as this. You must tumble into a psychotic break each time you see the shit that is depicted in the evening news.
And dblbogey7, just because I educated you on the actual beginnings of the BD format doesn't mean you have to continue with the shtick that, by reporting that reality, I somehow disparaged the potential for BD as a movie format.
Are you that much of a child?
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
dblbogey7
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
2. December 2006 @ 03:02 |
Link to this message
|
@Balaam:
Well what can I say but thank you for sharing with us your encyclopedic knowledge about BluRay and HD-DVD. I stand corrected on the important point about the beginnings of the BluRay format. We appreciate your contributions to these forums and look forward to your next enlightening post.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 2. December 2006 @ 03:15
|
