View Full Version : Dell, HP slam Intel, MS' 'erroneous' HD DVD claims
sandiego1
09-30-05, 10:43 AM
By Tony Smith 30 Sep 2005 14:04
Dell, HP slam Intel, MS' 'erroneous' HD DVD claims
Our format's better. Isn't. Is. Isn't. Is. Isn't. Is...
Backers of the Blu-ray Disc (BD) have hit back against "erroneous" claims from Intel and Microsoft that HD DVD is the superior next-generation optical disc format for PCs.
The joint Intel/Microsoft statement was said to be "not aligned" with the "vast majority" of computer industry participants, Blu-ray Disc Association (BDA) members Dell and HP said.
"Microsoft and Intel's announcement erroneously indicates that HD-DVD has an advantage in a number of areas," they claimed, pointing to the chip and software giants' statement that HD DVD offers a greater storage capacity than BD.
As The Register noted at the time, Intel and MS' claim that HD DVD's 30GB capacity is better than BD's 25GB is nonsense: the two companies conveniently ignored the fact they were talking about dual-layer HD DVD discs and single-layer BDs.
Dell and HP also challenged MS and Intel on their claim that HD DVD is the only format to allow users to make controlled copies of the content stored on the disc: that's part of the AACS copy-protection system, the BDA said, and AACS is also part of the BD spec.
BD also provides scope for hybrid discs, backward compatibility with DVD, the ability to operate in slimline drives for notebook PCs and a high degree of interactivity, all features MS and Intel claimed were only available with HD DVD, the PC vendors said.
"Dell has no doubt that BD best meets the needs of computer users and provides the type of open industry standards needed to drive innovation and growth of the format across all platforms - consumer electronic, personal computers and gaming consoles," the company's CTO, Kevin Kettler said.
"From a PC end-user perspective, Blu-ray is a superior format. It offers 67-150 per cent more storage capacity, higher transfer rates, slimline notebook compatibility, broadband connectivity and a proven interactive layer with BD-Java," added Maureen Weber, general manager of HP's Personal Storage Business. ®
crussader
09-30-05, 10:54 AM
[QUOTE=sandiego1]Dell has no doubt that BD best meets the needs of computer users...
...From a PC end-user perspective, Blu-ray is a superior format[/QUOTE]
Agreed. However, I do not follow these forums because I am interested in the future of computing. From a consumer electronics perspective what is the advantage of BR?
[QUOTE=crussader]Agreed. However, I do not follow these forums because I am interested in the future of computing. From a consumer electronics perspective what is the advantage of BR?[/QUOTE]
From a CE consumer experience: NONE!
That is why I fail to understand why so many people seem to have such strong feeling one way or another.
I coudn't care less how this fight plays out as long as I get a hi-def disc format that has broad studio support - partisan rhetoric aside, BOTH formats can easily deliver this! That is why I have been hoping, in vain apparently, that there is a consolidation of HD-DVD/BR before launch. If not that then at least a quick and decisive winner in the marketplace (which I doubt will happen).
Simon
TheFerret
09-30-05, 12:05 PM
[QUOTE=crussader]Agreed. However, I do not follow these forums because I am interested in the future of computing. From a consumer electronics perspective what is the advantage of BR?[/QUOTE]
I wish I could 'not be interested in these forums' and then hold myself to only 300-posts. :D
AnthonyP
09-30-05, 12:53 PM
From a consumer electronics perspective what is the advantage of BR?
Lymzy will most likely say "not this again"
the answer is not much, but they are key differences
1) capacity for BR as it is now the specs are for a 50GB DL compared to 30GB for HD-DVD ( there is also the 100GB proven for BR and according to Toshiba a 45GB HD-DVD that no one has seen)
2) bit rate. The max for BR is 54mbps while HD-DVD is 36mbps
this means that in theory BR can have better A/V on it. either due to max bitrate or higher average and so less artefacts it can also be used for more and better extras
3) due To the BR layer being so close to the top (.1mm instead of .6mm) BR mandates all disks to have a scratch resistant hard coat so they should be more durable (not to mention that some hard coats also have finger print resistance)
4) BD-J, not a big deal but could mean some interesting features. (i.e. like games or stuff in the extras)
on the other hand from the consumer side HD-DVD has nothing to offer
Version
09-30-05, 01:03 PM
I just hope HD-DVD wins this war quick.
c.kingsley
09-30-05, 01:21 PM
[QUOTE=AnthonyP]Lymzy will most likely say "not this again"
the answer is not much, but they are key differences
1) capacity for BR as it is now the specs are for a 50GB DL compared to 30GB for HD-DVD ( there is also the 100GB proven for BR and according to Toshiba a 45GB HD-DVD that no one has seen)
2) bit rate. The max for BR is 54mbps while HD-DVD is 36mbps
this means that in theory BR can have better A/V on it. either due to max bitrate or higher average and so less artefacts it can also be used for more and better extras
3) due To the BR layer being so close to the top (.1mm instead of .6mm) BR mandates all disks to have a scratch resistant hard coat so they should be more durable (not to mention that some hard coats also have finger print resistance)
4) BD-J, not a big deal but could mean some interesting features. (i.e. like games or stuff in the extras)[/QUOTE]
From a consumer electronics standpoint, there is no real benefit to one format over the other. They both can deliver a much-needed HD format to consumers. For me it will come down to cost and availability of titles. And I think for most consumers it will be the same.
hmurchison
09-30-05, 01:29 PM
Blu-Ray is the format that you want if you're into lab room theory and dreaming about rosy futures. HD-DVD is the platform for people that need to get stuff done today.
Blu-Ray = poor support for Red Laser DVD with bolted on lense. Tacked on AVC and VC-1 at the last minute. Blu-Ray just hasn't offered much other than outstanding optical technology that may or may not become affordable to me. If Sony is struggling to make DL 50GB ROMS then I can only imagine what they'll have to charge for 50GB DL recordable.
What I see is too many people thinking that Blu-Ray has a future in computing. Optical is dead ..neither format will have much penetration as networks in the home grow.
Hmmm let me see.
spend $25 on that 50GB BDR disc or spend $35 on a 2gb flash drive that is faster, smaller and more portable. Tough decision......NOT.
For movies I want the solution that allows me to be a collector without losing my shirt. I don't care about the rich pallete that BD-j offers. The menu is there to help me navigate and play the damn movie. BD-j sounds like freakin' annoying FLASH for DVD. Just play the damn movie!!!
HD-DVD is going to win simply because it's cheaper and doesn't try to over-engineer itself with special coatings difficult pressing. It's the most sane solution out there for everyone.
Bitrate means nothing...AVC and VC-1 operate comfortably below 20mbps. Again another superfluous Blu-Ray feature.
With Intel and MS aligning with the "Sane Solution" I see Blu-Ray declining over time as HD-DVD makes it's ascent.
[QUOTE=AnthonyP]on the other hand from the consumer side HD-DVD has nothing to offer[/QUOTE]
10k posts with misinformation and counting!
nataraj
09-30-05, 02:21 PM
[QUOTE=hmurchison]What I see is too many people thinking that Blu-Ray has a future in computing. Optical is dead ..neither format will have much penetration as networks in the home grow.
[/QUOTE]
I don't know whether BR has future in computing ot HDDVD. But one thing for sure ... optical backup for computers is not dead. It is not going to die ... if I dare so, ever.
We would always want to backup stuff in case the machines go down / crash, if not anything else.
From a consumer electronics standpoint, there is no real benefit to one format over the other. They both can deliver a much-needed HD format to consumers. For me it will come down to cost and availability of titles. And I think for most consumers it will be the same.
I think copying / streaming is important. If one format allows it and the other does not, that would be an important thing for consumers.
Infact BR is now taking so much heat about MC, I'm starting to wonder whether they will be forced to allow MC too.
TheDigger
09-30-05, 02:32 PM
Will HD DVD movies be in 1080p or will only BD support that?
hddvdnow
09-30-05, 02:32 PM
[QUOTE=nataraj]I don't know whether BR has future in computing ot HDDVD. But one thing for sure ... optical backup for computers is not dead. It is not going to die ... if I dare so, ever.
We would always want to backup stuff in case the machines go down / crash, if not anything else.[/QUOTE]
Optical backup for computers may not be dead now, but many people do believe that it will die in the future. With the proliferation of fast, cheap hard drives, the exponentially increasing capacity of flash memory, and increasing bandwidth making Internet off-site storage more viable, it is certainly possible that the hassles of "burning" a scratchable optical disc may become a relic of the past.
dialog_gvf
09-30-05, 02:50 PM
[QUOTE=crussader]Agreed. However, I do not follow these forums because I am interested in the future of computing. From a consumer electronics perspective what is the advantage of BR?[/QUOTE]
Recording capacity: More hours of archiving on an HD-PVR/BD recorder.
Extras: The potential for far more extras when DL 50GB is available. (TL isn't in the spec. Has no reference player. And probably won't be compatible with any early HD-DVD decks)
Hardware selection: Almost all the best CE companies making decks versus Toshiba, Sanyo and the Chinese
Economies of scale: Having Dell and HP selling BD burner equipment machines will drive the prices of drive components AND media down faster.
Studio support: *Strong* studio support from five of the top eight studios. It's a far easier road to travel to get Warner/Paramount/Universal on the BD side (they are already making such noises), than the other way around.
The PS/3 factor: Tens of millions of BD equipped PS/3 selling MILLIONS of BD video discs. Pushing availability of sales AND rental far faster.
"Nothing". Sheesh.
Gary
hddvdnow
09-30-05, 02:59 PM
[QUOTE=TheDigger]Will HD DVD movies be in 1080p or will only BD support that?[/QUOTE]
From what I understand, both HD DVD and Blu-ray will support 1080p.
AnthonyP
09-30-05, 03:34 PM
If you're going to post subjective, one-sided, and factually inaccurate information, then why post at all?
10k posts with misinformation and counting!
funny how instead of actually showing what I have said is factually inaccurate all you do is attack me
[QUOTE=AnthonyP]funny how instead of actually showing what I have said is factually inaccurate all you do is attack me[/QUOTE]
Well, I agree he was a bit too direct. But as a person who has to chase you from thread to thread and correct what you say, I have to say, there is some element of truth to the snide remark. I correct you one one fact, and you go make the same assertion in 10 other places. Take what you said here: "100 Gigabyte is PROVEN". Proven by whom? I think you already admit that DL BD can not be made. Now you claim 100 Gigabytes is PROVEN? BD folks like to sell you dreams and you keep posting these dreams. It is time to wake up! :).
Let's not keep rehashing the same topics. It only serves to make BD look worse :).
Amir
apologies AP, but you're spamming this forum with one-sided misinformation and the above post by amirm is dead on ;)
it's amazing such spamming is tollerated over and over and over.
[QUOTE=amirm]Well, I agree he was a bit too direct. But as a person who has to chase you from thread to thread and correct what you say, I have to say, there is some element of truth to the snide remark. I correct you one one fact, and you go make the same assertion in 10 other places. Take what you said here: "100 Gigabyte is PROVEN". Proven by whom? I think you already admit that DL BD can not be made. Now you claim 100 Gigabytes is PROVEN? BD folks like to sell you dreams and you keep posting these dreams. It is time to wake up! :).
