"HD DVD" Capacity Increase Challenges "Blu-ray Disc"

[Jerry Jones]

Link to Gizmodo Site: http://tinyurl.com/v4m5m

Toshiba's closed the gap between HD DVD and Blu-ray releases with the triple-layer 51GB HD DVD disc. That's one more than currently marketed 50GB Blu-ray movies.

One of the main ticks in the comparison sheet between Blu-ray and HD DVD was the higher storage capacity of BD (50GB discs just debuted a few months ago) compared to HD.

Going up to 51GB, the HD camp can finally say they're equal to BD in storage, even though it takes three layers to do it—which in turn amps up the price to make these discs. However, the 51GB disc doesn't exactly level the playing field, seeing as Blu-ray has discs of up to 200GB (8 layers) coming.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Elie]

I really hope they both win, the reason why i say this is because hardware manufacturers are adobting both formats in their palyers, so it's no longer an issue and from an editor/producers perspective, I would like to be able to output to either format based on what player my clients have.

I like Blue Ray's capacity, but I also like HD-DVD's wide spread availability.

So we'll see.

[Dr Mordrid]

BR is OK if you insist on 2 hours of MPEG-2 HDV video on a disc, but I'd not do that being one who prefers VC1 or H.264. Either of them could fit 2 hrs on a single layer HD DVD disc. BR would be nice for data backups though.

[Hulk]

I'm pretty sure you can put VC1 or H.264 on a BR disc as well and the players will read them, MPEG-2 is also part of the BR authoring spec. From what I've heard/read BR has faster seek times, faster read times, and more capacity per layer. All of this of course is due to the smaller wavelength laser. Of course this makes it more expensive, at least initially. I really don't care either way, same as the +- DVD thing didn't matter in the long run. It just seems like HD-DVD is a smaller jump than BR, being it uses a smaller wavelength.

But hell Betamax was a better technology than VCR but it lost so "better" is generally cheaper I guess.

Now Jerry is going to pile 52 quotes from around the world on me how HD-DVD is better!
I should learn...

Anyway, all I'm saying is that BR uses a shorter wavelength laser than HD-DVD and that translates into higher areal density, which at idential rpms and layers translates into better performance and higher capacity.

If the industry jumped on either format 100% prices on drives and media would come down dramatically just as they did with DVD so I only consider price a short term issue. I guess I would rather just make a BIG leap now to avoid another incremental upgrade in technology 5 years from now.

[Dr Mordrid]

Yes, BR and HD DVD can both use VC1 and H.264 and BR has a higher capacity. That said this will have little to do with who 'wins'. IMO that will go to whoever puts out the most discs encoded to VC1/H.264 instead of insisting on the legacy format of MPEG-2. These new formats look very nice and will use fewer layers meaning fewer potential layer change hiccups.

[Hulk]

Doc,

I wonder if the average consumer, the one who will make or break either format, really care or even know to which format the movie he is watching is encoded? I have a feeling this battle will be determined by the price of the players and discs (important to consumers) and how the media is supported (vendor/studio decisions but ultimately again important to consumers). Which movies are available on which format? Which video rental stores carry which format? etc... For example I use Netflix and they have a BR section so that is a factor which steers me into the BR direction. Yes, I can change providers but it's just another hassle I'd rather not have to worry about.

I think the battle lines for the big players were determined a few years ago for the most part. Ahh I really can't believe this is happening. It's a shame one format couldn't be agreed upon. We'd most likely already have affordable players, recorders, and media.

[Jerry Jones]

Now Jerry is going to pile 52 quotes from around the world on me how HD-DVD is better!

Nope.

I'm not in either camp, this time.

That said, I think the "HD DVD" camp has been surprisingly innovative while the "Blu-ray Disc" camp has sort of limped along.

I don't care which one wins, but these multi-layer "HD DVD" discs sure seem to erase the so-called "capacity advantage" of "Blu-ray Disc."

So, in my view, let the MOST AFFORDABLE format win.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Nowhere]

...
But hell Betamax was a better technology than VCR but it lost so "better" is generally cheaper I guess.