Let's not keep rehashing the same topics. It only serves to make BD look worse :).
Amir[/QUOTE]
Amir:
I am constantly asked why it seems that Microsoft always seems to win in the end...I always reply that it's because you guys are tenacious....Glad to see you are making my case :D
OK now I do have a question that I'd like to hear your thoughts on. We have been reading your version of events now for the past few days and it seems that BD is well just not going to ever work. I don't get the impression from your comments that your afraid it's not the best format from the way you tell it it's just not going to ever work.
With this in mind could you please explain to me how if all of this is true that:
All of the major CE companies in the world except 1 support it and are working with it every day..... How can they so shallow that they do not know they are being taken for a ride?
5 of the 8 largest computer companies support BD. Are they so incompetent that they don't know that these things are true? How do they think they will wipe the egg off their face and have us ever believe them again?
I don't want to sound flip here. But for me this just does not add up. This is one of the most heinous consumer frauds ever perpratrated by business or it's not quite as dire as you seem to think....can you help me here?
dialog_gvf
09-30-05, 04:31 PM
It is undeniable that one form of DL BD (BD-RE Mark I) has already been marketted to consumers. Yes expensive. But, go take a look what the price of a Hi-Vision LD was. Japan is an odd place in that respect.
Sure, there is no apparent mass manufacturing shown (or probably needed) for the BD-RE in Japan. But I doubt there was MASS manufacturing of the SL BD-RE either.
The 100GB, as far as I know, has only ever been talked about being released for recordable (TDK). Is TDK talking dreams too?
Anyone with sense realizes that like TL HD-DVD, a quad layer BD-ROM is meaningless unless it is compatible with the initial release of DL compatible decks.
In general:
I much prefer the newly liberated Amir who can now speak his mind, and show his colours. :) Here's a statement and a question for you.
Many in the HD-DVD camp seem scared to death at the notion of BD actually being released, and seem to be fighting on the hopes of short circuiting this. While, many BD supporters (including myself) would actually welcome a few years of competition.
I see it as a conventional modern marriage (we get to choose the woman, and date for a while), while the HD-DVD camp seems determined that we enter into an arranged marriage (marry her, sight unseen).
Where do you stand?
Gary
crussader
09-30-05, 04:41 PM
I for one hope both get released. I want to hear the response from the BD crowd when Sony releases its initial slate of titles with MPEG-2 (albeit at higher bitrates), and we find out that to get the reduced artifact benefits of an advanced codec you have to buy the Super_Duperbit version. :)
c.kingsley
09-30-05, 04:46 PM
[QUOTE=AnthonyP]Lymzy will most likely say "not this again"
the answer is not much, but they are key differences
1) capacity for BR as it is now the specs are for a 50GB DL compared to 30GB for HD-DVD ( there is also the 100GB proven for BR and according to Toshiba a 45GB HD-DVD that no one has seen)
2) bit rate. The max for BR is 54mbps while HD-DVD is 36mbps
this means that in theory BR can have better A/V on it. either due to max bitrate or higher average and so less artefacts it can also be used for more and better extras
3) due To the BR layer being so close to the top (.1mm instead of .6mm) BR mandates all disks to have a scratch resistant hard coat so they should be more durable (not to mention that some hard coats also have finger print resistance)
4) BD-J, not a big deal but could mean some interesting features. (i.e. like games or stuff in the extras)
on the other hand from the consumer side HD-DVD has nothing to offer[/QUOTE]
Ok, I'll take your bait. If you're going to make outlandish claims, the burden of proof lies with you. This is Critical Thinking 101 here...
1) Specs, specs, specs! Where are the FACTS? None of this stuff is fact until it is for sale, or more definitive information is available from manufacturers.
2) 36mbps or 54mbps, it doesn't matter. Both are more that sufficient to support 1920x1080p/24 encoded in MPEG-4 or WMV. Data rates beyond that are only worthwhile to a PC user (although multi-speed drives will undoubtedly be available soon after release of both formats)
3) This whole number is entirely speculation. There is no proof that a Blu-ray disk will be more durable for any of these reasons. Your whole fingerprint resistant comment is entirely speculative as well.
4) BD-J - what can this do that iHD cannot? How is BD-J more of a benefit to consumers than iHD? I dont' think you can answer this question.
"on the other hand from the consumer side HD-DVD has nothing to offer"
This statement is a wild, speculative, misinformed, crock of bologna that has no basis in fact whatsoever. It is this brand of subjective, opinion-based debate that is fueling a worthless format battle that will do nothing good for consumers.
[QUOTE=ToddD]Amir:
I am constantly asked why it seems that Microsoft always seems to win in the end...I always reply that it's because you guys are tenacious....Glad to see you are making my case :D [/quote]
:D. Actually, you are seeing a lot of posts from me because I am in Japan (guess for what reason :)), and wake up early at 1:00 or 2:00am and post 'till breakfast before I go to "work". When I get home, I may not be able to post as much.
OK now I do have a question that I'd like to hear your thoughts on.
Excellent set of questions and a refereshing change from same old stuff :).
All of the major CE companies in the world except 1 support it and are working with it every day..... How can they so shallow that they do not know they are being taken for a ride?
The answer is rather simple: we have different business models. Let's examine this a bit.
We have a healthy business selling operating systems and we sell a lot of them :). So for us, HD is really about convincing folks to buy more PCs with better capabilities since each one of those represents a new license revenue. Now, let's look at the CE business.
Unlike the old days, where Sony could come out with a CD player and it would take years before the price eroded, we now have aggressive far east companies that can build these devices quickly and cheaply courtesy of computer business they are so good at. This means that CE companies can not maintain prices much these days. Heck, just look at how both sides of this battle are advertising that their stuff is "cheap."!
To coup with above, CE companies focus on patents. By getting their patents into these specs, they stand to make money, even if the equipment sales is unprofitable at some point. Patent revenue is highly valued since its cost of sales is so low. So companies like that.
So when one of these companies goes to standard making organization, whether it is BD, HD DVD or MPEG, the #1 goal is to get your company’s patent into the standard and have it be mandatory. Now, I am not saying they will put garbage in there to get royalties as if the consumer offer gets too screwed up, then no one will buy the products and patent revenue would not be there. But for the most part, companies celebrate that they have put in patents in a standard, as opposed to doing good in general wrt to consume offer.
So this brings us back full circle to your question. Why would company X participate in BD if they know the discs are going to be expensive? Answer is that they don’t care if they get their few cents from every studio who has to stamp out those discs. Again, they do have to watch out they don’t screw the thing up too badly. But otherwise, the name of the game is patents, patents, and more patents.
As you can imagine, nothing I have been posting on this forum is a secret to anyone or I would not have post them :). BD companies are fully aware of the difficulties they face. But their management sees that in balance, they may be financially better off with BD versus the alternative. The risk they face though, is that BD may fail given its high risk. And this does give them pause. But you are not going to hear about this in public until they make a decision to do something different.
5 of the 8 largest computer companies support BD. Are they so incompetent that they don't know that these things are true? How do they think they will wipe the egg off their face and have us ever believe them again?
I think I addressed most of this. The other thing is that people assume that just because a company is in BD group, they are 100% there and won’t do anything else. We already saw an announcement from Samsung over the summer where they said they were considering dual format players. And given the fact that the factory that produces HD DVD drives for Toshiba is joint venture with Samsung (with Toshiba owning the 51% majority), you can imagine this is not idle chatter.
Then there is the matter of culture and other business matters. Companies in BD may have OEM or component business relationship with core/strong BD companies and may not want to openly oppose anything they do. Note that OEM relationships are usually secret per Japanese culture so average person do not know about them. Did you know that all of Sony’s DVD players are OEM models from other companies?
I don't want to sound flip here. But for me this just does not add up. This is one of the most heinous consumer frauds ever perpratrated by business or it's not quite as dire as you seem to think....can you help me here?
Does the above explanation help you figure it out? Unfortunately, I can’t share more than I have here. Suffice it to say that what the public sees, is only 1% of what goes on behind the scenes. Even though I have been part of, or working with Japanese/CE industry for some 16 years now, I continue to be frustrated by how decisions get made due to pride, career goals, corporate or local culture, patent positions, etc. as opposed to pure merits of the technology.
We have tried for 3+ years to bring some sense to poor decisions made by both sides. We managed to convince BD group that MPEG-2 was not perfect (they even published studies showing consumers preferred MPEG-2 to H.264!). We convinced DVD Forum that VC-1 was a great option in that it both provided great compression while at the same time bringing compatibility with PCs and the Internet. We convinced both sides to use a single copy protection system that fully incorporated the needs of IT, CE and content industry called AACS, until BD+ came around and started to mess with that. And we thought we could help them avoid a disaster of turning every CE equipment into buggy software machines through iHD, but failed with BD and BD-J.
When we exhausted all of our private options, and noticed that HD DVD group listened but BD did not, we decided to go public. And now you see at least some of what is going on behind the scenes.
Amir
dialog_gvf
09-30-05, 05:03 PM
[QUOTE=amirm]
I think I addressed most of this. The other thing is that people assume that just because a company is in BD group, they are 100% there and won’t do anything else.
[/QUOTE]
Very true.
Could Dell create a VIIV box with a Vista-WME and use a BD drive? Will such a thing be possible too?
Gary
[QUOTE=dialog_gvf]DL pre-recorded. DL recordable. Or DL BD period?[/quote]
Just about every post from me is about ROM format.
Many in the HD-DVD camp seem scared to death at the notion of BD actually being released, and seem to be fighting on the hopes of short circuiting this. While, many BD supporters (including myself) would actually welcome a few years of competition.
I see it as a conventional modern marriage (we get to choose the woman, and date for a while), while the HD-DVD camp seems determined that we enter into an arranged marriage (marry her, sight unseen).
Where do you stand?
Gary
We have already said this publicly. We like to see a single format at both logical and physical layers. Consumers at large have spoken about that and it is hard to refute the benefits of one format. Failing that, we like to see the logical layers be the same so that us software folks, can write one player, one authoring tool, etc. But if this does not come to pass, then we will strongly support HD DVD.
Note the middle sentence. That was a huge missed opportunity for BD companies. PC companies could ride our coat tails as we built a player that worked for both. But because of the divergance, they are now on their own. We were so damn close with audio/video codecs being the same, AACS as copy protection....
Amir
hmurchison
09-30-05, 05:06 PM
[QUOTE=hddvdnow]Optical backup for computers may not be dead now, but many people do believe that it will die in the future. With the proliferation of fast, cheap hard drives, the exponentially increasing capacity of flash memory, and increasing bandwidth making Internet off-site storage more viable, it is certainly possible that the hassles of "burning" a scratchable optical disc may become a relic of the past.[/QUOTE]
Spot on
I have nothing against optical drives but come on folks just because consumer jumped all over CDR and DVDR doesn't mean that HD-DVD-R/BD-R will enjoy the same success.
Flash drives are becoming a huge factor in portable storage and Sandisk and other companies are finding ways to make them secure.
80GB 3.5" hard drive is $50-60. In another couple of years perpendicular recording and other enhancements will mean 100GB drives for $50. Who's going to pay twice as much for half the capacity and a fourth the speed ofa hard drive.
DVD Ripping software has pretty much caused some people to realize that there is no need for that polycarbonate disc. It's simply a low cost medium to transfer data via sneakernet and with flash drives taking off and their reusability I wouldn't invest in optical too heavily.
HD-DVD and Blu-Ray will have to survive and thrive based on their use as prerecorded distribution format. The recorders will be nice but the media is going to be prohibitively expensive IMO.
[QUOTE=dialog_gvf]Very true.
Could Dell create a VIIV box with a Vista-WME and use a BD drive? Will such a thing be possible too?
Gary[/QUOTE]
Hard to answer on the hardware part. If BD+ requires special security hardware, and said hardware is not part of Intel's offer, there may be issues. I don't know.
On Vista, I hope they can use our protected media infrastructure (which we have fully enclosed to them). But since we designed this subsystem with AACS/iHD in mind (recall that until 3 months ago, both sides were on a path to standardize here and hence our assumption), it is anyone's guess as to whether they will have an easy or difficult job on their hand with Vista. Let me be very clear in saying though that we absolutely are here to answer their questions about Vista and BD implementations on it. And that BD players can be built on top of Vista even if they don't use one bit of technology from us.
Amir
dialog_gvf
09-30-05, 05:26 PM
[QUOTE=amirm]Just about every post from me is about ROM format.
[/QUOTE]
Fine. But what if the poster was talking about recordable? Categorically denying 100GB without stating the pre-recorded caveat, amounts to muddying the waters in my opinion.
Feel free to question the viability of 4-layer BD-R. But, you can't deny a reputable company has stated its commercialization intention.
Many of us actually do care about general computing uses. Clearly, your interest is completely restricted to movie discs.
[QUOTE=amirm]
We have already said this publicly. We like to see a single format at both logical and physical layers. Consumers at large have spoken about that and it is hard to refute the benefits of one format. Failing that, we like to see the logical layers be the same so that us software folks, can write one player, one authoring tool, etc.
[/quote]
Until there is a finalized BD format, can there be a logical reconcilation?
[QUOTE=amirm]
But if this does not come to pass, then we will strongly support HD DVD.
[/QUOTE]
MS already seems to have come out strongly in favour of HD-DVD. Do you mean encoders, authoring tools, players, etc?
Gary
dialog_gvf
09-30-05, 05:32 PM
[QUOTE=amirm]But since we designed this subsystem with AACS/iHD in mind (recall that until 3 months ago, both sides were on a path to standardize here and hence our assumption)[/QUOTE]
A path to standardize to Microsoft's maximum advantage?! How reasonable an assumption was that?
If a compromise had adopted BD-J, would MS had still been screaming against that?
Gary
nataraj
09-30-05, 05:47 PM
Optical backup for computers may not be dead now, but many people do believe that it will die in the future. With the proliferation of fast, cheap hard drives, the exponentially increasing capacity of flash memory, and increasing bandwidth making Internet off-site storage more viable, it is certainly possible that the hassles of "burning" a scratchable optical disc may become a relic of the past.
"Future" is very vague. What time frame are we talking about ? I'm talking about ... next 10 years.
They say long term does not matter ... because we will all be dead by then ;)
[QUOTE=hmurchison]Spot on
I have nothing against optical drives but come on folks just because consumer jumped all over CDR and DVDR doesn't mean that HD-DVD-R/BD-R will enjoy the same success.
[/QUOTE]
THe question is, is there a future for optical drives. Not just BR/HDDVD.
[QUOTE=hmurchison]
80GB 3.5" hard drive is $50-60. In another couple of years perpendicular recording and other enhancements will mean 100GB drives for $50. Who's going to pay twice as much for half the capacity and a fourth the speed ofa hard drive.
....
The recorders will be nice but the media is going to be prohibitively expensive IMO.
[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure which drives you are talking about ... I don't pay more than $50 for a 200GB drive now :D
Economy of scale should drive the prices to under 10Cents a disk in a couple of years. So, we are talking about 15 to 25GB for about 10 cents.
The drives are just one time cost ... not running cost. So, no point comparing those costs.
I'd like to keep all my videos and photos on disks for long term storage and on HDD for immidiate availability. I don't see that changing in the next decade.
[QUOTE=hmurchison]just because consumer jumped all over CDR and DVDR doesn't mean that HD-DVD-R/BD-R will enjoy the same success. [/QUOTE]
Yes, how dare we pay attention to historical data. :rolleyes:
Flash drives are becoming a huge factor in portable storage and Sandisk and other companies are finding ways to make them secure. 80GB 3.5" hard drive is $50-60. In another couple of years perpendicular recording and other enhancements will mean 100GB drives for $50.
Flash drives are good for quick access to small files, but are useless for storing large amounts of data. Flash and hard drives both have major long-term reliability issues, making them inappropriate as a backup medium. DVDs and tape are the only current viable options, and DVDs present a much lower initial cost than tape. There is no reason to think any of this will change anytime soon.
DVD Ripping software has pretty much caused some people to realize that there is no need for that polycarbonate disc.
If it's just a way to transfer bits, then how many people toss away those discs after they rip them? I'm guessing very few, since most people realize that the DVD is a more reliable medium than a hard drive.
HD-DVD and Blu-Ray will have to survive and thrive based on their use as prerecorded distribution format. The recorders will be nice but the media is going to be prohibitively expensive IMO.
DVD-R media prices came down very fast, so there's no reason to think the same won't happen with HD-DVD and Blu-Ray. Chances are Blue-Ray will come down quicker than HD-DVD since there will be many, many more Blu-Ray recordable drives.
The computer industry is considerably larger than the media industry and the majority of large players have already sided with Blu-Ray. Even if HD-DVD becomes the standard in home electronics, they will get trounced in the computer industry.
-B
samiam95124
09-30-05, 05:54 PM
[QUOTE=hddvdnow]Optical backup for computers may not be dead now, but many people do believe that it will die in the future. With the proliferation of fast, cheap hard drives, the exponentially increasing capacity of flash memory, and increasing bandwidth making Internet off-site storage more viable, it is certainly possible that the hassles of "burning" a scratchable optical disc may become a relic of the past.[/QUOTE]
Lets see:
1. Store all my backup on a hard drive. Hey, lots of folks do that.
No way. I STREAM my backups. I have a set of write only DVDs, about once per month. Old
backups are not discarded. I even try (when possible) to burn in plain Windows disc format,
because I might change backup programs someday.
Another hard drive could also break down. The computer could crash WHILE writing that
backup drive, and scratch BOTH your normal hard drive and your backup drive. Finally,
I can and have gone back several backup generations in the past to check work.
Of course, I develop software for a living, so its different with me.
2. Store on flash memory.
Flash memory is just reaching the 1gb stage. I already overflow a 6gb dvd, you want me to
fit in a 1gb flash ? That sells for orders of magnitude more than a DVD-R ?
3. Store off site.
Yea, I really want to give all my data to a company that is going to fail or (worse) copy, sell
or lose my data. Pass.
samiam95124
09-30-05, 05:57 PM
[QUOTE=hddvdnow]From what I understand, both HD DVD and Blu-ray will support 1080p.[/QUOTE]
From what the specs on each system actually SAY, neither of them support it. Nor will
they.
samiam95124
09-30-05, 06:02 PM
[QUOTE=amirm]Well, I agree he was a bit too direct. But as a person who has to chase you from thread to thread and correct what you say, I have to say, there is some element of truth to the snide remark. I correct you one one fact, and you go make the same assertion in 10 other places. Take what you said here: "100 Gigabyte is PROVEN". Proven by whom? I think you already admit that DL BD can not be made. Now you claim 100 Gigabytes is PROVEN? BD folks like to sell you dreams and you keep posting these dreams. It is time to wake up! :).
Let's not keep rehashing the same topics. It only serves to make BD look worse :).
Amir[/QUOTE]
Dude ! From your bio, don't you have a division to run, and things to do (like crushing the
OpenGL standard) ? Amazing you have the time to fight tit for tat in these matters.....
:cool:
[QUOTE=dialog_gvf]A path to standardize to Microsoft's maximum advantage?! How reasonable an assumption was that?[/quote]
What advantage is that? That we invested huge amount of R&D here so that they could use this without pay us another cent extra for it? There is no format lock here. There is no IP position. Nothing.
If a compromise had adopted BD-J, would MS had still been screaming against that?
Gary
Absolutely. We have many options for HD. Optical format is just one of it. Should the optical formats go south in a way that is not good for our customers, we will chase other options. Fortunately for us, our devices are not fixed function and get stuck with a standard like this :).
Amir
dialog_gvf
09-30-05, 06:28 PM
[QUOTE=amirm]What advantage is that? [/QUOTE]
The advantage of not having to do much development changes to support the compromise. A good engineer faced with a merger would assume a merger would occur and not a total capitulation to one standard.
That is, a merger is usually a royal pain in the butt for everyone. And Microsoft assumed that a BD/HD-DVD merger would be totally HD-DVD oriented?
I sense MMCD + SD -> DVD was far narrower a compromise, and that delayed things considerably.
Gary
samiam95124
09-30-05, 06:31 PM
[QUOTE=hmurchison]
80GB 3.5" hard drive is $50-60. In another couple of years perpendicular recording and other enhancements will mean 100GB drives for $50. Who's going to pay twice as much for half the capacity and a fourth the speed ofa hard drive.
[/QUOTE]
Who is going to pay $50 when you could get an optical recordable disc for less than $1 ?
Optical media has allways been about the net cost to store a bit. At DVD-R prices, your $50
drive already loses since you can buy 300gb for that, and with BR or HD-DVD recordables,
that will get worse. And that's assuming $1 DVD-Rs, the reality is they cost less than that
in quanity.
There was a time the optical disk makers thought they could outrun the hard drive makers,
its good that was given up. But there is nothing like optical media today. Its been speculated
that DVDs cost less than 50 cents, possibly less than 30 cents apeice to produce, meaning
they are starting to be stuffed into magazines and sent out as junk mail. Do you see that
happening with flash or hard drives ?
PS. This is really nothing new. When audio records first were produced, Edison and his
followers thought they were stupid. Edison's cylinders took less space and had a constant
tracking geometry and speed from start to finish, vs. the spiral groove in a record that speeds
up (in inches per second) at the outter tracks. But Edison spent too much time in the lab,
and not enough time in manufacturing. If he had, he would have realized that the same
types of presses that stamped out Ford's model-T's could turn out flat records at production
rates that the world had never seen before, and at costs that made profits flow to (then)
unimaginable new heights.
[QUOTE=samiam95124]From what the specs on each system actually SAY, neither of them support it. Nor will
they.[/QUOTE]
This has been debated to death in that super thread.
FYI
Unlike DVD(the SD master could only be stored and transferred by SDI in the form of 480i@60, therefore IVTC is a must before encoding-many bad edits...) , the HD master is stored 24p-progressive natively either in the form of D5 tape or DI.
The video would thus be 24p progressive encoded and stored in both format, no matter what codec they choose. No vertical filtering during the process. movie in 1080p@24 on the disc period!
In HD DVD, the 24p video stream would have flags to enable the decoder output 1080i@60 correctly. Of course, a faroudja like chip could be added afterwards to do the de-interlace and scaling job and thus output 1080p@48/60/72.... In blue ray spec, 1080@24fps is possible. Anyway, it does not make any difference to the consumers.