Better as in...too short recording/playing time? (seriously...isn't this superiority a bit of a myth)

And BTW, the wavelenghts on Bluray and HD-DVD are the same.

Also...apparently there are 33GB single layer Bluray discs in testing (so when going to dual layer...)

[paulw]

Better as in...too short recording/playing time? (seriously...isn't this superiority a bit of a myth)

And BTW, the wavelenghts on Bluray and HD-DVD are the same.

Also...apparently there are 33GB single layer Bluray discs in testing (so when going to dual layer...)

I had both in the 1980s and Beta was definatly the best for picture and tape wear. Also i could get 3 hour tapes for both formats.

[Hulk]

Better as in...too short recording/playing time? (seriously...isn't this superiority a bit of a myth)

And BTW, the wavelenghts on Bluray and HD-DVD are the same.

Also...apparently there are 33GB single layer Bluray discs in testing (so when going to dual layer...)

Yes, you are correct, same wavelength. I meant to refer to the numerical aperture of BR being larger and hence the better resolving power (and greater areal density) of BR over HD-DVD. Anyway, smaller "bits" can be read/written by the BR technology thus giving it larger capacity per layer, and faster read/write speeds at a given RPM.

As I said, I think both formats will be affordable once they are mainstream. It's not a big deal but I think BR has longer legs.

[Jerry Jones]

As I said, I think both formats will be affordable once they are mainstream.

This is where I'm skeptical about Blu-ray Disc.

The price has been astronomical.

Will it ever be affordable?

When?

The clock keeps ticking...

And "HD DVD" isn't exactly a bargain yet, either.

By the time the price of these formats comes down, I suspect highly compressed high definition content will be routinely downloaded and shared via personal media players to the point where "discs" will be considered primitive in comparison to "disks."

I listen to music on an Apple iPod.

I suspect I'll be carrying video and displaying video -- including high definition -- by simply connecting a portable device to a screen and playing from the hard disk or from flash memory.

I think high definition DVDs will be be niche formats -- for sure.

But will they ever gain widespread adoption?

I'm doubtful.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Dr Mordrid]

I just have the feeling that by the time they're affordable some other massively denser format will pass 'em both.

[Jerry Jones]

Here at Idaho State University, we link classrooms with video and audio.

Everybody agrees it would be nice to upgrade the picture/sound quality to high definition.

But constraints -- financial and physical -- make that impractical for now.

But the day is coming when high definition communication will be common.

I think the parallel to music will be quite interesting.

With music, more and more people are discovering they can keep their entire collection of songs on their computers and they can move those songs with ease to their Apple iPod or some similar portable device.

Many of these people still buy the occasional CD disc, but not as often as before.

It's easier to buy it online.

So people are not buying CDs as often as before.

I'm thinking TV and movies are already following that paradigm.

My brother -- the Macintosh person -- is already downloading TV programs and movies from the iTunes Store.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Hulk]

Who knows what will happen but I tend to think HD-DVD, BR or both will replace the DVD. BR computer burners can be had for $600 right now. Expensive but not astronomical. I paid more than that for my first CD burner and it only worked about half of the time reliably.

Media is expensive but these things haven't penetrated the market at all. I'll be interesting to see where we are in a year.

I think the movie industry will continue to push for some type of disc to be purchased or rented.

I can't stand I tunes, just another virus-like invasive program in my opinion. I rip my CD's and manage them like any other files and just play them in winamp. I don't need more bloatware on my system.

Digital rights management is another mess that always turns into a waste of my time as well.

And while I'm on this rant I can't stand compressed music either. Yes it's convenient but for serious listening I need uncompressed or Flac. Swooshing cymbals, puffy kick drums, crappy soundstaging, the list goes on and on. Compression sucks all the life out of the music to my ears. I hear it on my $300 computer monitors and I really hear it on my hi end system.

[paulw]

My brother -- the Macintosh person -- is already downloading TV programs and movies from the iTunes Store.

Jerry Jones
http://www.jonesgroup.net

But can he watch these downloads in the comform of his lounge or does he have to sit infront of his Mac??