Why won't the HD-DVD fanboys admit the best they can hope for is HD-DVD to coexist with Blu-ray? Blu-ray isn't going to disappear no matter how hard you guys wish it so. The BDA is way too big to simply call it quits. The companies involved in HD-DVD realize this and thus they are working overtime to belittle BD. I know they're counting on the support of their handful of followers to win over people but it's not happening is it? ;)
[QUOTE=amirm]:D. Actually, you are seeing a lot of posts from me because I am in Japan (guess for what reason...[/QUOTE]
Knowing that this question will probably go unanswered, I'll ask anyway.
Does you trip to Japan have anything to do with another attempt to unify the formats or has it nothing to do with it?
If I recall correctly, MS' R.Doherty said newyear will be the point of no return. Hence, there is still time. And the latest developments - MS and Intel dropping neutrality - must have at least made the BR team to sit down and go over their strategy, risk analisys, etc.
To re-phrase - and get a better chance to have the question answered - what is the chance to have one format within the next 6-12 months?
Diogen.
[QUOTE=diogen]Does you trip to Japan have anything to do with another attempt to unify the formats or has it nothing to do with it?[/quote]
I actually manage a group here that is reponsible for interfacing with our top partners across the entire consumer business for Windows. So I come here every six weeks no matter what.
Of course, while here, I always drop by my friends -- yes, they are personal friends -- who happen to be executives in some BD companies. We compare notes and talk openly about issues/opportunities/concerns on both sides. As you suspected, I am not able to disclose what we talk about.
And the latest developments - MS and Intel dropping neutrality - must have at least made the BR team to sit down and go over their strategy, risk analisys, etc.
Let's say we have been noticed :).
To re-phrase - and get a better chance to have the question answered - what is the chance to have one format within the next 6-12 months?
Diogen.
Japanese have the word "mizukashi" which directly translated to English means "difficult." This is the word I am tempted to use to answer your question. Unfortunately, mizukashi can also mean, "no" but in a polite and soft way. I let you decide which meaning should be used here :).
Amir
Amir, I heard that there's going to be a HD-DVD player debut in japan close to the end of 05', can you share some info with us, and would you estimate the amount of HD-DVD titles that is releasing when that time come (please take the best "guess" if you don't know it for sure) .
Btw.."difficult" in Japanese sounds more like "muzukashi" to me ^^"
Bluescale
09-30-05, 11:50 PM
[QUOTE=amirm]Of course, while here, I always drop by my friends -- yes, they are personal friends -- who happen to be executives in some BD companies. We compare notes and talk openly about issues/opportunities/concerns on both sides. As you suspected, I am not able to disclose what we talk about. [/QUOTE]
How long has it been since you were at Sony?
Thanks, Amir.
My choice would be "difficult". May be wishfull thinking.
I still believe it will be a Pirr's victory (whoever it will be) if both bring the complete range of products to market.
I'd say if neither side has a 80%+ market share by next Xmas, this attempt to bring high-def video to the market should be written off. Just like SACD and DVD-A.
Holographic disc, VOD, what else is there in the pipeline...
Diogen.
BTW, do you speak Japaneese, Amir?
Version
10-01-05, 01:39 AM
[QUOTE=n2blu]I know they're counting on the support of their handful of followers to win over people but it's not happening is it? ;)[/QUOTE]
Unless you count Microsoft and Intel. ;)
[QUOTE=diogen]BTW, do you speak Japaneese, Amir?[/QUOTE]
Not really. I just know enough to get myself in trouble....
Amir
[QUOTE=n2blu]Why won't the HD-DVD fanboys admit the best they can hope for is HD-DVD to coexist with Blu-ray? Blu-ray isn't going to disappear no matter how hard you guys wish it so. The BDA is way too big to simply call it quits. The companies involved in HD-DVD realize this and thus they are working overtime to belittle BD. I know they're counting on the support of their handful of followers to win over people but it's not happening is it? ;)[/QUOTE]
That's what I was starting to think.
Look how long Sony has stuck with Memory Stick and Mini Disc despite tepid reception for these products. They even stuck with Beta for longer than it made sense.
Even if HD-DVD players outsell Blu-Ray players for several years and HD-DVD has a content advantage, Sony won't give up soon, since they own content as well. Can't speak for how dedicated the other BDA companies will be but this seems to be a company bet for Sony.
Several things would have to go wrong, like HD-DVD winning big, PS3 losing big, all the major BDA companies switching sides to HD-DVD, etc. One way or another, Blu-Ray will be with us for years, probably at least 10 years. PS3 may be the main distribution channel for BD-ROM drives and discs and Blu-Ray drives may only be on 5% of computers but even under this worst case scenario, Sony will stick with it and release SPE movies in the format.
Toshiba better have the same kind of commitment (they're not hedging their bets with HVD are they?). Plus rumors of even Warners wavering makes you wonder if the HD-DVD side is more likely to flinch than the BDA.
[QUOTE=wco81]
Look how long Sony has stuck with Memory Stick and Mini Disc despite tepid reception for these products. They even stuck with Beta for longer than it made sense.[/QUOTE]
The first time I see such a spin on Sony products - calling a success (or determination "no matter what") on what normally would be called a disaster.
You forgot SACD - what a triumph and success that was! :)
[QUOTE=wco81]
Even if HD-DVD players outsell Blu-Ray players for several years and HD-DVD has a content advantage, Sony won't give up soon, since they own content as well. Can't speak for how dedicated the other BDA companies will be but this seems to be a company bet for Sony.
[/QUOTE]
Is this a prayer?
If I recall correctly, Sony lost 75% of their profits this year.
How much is going to be left if they do what you expect them to do, I wonder.
Diogen.
AnthonyP
10-01-05, 03:37 PM
I correct you one one fact, and you go make the same assertion in 10 other places
I thought that was my job :) let's be honest you keep on bringing up Toshibas TL and they can't even build a workable player to lend to Cinram to test the few disks they tried producing.
I think you already admit that DL BD can not be made
where did I say that? I said that it might not be cost effective, that is different then unavailable or unproven
[QUOTE=AnthonyP]where did I say that? I said that it might not be cost effective, that is different then unavailable or unproven[/QUOTE]
OK, I am all ears. Let's hear how it is "available" and "proven."
Please tell us what information you have on DL mastering. Who makes it, and its current status.
Please tell us which replicator has bought such equipment.
Please tell us if Sony or any other equipment maker has published specifications for testing of the process (heck, tell me if they have done this for SL!).
Since you brought up the point regarding HD DVD players, please tell us what information you have that shows DL BD players are available for testing.
Please tell us you have something more than "marketing" speak from BD group that loves for you to confuse recordable and drive capability with ability to produce DL BD Rom discs in a factory. I am listening :).
Amir
SlickVik
10-01-05, 04:32 PM
[QUOTE=samiam95124]Dude ! From your bio, don't you have a division to run, and things to do (like crushing the
OpenGL standard) ? Amazing you have the time to fight tit for tat in these matters.....
:cool:[/QUOTE]
lol
:D
It really doesn't matter what each camp says about each other at this point - Software is going to be available on both formats and we're probably going to end up with dual format players, with seamless integration between the two. Studios will be able to put out material on whichever format they like. For archiving Bluray will definately win, and it will also have the upper hand with the PS3 on the movie front. But HD-DVD is going to be a thorn regardless. :p
[QUOTE=SlickVik]lol
:D
It really doesn't matter what each camp says about each other at this point - Software is going to be available on both formats and we're probably going to end up with dual format players, with seamless integration between the two. [/QUOTE]
It does matter at this point unfortunately. Without Wintel support for blue ray, I would not be able to copy my blue ray to the HDD inside a wintel system and play with it. No home media network for blue ray content. Sure, I am not worried about playback. For simple playback, why even bother to use a wintel system? If you see the video appplication document 1.0 of HD DVD, you will know a lot of exciting features count on the home network.(not necessarily wintel based)
So seamlessly? No, far from that.
[QUOTE=lymzy]It does matter at this point unfortunately. Without Wintel support for blue ray, I would not be able to copy my blue ray to the HDD inside a wintel system and play with it. No home media network for blue ray content. Sure, I am not worried about playback. For simple playback, why even bother to use a wintel system? If you see the video appplication document 1.0 of HD DVD, you will know a lot of exciting features count on the home network.(not necessarily wintel based)
So seamlessly? No, far from that.[/QUOTE]
I don't think you are right about that....It's not that you can't do any of these things but that you MAY not be able to do them out of the box. You MAY need third party software added to your system to do them....none of this is fully known or understood yet....
AnthonyP
10-01-05, 07:15 PM
1) Specs, specs, specs! Where are the FACTS? None of this stuff is fact until it is for sale, or more definitive information is available from manufacturers.
well everything is spec. How many HD-DVDs have you bought this year?
2) 36mbps or 54mbps, it doesn't matter. Both are more that sufficient to support 1920x1080p/24 encoded in MPEG-4 or WMV. Data rates beyond that are only worthwhile to a PC user (although multi-speed drives will undoubtedly be available soon after release of both formats)
maybe maybe not, sure does not prove that there is no difference, is there. Most of the DVD artefacts are there because of BW limitations. You might be happy with less, but why should I be. On the other hand all I did is mention that difference, hoe is that factually inaccurate information
3) This whole number is entirely speculation. There is no proof that a Blu-ray disk will be more durable for any of these reasons. Your whole fingerprint resistant comment is entirely speculative as well.
1) TDK and Philips have developed hard coats that are fingerprint resistant.
2) HD-DVD is as scratch resistant as DVD, go to the BR site and look at the minimum specs for BR
4) BD-J - what can this do that iHD cannot? How is BD-J more of a benefit to consumers than iHD? I dont' think you can answer this question.
BD-J is Java + more libraries. Like I said I think it is a minor factor at least for me0 but it does mean that theoretically a studio could include some fancy games and stuff?
"on the other hand from the consumer side HD-DVD has nothing to offer"
This statement is a wild, speculative, misinformed, crock of bologna that has no basis in fact whatsoever. It is this brand of subjective, opinion-based debate that is fueling a worthless format battle that will do nothing good for consumers
So what does it have :) I gave my list why I like BR more, why don’t you put something down to why HD-DVD is better?
steviec
10-01-05, 07:36 PM
I love Dell but I think they picked the wrong horse this time!
SlickVik
10-01-05, 07:36 PM
While we're arguing the virtues of each standard, we forget that both these formats are competing against an entrenched, "good enough" standard, DVD. These standards are competing for a niche role in a primarily upper class market that can actually afford HD sets (15% of the market currently). And you can bet movies on HD-DVD/Blu-Ray will cost more than regular DVDs. So we can likely expect for the first 3-5 years after launch for both formats to be a monumental flop in terms of movie sales.
HD-DVD will try to lower the price point by leveraging the combined financial power of a larger consortium, but there is no "killer app" for HD-DVD, nor will there likely be at any point in the near future. The first rev of XBox 360 will ship WITHOUT an HD-DVD drive, meaning game makers will be reluctant to make HD-DVD games for the XBox 360 because they feel they'll be locking themselves out of the early adopter market, who are obviously the idiots willing to shill out lots of money for instant gratification rather than being patient and waiting for the price to become reasonable.
Sony has a Blu-Ray killer app, the PS3. Every PS3 will ship with a Blu-Ray drive. And game makers can feel safe releasing games on Blu-Ray knowing that they'll be compatible with every PS3 on the market. Furthermore, PlayStation is the powerhouse player in the video game market, and will allow Sony to move large volumes of Blu-Ray drives, dramatically lowering the price point.
3-5 years down the road, by the time your average joe actually owns an HD set and is trying to decide between HD-DVD or Blu-Ray, thanks to Sony pushing production of the drives and discs through the PS3 market and lowering the price point through volume sales that will be virtually absent in the movie market, Blu-Ray players and discs will be cheaper. So that's what our joe will buy...
Yes, sorry HD-DVD, competing with an entrenched standard + no killer app == you're screwed!
steviec
10-01-05, 07:41 PM
Quote:
Yes, sorry HD-DVD, competing with an entrenched standard + no killer app == you're screwed!
Wishful thinking! Intel and microsoft are not going to back any format unless it is a clear winner and the best it can be meaning it is a format that adapt , change and improve as time goes on. Beta has already lost!with all the production problems related to protective coating and ability to consistently replicate the dvds to a consistent quality standard!
Sorry, i meant Blu-Ray.
AnthonyP
10-01-05, 07:42 PM
OK, I am all ears. Let's hear how it is "available" and "proven."
has Sony shown some disks? Others? If you tell me it has only been done in a lab, that still makes them proven, just not cost effective. Not to mention that none of these formats are out yet. At the least anything is 6m away and possibly even 9m. That is plenty of time for improvements and production cost drops
on the other hand all I said is that you put words in my mouth that “DL BD can not be made” and I never said that.
My guess it can be made and will be able to be made cost effectively and like DL DVD sooner or later it will be and most probably used more then SL
AnthonyP
10-01-05, 07:44 PM
so MS and Intel only back formats tht win and others go out of their way to back the losing format?
steviec
10-01-05, 07:48 PM
Quote:
so MS and Intel only back formats tht win and others go out of their way to back the losing format?
Correct! Intel and microsoft think and plan long term the others think only money!
AnthonyP
10-01-05, 08:22 PM
lol good one steviec
[QUOTE=SlickVik]While we're arguing the virtues of each standard, we forget that both these formats are competing against an entrenched, "good enough" standard, DVD. These standards are competing for a niche role in a primarily upper class market that can actually afford HD sets (15% of the market currently). And you can bet movies on HD-DVD/Blu-Ray will cost more than regular DVDs. So we can likely expect for the first 3-5 years after launch for both formats to be a monumental flop in terms of movie sales.
HD-DVD will try to lower the price point by leveraging the combined financial power of a larger consortium, but there is no "killer app" for HD-DVD, nor will there likely be at any point in the near future. The first rev of XBox 360 will ship WITHOUT an HD-DVD drive, meaning game makers will be reluctant to make HD-DVD games for the XBox 360 because they feel they'll be locking themselves out of the early adopter market, who are obviously the idiots willing to shill out lots of money for instant gratification rather than being patient and waiting for the price to become reasonable.
Sony has a Blu-Ray killer app, the PS3. Every PS3 will ship with a Blu-Ray drive. And game makers can feel safe releasing games on Blu-Ray knowing that they'll be compatible with every PS3 on the market. Furthermore, PlayStation is the powerhouse player in the video game market, and will allow Sony to move large volumes of Blu-Ray drives, dramatically lowering the price point.
3-5 years down the road, by the time your average joe actually owns an HD set and is trying to decide between HD-DVD or Blu-Ray, thanks to Sony pushing production of the drives and discs through the PS3 market and lowering the price point through volume sales that will be virtually absent in the movie market, Blu-Ray players and discs will be cheaper. So that's what our joe will buy...
Yes, sorry HD-DVD, competing with an entrenched standard + no killer app == you're screwed![/QUOTE]
You are just about at the same place that I am, but I also include the power of having Dell and HP and Apple supporting BD...I would not underestimate their importance in the whole picture...But in the end I am counting on Dual standard drives and software.
It's not hard to see why Dell and HP are backing BD.
From a business stand point, it seems like a logical thing to do.
Why not back the format that is going to cost the consumer more and give my company a better return on profit? :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=Koala]It's not hard to see why Dell and HP are backing BD.
From a business stand point, it seems like a logical thing to do.
Why not back the format that is going to cost the consumer more and give my company a better return on profit? :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
I do not think that's part of their criteria. They like to be the low cost provider.
dialog_gvf
10-01-05, 11:52 PM
[QUOTE=ToddD]I do not think that's part of their criteria. They like to be the low cost provider.[/QUOTE]
Ah, but it is precisely among higher margin components that the purchasing power of such companies like Dell and HP allow them to obtain the significant savings over their competitors.
Think Dell doesn't get great deals on CPUs and Microsoft OS?
Gary
WiFi-Spy
10-02-05, 12:59 AM
[QUOTE=ToddD]You are just about at the same place that I am, but I also include the power of having Dell and HP and Apple supporting BD...I would not underestimate their importance in the whole picture...But in the end I am counting on Dual standard drives and software.[/QUOTE]
Alot of people forget that HD-DVD mastering/Authoring is built in to APPLE's DVD Studio Pro 4.0..... not Blu-Ray authoring.....
Bluescale
10-02-05, 01:38 AM
[QUOTE=ToddD]I don't think you are right about that....It's not that you can't do any of these things but that you MAY not be able to do them out of the box. You MAY need third party software added to your system to do them....none of this is fully known or understood yet....[/QUOTE]
Based on Amir's previous statements, the only thing that will keep Blu-Ray from being streamed will be the BDA studios and the BDA itself. If BD+ is designed in such a way that it kills streaming, that no third party vendor will have the opportunity to develop an app to do so unless they are willing to break the law. If BD+ does not kill streaming, however, the market is wide open, since it seems Windows Media Player won't be able to do this. I could see Apple stepping in here pretty quickly.
hddvdnow
10-02-05, 04:37 AM
[QUOTE=nataraj]"Future" is very vague. What time frame are we talking about ? I'm talking about ... next 10 years.
They say long term does not matter ... because we will all be dead by then ;)
THe question is, is there a future for optical drives. Not just BR/HDDVD.
[/QUOTE]
Actually, I think when people prognosticate about the death of optical drives, they are talking about 10 or more years in the future. While that may seem like an eternity, especially in the technology world, it really isn't that long a time. The DVD format itself was announced 10 years ago in 1995 (according to the Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD)), and I remember the launch of Windows 95 like it was yesterday.
hddvdnow
10-02-05, 04:50 AM
[QUOTE=samiam95124]Lets see:
1. Store all my backup on a hard drive. Hey, lots of folks do that.
No way. I STREAM my backups. I have a set of write only DVDs, about once per month. Old
backups are not discarded. I even try (when possible) to burn in plain Windows disc format,
because I might change backup programs someday.
Another hard drive could also break down. The computer could crash WHILE writing that
backup drive, and scratch BOTH your normal hard drive and your backup drive. Finally,
I can and have gone back several backup generations in the past to check work.
Of course, I develop software for a living, so its different with me.[/QUOTE]
When I said that many people thought optical discs may someday become extinct, I mentioned that it was something for the future. I fully understand that optical discs represent the best form of backup for many people at the present time.
[QUOTE=samiam95124]2. Store on flash memory.
Flash memory is just reaching the 1gb stage. I already overflow a 6gb dvd, you want me to
fit in a 1gb flash ? That sells for orders of magnitude more than a DVD-R ?[/QUOTE]
Again, in the not-too-distant future, it is quite possible that flash will become affordable in sizes larger than 8GB. There is even already talk of the feasibility of making flash hard drives as a replacement for regular hard drives.
Although I have to say... you mention you are a software developer... I know of very few software developers who have to personally maintain and backup a code base exceeding 6GB. That's one big program! :)
[QUOTE=samiam95124]
3. Store off site.
Yea, I really want to give all my data to a company that is going to fail or (worse) copy, sell
or lose my data. Pass.[/QUOTE]
If you are worried about copying or selling, you can always encrypt your data before you back it up. As for losing data... data can always be lost or damaged (even homemade optical discs), but a reputable data storage company should have the resources and capability to provide the necessary redundancy, data replication, and off-site backup to be a good solution. Again, it might not be right today, but it will probably be more feasible in the future.
hddvdnow
10-02-05, 04:59 AM
[QUOTE=Koala]It's not hard to see why Dell and HP are backing BD.
From a business stand point, it seems like a logical thing to do.
Why not back the format that is going to cost the consumer more and give my company a better return on profit? :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
Computer prices have dropped steadily through the last few years, and trying to foist a new optical disc format on consumers while picking the one likely to cost more is probably not a good strategy to maintain/improve marketshare and profits. Especially when convincing consumers that a new format is necessary at all may be an uphill battle for the many who believe that DVD is "good enough".
I believe that Dell and HP are probably backing Blu-ray for other business reasons, not in the hope that they can charge consumers more money for Blu-ray than for HD DVD.
[QUOTE=WiFi-Spy]Alot of people forget that HD-DVD mastering/Authoring is built in to APPLE's DVD Studio Pro 4.0..... not Blu-Ray authoring.....[/QUOTE]
As an owner of that product I am aware of that...But as a BD member company that will have BD drives in their computers how long do you think that it will remain so. DVD SP is on a yearly release schedule. At the time of ver 4's release HD-DVD expected a release soon. It was therefor important to include it into the product at that time. Do not think that gives a preference to HD-DVD just a desire to allow Apple customers the ability to pick the format thats right for them-even thought BD will be the installed format in Apple systems. This is a flexibility that I'd like to see our friends at Microsoft offer as well.
Here's Cnet's take on the events of the past week:
Microsoft and Intel last week tried to swing the computing, consumer
electronics and entertainment industry toward HD DVD in a format war to establish a higher-capacity successor to today's DVD.
It didn't work.
Dell and Hewlett-Packard, the top two business partners of Intel and Microsoft, instead loudly reaffirmed their support for the other side, Blu-ray Disc. The latest volleys illustrate the continuing difficulties of trying to establish a single standard that can be used for videos, video games, software distribution and backup data.
Did HD DVD win the battle now that Microsoft and Intel voted in its favor?
No. Blu-ray has a formidable list of allies, and instead of lining up behind HD DVD, they offered a swift rebuttal. "I think things are more cloudy now for HD DVD than they were five days before," said Envisioneering analyst Richard Doherty. "I think this is probably going to cause some reflection at Microsoft."
Who's on each side?
Toshiba leads the HD DVD consortium, which also includes consumer electronics manufacturers Sanyo and NEC. Entertainment companies on board are HBO, New Line Cinema, Paramount Home Entertainment, Universal Studios Home Entertainment and Warner Home Video.
Blu-ray's consumer electronics list is longer, with Sony, Panasonic, Philips, Samsung, Sharp, Pioneer and LG Electronics. PC makers that support it are Dell, HP and Apple Computer. Also on board are video game maker Electronic Arts and entertainment companies Twentieth Century Fox, Vivendi Universal and Walt Disney.
What are HD DVD and Blu-Ray Disc?
Today's conventional DVDs can hold 4.7GB of information, but many want a higher-capacity successor to accommodate the larger data demands of high-definition video. HD DVD and Blu-ray both use blue lasers to read and write data; because blue has a shorter wavelength than the red used in DVD and CD lasers, information can be packed more densely on a disc and a single disc can hold more. Both HD DVD and Blu-ray drives are able to read current-generation DVDs.
It's no surprise why manufacturers want part of the industry. DVD player shipments, including next-generation models, will diminish from 113 million this year to 78 million in 2009, offset by a DVD recorder increase from 17 million this year to 74 million in 2009, said iSupply analyst Chris Crotty.
What are the differences between Blu-ray and HD DVD?
Each next-generation DVD format comes in single-layer and dual-layer formats. For HD DVD, that means capacities of 15GB and 30GB; for Blu-ray, it's 25GB and 50GB. Toshiba initially expected HD DVD earlier was expected to arrive this year, but now the company plans to launch products worldwide in the first quarter of 2006. That's about the same time as the spring launch of Blu-ray, eliminating the early debut advantage. Blu-ray uses Sun Microsystems' Java software for built-in interactive features, whereas HD DVD uses a technology called iHD that Microsoft and Toshiba have worked on.
Why did Microsoft and Intel side with HD DVD?
The companies cited several reasons for their decision. They said the 50GB version of Blu-ray was "nowhere in sight," giving the 30GB HD DVD the capacity advantage for the time being. They also said HD DVD guarantees a feature they want, "managed copy," which lets a computer user copy a movie to a computer hard drive so it can be beamed around the house. The iHD software offers "greater interactivity," for example, letting a small screen with a movie director be overlaid onto the main video screen. HD DVD manufacturing is easier than for Blu-ray's BD-ROM, and its "hybrid disk" feature will mean an owner of today's DVD player will be able to buy a dual-format disk that can be played in tomorrow's HD DVD player.
What was Blu-ray's response?
In short, hogwash. They say the 50GB discs will arrive with no trouble in the spring, that HD DVD has no advantage in the managed copy area, and it has a hybrid disk technology as well. Neither side is winning the debate: "There are so many charges from both sides that it's very difficult to discern reality from propaganda," Crotty said.
What problems does the split cause?
Plenty. Consumers must gamble that investments in disc players and video collections are in a format that will prevail. And they'll be more cautious embracing digital entertainment technology: "You have to allow consumers to build their digital home over a very long time--a decade. You can't have this fiddle-faddle with standards," said Endpoint Technology Associates analyst Roger Kay.
Studios and video rental stores must either maintain duplicate inventory for the two formats or worry that one format might not have all the content consumers want. Electronics retailers have to explain the different standards. And the industry overall is faced with a more sluggish arrival of the next-generation technology at the same time other alternatives develop--including content that's downloaded directly or that's recorded onto hard drives built into set-top boxes and personal video records, Crotty said.
Can the two sides get together?
It's conceivable. Doherty observes that it took 18 months of struggle before two disputing factions--Super Disc and Multimedia CD--managed to compromise on a unified standard that became DVD, and the standard was the better for it. But at this late date, few see cooperation as likely. It's quite possible there could be no single victor, as happened with the rewritable disc standards DVD-RW and DVD+RW, both of which are used in the market. In that case, it's likely drive and player makers will build dual-format drives, a move Samsung has said it will make if no unification occurs.
http://msn-cnet.com.com/FAQ%3A+HD+DVD+vs.+Blu-ray/2100-1041_3-5886956.html?part=msn-cnet&subj=ns_2510&tag=mymsn
[QUOTE=ToddD]As an owner of that product I am aware of that...But as a BD member company that will have BD drives in their computers how long do you think that it will remain so. DVD SP is on a yearly release schedule. At the time of ver 4's release HD-DVD expected a release soon. It was therefor important to include it into the product at that time. Do not think that gives a preference to HD-DVD just a desire to allow Apple customers the ability to pick the format thats right for them-even thought BD will be the installed format in Apple systems. This is a flexibility that I'd like to see our friends at Microsoft offer as well.[/QUOTE]
Apple always has been and continues to be very good at that sort of thing, and always stays on the leading edge... :)
While (I am told) one can do a lot with the Apple, even glitch-free HD recording is apparently not possible with XP today. XP supposedly has firewire support, but being "open source" is a good enough excuse for things to not work well?
A number of pithy, personal comments have been deleted.
[QUOTE=Geo05]Apple always has been and continues to be very good at that sort of thing, and always stays on the leading edge... :)
While (I am told) one can do a lot with the Apple, even glitch-free HD recording is apparently not possible with XP today. XP supposedly has firewire support, but being "open source" is a good enough excuse for things to not work well?[/QUOTE]
You raise an interesting point. I am a Hugh supporter of Microsoft technologies and I can proudly say responsible for Millions of $ of sales for them. I still to this point work to convince my customers to go with a wholly Microsoft environment. But even after saying all that, there are other choices. I am typing this on a Windows system but I could just as easily be typing it on my Mac. Yes that’s right I have chosen to have both. The Mac is a wonderful media system that in many ways has far surpassed Windows in that space. I know from contacts within Microsoft that they are working to narrow this gap and to someday equal or become the leader in this area. I wish them luck.
But at the same time it's important to remember that they are not the only choice. At the point in time that I make a decision as to which Media Server to go with Microsoft will find that I have a bit of bias towards their product as I do with all of their server products. But In the end we pick a product to do what we need it to do. For me that is to support ALL of the formats that I am using and most unhappily it looks like that will have to be both HD disk formats. So if that's not possible in the Microsoft product then I'll have to look elsewhere. As you pointed out Apple would be the next place to look.
dialog_gvf
10-02-05, 10:38 AM
[QUOTE=ToddD]You raise an interesting point. I am a Hugh supporter of Microsoft technologies and I can proudly say responsible for Millions of $ of sales for them. I still to this point work to convince my customers to go with a wholly Microsoft environment. [/QUOTE]
And in the end, most/all of those Dell and HP boxes with BD burners will be on Wintel machines. So, they ultimately lose little from this gambit.
Gary
steviec
10-02-05, 11:52 AM
http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20050927_190208.html
This says it all! the bluray myths have been exposed!
I'm going to warn members to stick to the discussion at hand, clearly differentiate between facts and speculation, and limit the questioning of motivation and character to a polite minimum.
Amir - A question that hasn't been asked in a while....
You indicated that you are largely focused on the consumer end of the industry. However, I know several enterprise buyers who are salivating at the prospect of 100GB BR replacing their tape systems that are no longer deemed adequate for back-up/archiving. Many corporate buyers were and are shifting away from tape for near-line back-up, but the disaster recovery plans still mandate off-site physical storage. Thus, these guys have been waiting for a format that would pass their archive requirements for durability, which tape fails, but have lacked a successor.
Does this factor into any of the discussions with your largest HW partners in this arena? I can easily see HP and Dell looking at the profitability of selling BR-based Autoloaders as dwarfing what they might get in profits from the consumer end (all of those tape robots having to be replaced or "supplemented"), but I have not played on those playgrounds in a while, so I am less familiar with what some of the ancillary business model issues are for them.
Later,
Bill
Good question Bill. When it comes to recordable technology for enterprise, we really don't have any issues with whatever format gets used. But as you know, that market has picked non-consumer technologies before.
The reason we take a strong position on ROM, is that the consumer ultimately does not have a choice there. If you want a movie and it comes on HD DVD, you can't play it on your BD drive. With recordable, the consumer could more directly vote for the format they like best.
Amir
AnthonyP
10-02-05, 04:07 PM
Why not back the format that is going to cost the consumer more and give my company a better return on profit?
there are several alternatives (like HD-DVD) there is a price ceiling, they cannot charge more because no one will buy the more expensive format, so if BR and HD-DVD are priced the same to consumers then the BR companies are making less
(but have happier customers because they have the better product.)
[QUOTE=AnthonyP]Koala you obviously never took any economic courses or else you failed them.
because there are several alternatives (like HD-DVD) there is a price ceiling, they cannot charge more because no one will buy the more expensive format, so if BR and HD-DVD are priced the same to consumers then the BR companies are making less
(but have happier customers because they have the better product.)[/QUOTE]
What is sad is that you only see your biased view on this subject and have to retort with trivial and childish like responses.
AnthonyP
10-03-05, 01:07 AM
how is it my biased view that what you said makes no economic sense what so ever. If something costs you more then you make less money. It makes more money if it costs them less.
let me give you an example if something costs me 2$ and you buy it from me for 3$ I made 1$ if something costs me 2.50 and you buy it for 3$ I made .50$ what is more .50 or 1$? I made more by choosing the cheapest thing
SlickVik
10-03-05, 01:22 AM
The end goal is making more money for the studios, and even if it is going to cost them more to put out Bluray titles, they also know that relative to HD-DVD they're going to sell millions more simply from the fact that there will be millions of PS3s at the beginning. So even with both formats being priced the same at retail, they are still making more profit from Bluray.
b2bonez
10-03-05, 03:36 AM
[QUOTE=SlickVik]The end goal is making more money for the studios, and even if it is going to cost them more to put out Bluray titles, they also know that relative to HD-DVD they're going to sell millions more simply from the fact that there will be millions of PS3s at the beginning. So even with both formats being priced the same at retail, they are still making more profit from Bluray.[/QUOTE]
It doesn't take a whole lot of number crunching to figure out that selling blades at a 1000% margin is a really good deal when someone else is supplying millions of your customers with new razors (that cost hundreds of dollars) without a dime out of your own pocket. :)
b2b
[QUOTE=b2bonez]It doesn't take a whole lot of number crunching to figure out that selling blades at a 1000% margin is a really good deal when someone else is supplying millions of your customers with new razors (that cost hundreds of dollars) without a dime out of your own pocket. :)
b2b[/QUOTE]
If only those bladed were easier to make and were as sharp/double-sided as the competition :). And oh year, that razor is a toy and not built for specific purpose of being an adult razor. And the company selling those razors is under huge market pressure to show better finanical results so may not be in a mood in the future to keep funding this thing.
Wonder why not everyone is convinced about this shaving business :)?
Amir
b2bonez
10-03-05, 04:58 PM
[QUOTE=amirm]If only those bladed were easier to make and were as sharp/double-sided as the competition :). And oh year, that razor is a toy and not built for specific purpose of being an adult razor. And the company selling those razors is under huge market pressure to show better finanical results so may not be in a mood in the future to keep funding this thing.
Wonder why not everyone is convinced about this shaving business :)?
Amir[/QUOTE]
Well you could try it the HD-DVD way. Give away your new and improved blades (HD-DVD hybrid) in the same box as the old blades (DVD) and hope that your customers will go out and spend a $1000.00 to buy a new razor (Toshiba HD-DVD player). :rolleyes: And the razor company could also hope that the shaving cream company they just signed a partnership agreement with could buy and throw in some of their new razors as a bonus with their new shaving cream.
Naaaw.. that would never happen, that would mean the shaving cream company would have to go into the blade business to ever get their money back from giving away expensive razors and the government would never allow that because they hold a lock on the extremely profitable electric razor business.... :D
b2b
[QUOTE=amirm]The reason we take a strong position on ROM, is that the consumer ultimately does not have a choice there. If you want a movie and it comes on HD DVD, you can't play it on your BD drive. With recordable, the consumer could more directly vote for the format they like best.[/QUOTE]
I don't get the reasoning here. Microsoft is primarily a computer software company, and computer users are going to want a writable format. Is Microsoft's position really that consumers should buy a HD-DVD drive to play movies on their computer, and buy a different drive as well to record data that will also play movies?
-B
Bluescale
10-05-05, 09:02 PM
[QUOTE=Brian]I don't get the reasoning here. Microsoft is primarily a computer software company, and computer users are going to want a writable format. Is Microsoft's position really that consumers should buy a HD-DVD drive to play movies on their computer, and buy a different drive as well to record data that will also play movies?
-B[/QUOTE]
I think it's fairly safe to assume that Microsoft wants to see PCs quicky integrated into mainstream HT systems. That's precisely why they want a stake in the game.
hmurchison
10-05-05, 09:07 PM
[QUOTE=Bluescale]I think it's fairly safe to assume that Microsoft wants to see PCs quicky integrated into mainstream HT systems. That's precisely why they want a stake in the game.[/QUOTE]
add Intel to that list as well. They specifically came up with the BTX spec for motherboard and chassis to take advantage of smaller form factors.
5 years is a lot of time in the computing world and Microsoft and Intel are leading that charge and thus they understand what lies ahead a bit more than content providers.
The hope is not to cripple the nextgen HD media because there's about to be an explosion of new gear coming in the next few years that will radically change how we view our media.
[QUOTE=Bluescale]That's precisely why they want a stake in the game.[/QUOTE]
They have to ante up if they want to sit at the big table.
The ante for them is HD-DVD in all X360s.
So far they're not reaching for their fat wallets. :p
[QUOTE=Brian]I don't get the reasoning here. Microsoft is primarily a computer software company, and computer users are going to want a writable format. Is Microsoft's position really that consumers should buy a HD-DVD drive to play movies on their computer, and buy a different drive as well to record data that will also play movies?
-B[/QUOTE]
Like many in the industry, we feel that the time has come and gone for optical discs being used for storage. For enterprise use, they can use non-consumer formats (e.g. upcoming HDV) as it is doubtful they want to put any of that data on a CE device to play. And for consumers, hard disks are getting so big that only another hard disk can be used to conveniently back it up. And the trend is only getting worse.
So the main application for writable is to create A/V content to play elsewhere. Current DVD is quite good for that as will HD DVD (I think you implied HD DVD is not useful for recording which is not correct.). And if a studio can put a great HD experience on HD DVD, then the user can too. No need for super expensive optical.
Consumers have also voted in the marketplace in this space. Soon, every DVD recorder will have a hard disk in it. Estimates are that by next year, a non-hard disk machine will not be marketable.
Yes, I know some people don't necessarily believe in the above. But this is not the place to debate them probably :). As a side note though, the companies that believe in optical business are the same ones that have no hard disk business. As a case in point, neither Sony, Panasonic or Philips have HD business and hence the push BD recordable. Others such as Toshiba have good storage business and don't see as much ned for recordable.
Hope this helps,
Amir
dialog_gvf
10-05-05, 10:12 PM
[QUOTE=amirm]
Consumers have also voted in the marketplace in this space. Soon, every DVD recorder will have a hard disk in it. Estimates are that by next year, a non-hard disk machine will not be marketable.
[/QUOTE]
Isn't that the obvious difference in use between transitory storage and archival storage? The problem with RW media is that it is expensive to transform into archival, and inconvenient to copy over to R media. An HDD is the exact right device for transitory recordings.
Hard drives are mechanical. What happens to the lubricants over time? What is the effect of changes in the Earth's magnetic field on the magnetic layers over 20 years? The interfaces for hard drives change over time. Will we be able to get an EIDE interface in 20 years?
Will you be able to read a CD/DVD/BD in 20 years? I think so. Most think they are at least that stable, and somebody will make something that reads them.
And before we give away the business archival market to HVD, perhaps HVD should actually be released.
Gary
Bluescale
10-05-05, 10:23 PM
[QUOTE=wco81]They have to ante up if they want to sit at the big table.
The ante for them is HD-DVD in all X360s.
So far they're not reaching for their fat wallets. :p[/QUOTE]
I think that's a bit unfair. MS is deeply involved with VC1, iHD, DRM and AACS, as well as memebers of the DVD Forum. Putting a blu-ray playing the PS3 is a HUGE risk for Sony (and right now it looks like it will pay off big time). If MS had committed to putting an HD-DVD drive into the X360, they would have incurred huge losses on all early sales, been late to market, and risked picking the losing format. I don't see any real reason for this to take this much of a risk. They want to play, but they don't have any intention of betting the farm. Right now, if Blu-Ray wins, the only thing they've lost is a little face and royalties from iHD.
b2bonez
10-05-05, 10:31 PM
[QUOTE=amirm]Like many in the industry, we feel that the time has come and gone for optical discs being used for storage. For enterprise use, they can use non-consumer formats (e.g. upcoming HDV) as it is doubtful they want to put any of that data on a CE device to play. And for consumers, hard disks are getting so big that only another hard disk can be used to conveniently back it up. And the trend is only getting worse.
So the main application for writable is to create A/V content to play elsewhere. Current DVD is quite good for that as will HD DVD (I think you implied HD DVD is not useful for recording which is not correct.). And if a studio can put a great HD experience on HD DVD, then the user can too. No need for super expensive optical.
Consumers have also voted in the marketplace in this space. Soon, every DVD recorder will have a hard disk in it. Estimates are that by next year, a non-hard disk machine will not be marketable.
Yes, I know some people don't necessarily believe in the above. But this is not the place to debate them probably :). As a side note though, the companies that believe in optical business are the same ones that have no hard disk business. As a case in point, neither Sony, Panasonic or Philips have HD business and hence the push BD recordable. Others such as Toshiba have good storage business and don't see as much ned for recordable.
Hope this helps,
Amir[/QUOTE]
The first statement is incorrect and the second is pure speculation. DVD recording is a mess of media/HW incompatibilities.
b2b
b2bonez
10-05-05, 10:49 PM
[QUOTE=Bluescale]I think that's a bit unfair. MS is deeply involved with VC1, iHD, DRM and AACS, as well as memebers of the DVD Forum. Putting a blu-ray playing the PS3 is a HUGE risk for Sony (and right now it looks like it will pay off big time). If MS had committed to putting an HD-DVD drive into the X360, they would have incurred huge losses on all early sales, been late to market, and risked picking the losing format. I don't see any real reason for this to take this much of a risk. They want to play, but they don't have any intention of betting the farm. Right now, if Blu-Ray wins, the only thing they've lost is a little face and royalties from iHD.[/QUOTE]
Hence the old saying "Money talks and BS walks". Sony is doing exactly what MS is not willing to do with XBox. Sony is betting the farm. MS is using Windows money to invade Sony's industry turf. It costs billions in fixed capital expenses to be in the CE business and MS ain't willing to it other than for the XBox.
b2b
Bluescale
10-05-05, 11:29 PM
[QUOTE=b2bonez]Sony is doing exactly what MS is not willing to do with XBox. Sony is betting the farm.[/QUOTE]
Sony is doing it because they have to. Is Blu-Ray fails, they lose so much money, it isn't funny. If Blu-Ray takes off, Sony makes mega bucks. If HD-DVD fails, MS loses next to nothing. If Hd-DVD takes off, MS makes very little. It would be reckless of them to bet the farm on something they get minimal returns on.
[QUOTE=b2bonez]DVD recording is a mess of media/HW incompatibilities.
b2b[/QUOTE]
The mess with DVD formats was started with a group of companies which included Sony/Philips splintering from DVD forum and creating the +RW format. So yes, there is a mess out there. And it was created by our blu-ray friends :).
And now they have done it again with BD. Let's hope your friends don't hand us another mess.....
Amir
Jeffbean
10-06-05, 12:04 AM
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/oct2005/tc2005106_9074_tc024.htm
"How Sony gained an edge in its fierce battle with Microsoft over video formats"
[QUOTE=amirm]Yes, I know some people don't necessarily believe in the above. But this is not the place to debate them probably :).[/QUOTE]
Since a good part of your argument hinges on this point, I'd say it's a valid matter to discuss.
And for consumers, hard disks are getting so big that only another hard disk can be used to conveniently back it up. And the trend is only getting worse.
I said it before, and I'll say it again - no matter how cheap they get, hard disks are not a viable backup solution. I know you know this. Some colleagues in New Orleans found this out recently as well, when they discovered that a submerged hard drive is a dead hard drive.
So the main application for writable is to create A/V content to play elsewhere.
I can't find any hard numbers, but I strongly doubt that is the case. Based on my personal experience of 15 years in the computer industry (including several years at a music company), the vast majority of CD-Rs (and now DVD-Rs) purchased were for data, not A/V. Every home user I know that backs up their data uses CDs or DVDs.
Soon, every DVD recorder will have a hard disk in it. Estimates are that by next year, a non-hard disk machine will not be marketable.
And those hard disks are not used for long term storage. They are used to temporarily hold the data before it is burned, because hard drives are NOT a long term storage solution. This is besided the point, though, because I'm talking solely about computers here, not A/V equipment.
As a side note though, the companies that believe in optical business are the same ones that have no hard disk business.
Hitachi is part of the BDA Board of Directors. Are you intentionlly trying to deceive us, or are you just uninformed?
-B
Brian, are you making a case for consumer use or enterprise? I can't tell from your comments. Regardless, no one is saying that hard disks are permanent storage. We are talking about practical situation we have today where one type of storage has gotten so large that it can no longer be backed up by consumers which unlike enterprises, do not have large budgets and processes for mission critical applications.
I hope you also accept that we have a pretty good idea of what our customers do with their PCs :). We know that they have no way of backing up a 200 Gigabyte hard disk with any kind of optical backup. They simply do not have the patience to do it once, let alone regularly. As a matter of fact, we know that vast majority of them do not back up their PCs on anything -- hard disk or otherwise. Yes, it is a serious problem but this does not point to consumers using CDs or DVDs for back up.
BTW, the #1 reason for CD-R usage for PCs is burning music tracks. Back-up pales in comparison.
You don’t have to take my word on this. Just ask around your friends of family how many are backing up their PCs with optical media. I am sure you will find out that other than making a copy of a few files (say, tax return), most of their PCs are not backed up.
Hitachi is part of the BDA Board of Directors. Are you intentionlly trying to deceive us, or are you just uninformed?
Hitachi is not a force behind BD. Sony, Philips and MEI are. All of who meet the criteria that I mentioned. Being on a board means little anyway as Hitachi is also a board (Steering Committee) member of DVD Forum. Using superficial facts like this to counter my argument with a personal attack to boot, is not the best way to have a constructive discussion here :).
Amir
AnthonyP
10-06-05, 02:35 PM
BTW, the #1 reason for CD-R usage for PCs is burning music tracks. Back-up pales in comparison.
and I am sure a lot of it has to do with DVD being too small. I don't use mine for music or anything like that, but I do use it for archiving, Do I back up like I should? no part of it is that I have better things to do then sit around waiting to swap disks. That is why every few months I just put a whole bunch of important files in a folder and archive the folder. Should I make a full back up? yes, but who has the time to change disks every 5 GB that is the difference with having a 50GB medium, it becomes much less of a chore. It is not how long it takes to write but how much can be put on a disk. If I don't need to be there to swap in/out, I don't care if it takes 1h or 1d.
Sony, Philips and MEI are. All of who meet the criteria that I mentioned. Being on a board means little anyway as Hitachi is also a board (Steering Committee) member of DVD Forum.
isn't Sony and Philips board (Steering committee) members of the DVD forum? Most BR companies are in the DVD forum, DVD was the only format at the time.
The mess with DVD formats was started with a group of companies which included Sony/Philips splintering from DVD forum and creating the +RW format.
I thought it was because DVD had no writable format.
[QUOTE=AnthonyP]I thought it was because DVD had no writable format.[/QUOTE]
The did. It was DVD-RAM. And then -R, -RW and the mess that was talked about. Although my memory is hazy as to timing of +RW and -RW. It may have been a similar situation to BD versus HD DVD. I don't recall.
Amir
John Kotches
10-06-05, 03:05 PM
This goes back a few days, when Ursa said:
You indicated that you are largely focused on the consumer end of the industry. However, I know several enterprise buyers who are salivating at the prospect of 100GB BR replacing their tape systems that are no longer deemed adequate for back-up/archiving. Many corporate buyers were and are shifting away from tape for near-line back-up, but the disaster recovery plans still mandate off-site physical storage. Thus, these guys have been waiting for a format that would pass their archive requirements for durability, which tape fails, but have lacked a successor.
If it's a real enterprise, and they're talking about multi-terabyte database backups where the goal is to have the shortest possible backup window then optical just isn't fast enough period. Even 4x Blu-ray (about 200 Mbits/second) is only 25MB/second maximum sustained.
This pales in comparison to LTO (80MB/second), current 8mm and other options which have storage in the multiple hundreds of Gigabytes to nearly 1 TB per cartridge.
I don't know what enterprise you play in, but in the enterprise I play in Blu-ray at 100GB and even 10x spindle is just too slow as a near-line storage. Archival off-site is another story.
Does this factor into any of the discussions with your largest HW partners in this arena? I can easily see HP and Dell looking at the profitability of selling BR-based Autoloaders as dwarfing what they might get in profits from the consumer end (all of those tape robots having to be replaced or "supplemented"), but I have not played on those playgrounds in a while, so I am less familiar with what some of the ancillary business model issues are for them.
See above. Too slow, too little capacity.
Michael Grant
10-06-05, 03:40 PM
So nobody runs multiple drives in parallel? EDIT: i.e., something like this?
http://www.ultera.com/o-striper4.htm#Standard
Actually, here's something more mainstream:
http://www3.ca.com/Solutions/ProductOption.asp?ID=2746
[QUOTE=amirm]Brian, are you making a case for consumer use or enterprise?[/QUOTE]
Both. At an Enterprise level, we use DVDs to archive user data, and store system images for restore from imaging programs like Ghost, Mondo and VMWare. Remote offices and laptops use burners for off-site backup. We also use burners to create custom installation CDs, shuttle data between offices with slow links, etc.
For home use, burners are the only pratical solution for backup. Not everyone may back up, but everyone knows they should, so most have burners. Do you know anyone who doesn't have a burner on at least one of their home machines? So the question still stands. Are you advocating that consumers buy one drive just to play movies on their computer, and a second drive to burn their data and play movies?
Regardless, no one is saying that hard disks are permanent storage.
Well, you are: "hard disks are getting so big that only another hard disk can be used to conveniently back it up."
We are talking about practical situation we have today where one type of storage has gotten so large that it can no longer be backed up by consumers
Very few people are filling up those 250 GB hard drives with essential data. It's all copies of movies, mp3s, games, and porn. The important data that most people need to back up is usually only 20-30 gigs, which fits very well onto a few Blu-ray discs.
BTW, the #1 reason for CD-R usage for PCs is burning music tracks. Back-up pales in comparison.
Like I said, I couldn't really find any numbers either way on this, and sorry, but I'm not willing to just take you at your word. I'd be satisfied if you could point me towards some statistics that back that up.
Hitachi is not a force behind BD. Sony, Philips and MEI are. All of who meet the criteria that I mentioned.
Your didn't write "force behind BD", it was "companies that believe in optical business." Maybe you have some inside info I don't, but being one of the founding members sure makes them look like a company that believes in the product.
John Kotches
10-06-05, 09:29 PM
Michael,
Take a look at this drive please. (http://www.exabyte.com/products/products/get_products.cfm?prod_id=601&product=Magnum%20Tape%20Drive%20%28LTO%29) Raw storage space is equivalent to 4 100GB Blu-ray discs, compressed at 2:1, quite acheivable in enterprise environments which have large databases that compress rather well.
Real world sustained data rates (I've seen these in action) are from 60-100MB/second. That's 480-800Megabits/second. That would be 6-16x spindle speed on Blu-ray, which (by the way) is several years from being available as are the 100GB media.
Simply put, talking about 100GB media in the enterprise on Blu-ray is at this point a pipe dream, whereas real world storage of 600+ GB per LTO cartridge is available right now.
Now, going forward, by the time Blu-ray is available at 100GB, there will be later generations of LTO, and other tape technologies that will make Blu-ray still be a speed laggard. This is simply fact.
In the enterprise, you want your backup time to be minimal and speed is king. Blu-ray loses, despite Brian's statements. For what he's using, which is not "enterprise level" backups, but rather dept. level functions Blu-ray will be fine.
I could see Blu-ray having a place at the enterprise level as an archive from tape for permanent archival storage, and I'd want that to be on a -R format. I would not want it as my primary enterprise backup medium, it is (and will remain) to slow, even on striped arrays.
Imagine applying the same striping technology you mention (and it does exist) to the tape drives I mentioned above :)
Cheers,
[QUOTE=John Kotches]Take a look at this drive please. (http://www.exabyte.com/products/products/get_products.cfm?prod_id=601&product=Magnum%20Tape%20Drive%20%28LTO%29)[/QUOTE]
LTO-3 drives are $6,000 each with media at $100 each, plus they require a SCSI-3 card and cable which will run another $500, while Blu-ray will be an estimated $4-500 per drive with media starting around $20. That's not really a valid comparison.
In the enterprise, you want your backup time to be minimal and speed is king. Blu-ray loses, despite Brian's statements. For what he's using, which is not "enterprise level" backups, but rather dept. level functions Blu-ray will be fine.
An "enterprise" is not just the data centers. It's also every user in every office spread across the world. I'm not going to be buying a $25,000 autoloader for our 5 person office in South-East Asia.
You do seem to be agreeing with me though, that Blu-ray does have its place, which means they will be selling millions of these drives for use in small offices, small businesses, and home users, so, as I said before, I think Blu-ray will trounce HD-DVD in the computer field, and Microsoft seems to be doing a disservice to their customers by supporting an inferior format for data storage.
-B
And those precious backups you make with your office desktop and whatever cheap media your office buys will likely be blank in five years. It's amazing how poorly some cd-r and dvd-r media hold up in a real world back up situation. If you want permanent back up you use tape, no if ands or buts about it. Anything else is temporary solution. Perfect for the casual short-term backup, but by no means good for achival purposes.
hmurchison
10-07-05, 01:02 PM
Blu-Ray does not have a backup future. Hell it won't even work for SMB let alone Enterprise which needs Tape Libraries with hundreds of tape.
John Kotches is correct in stating that EVERYONE is trying to shrink their backup window. I could see people archiving to Optical but Blu-Ray with it's thin protection layer should worry any CTO.
I still see archiving to tape as the cheapest option with backing up direct to disk being the new "big thing" D2D2T is the moniker.
Optical costs per gigabyte are dropping but tape is dropping at the same level thus tape archival will always be cheaper and you still have forward migration and compatibilty with future LTO drives.
because you have to switch tapes in and out and store them offsite durability is key and no one has made an optical media that can handle this sort of action yet .
I think Blu-ray will trounce HD-DVD in the computer field, and Microsoft seems to be doing a disservice to their customers by supporting an inferior format for data storage.
I've been around optical media for a while. It's always had promise...the first MO drives...the Pinnacle Micro Apex..the list goes on. However it is simply a technology that is too slow for todays quick Backup/Restore needs.
If you want to look to the future of backup look to
RAID 5 drive systems using SAN or NAS
Tape Virtualization
Disc Imaging apps like Symantec ghost or Acronis Trueimage.
A "decent" RAID 5 controller is a few hundred bucks and things get even better when SAS/SATA controllers flood the market in a few years.
Archiving to tape isn't going anywhere.
John Kotches
10-07-05, 01:51 PM
Brian:
You're equating enterprise (small e) with desktops. I'm equating Enterprise (big E) with the company's lifeblood, it's storehouse of intellectual property in the large databases, software, engineering diagrams etc that are its revenue stream. Eventually you will get that we are talking about different scales, windows, requirements and demands.
You can continue to think that Blu-ray can handle it even though the capacity and the speed required to match up with current single tape units are drawing board creations that are several years away from seeing the light of day. During the time it will take for Blu-ray to go from potential to reality, do you suppose that disc and tape speed and capacity will stand still waiting for Blu-ray?
If you do, you're foolish, and I don't think that's the case. The sooner you realize that for true high-end, mission critical, short window backups, Blu-ray is already a non-contender, the better.
I've already said for low-end stuff which is a different market Blu-ray will be fine. But frankly, that's a different animal altogether. Of course time isn't of the essence there.
John Kotches
10-07-05, 02:00 PM
hmurhcison:
The really "big boys", who can't deal with outages are going redundant arrays, and backup the redundant array. Here, I'm thinking of things like OLTP for credit card processing, the big e-businesses etc. After the backup is done, they only have to synch the delta blocks and voila... redundant again :D
In 1990 optical had a bright future 5 or so years out. In 2005 optical has a bright future, 5 or so years out. Sound familiar?
Cheers,
Forget enterprise for a minute.
Are you saying there is absolutely no utility for a 25GB or 50GB or greater optical disc?
I believe it's expected that for most consumer recording, MPEG2 encoders will be with us for some time. So the capacity will come into play.
John Kotches
10-07-05, 03:47 PM
wco:
I didn't offer Blu-ray as an enterprise backup solution, I was responding to the unrealistic claims (as was hmurchison)that Blu-ray was going to take over the enterprise backup market ;)
What you are talking about is a seperate issue.
Cheers,
Right but it can be useful even if it doesn't get into enterprise. BTW, at my group, we've only recently started using DVD, single-layer at that, for archives. Not of the whole network (which is on RAIDs and does use tape) but of sources and binaries. Still do a lot of CD backups too for smaller projects, mostly legacy ones.
What are all the DVD writers and media being used for? Can't all be for people downloading DVD-rips, could it?
dialog_gvf
10-07-05, 04:43 PM
Same here. I just spent all this week taking requests to burn to DVD-Rs to clean up our release and VSS archives RAIDs (clearly we need more DVD burners :) )
Personally, my entire CD collection is now on 15 DVDs (WMA lossless). That would become THREE with SL BD-R, and perhaps as little as ONE for DL BD-R. That's pretty cool.
Imagine carrying your entire music collection on one disc with for your laptop, or car!
Or you can use up 50GB of disc space, or put 50GB in a car stereo (and get the data on it somehow).
Gary
[QUOTE=John Kotches]You're equating enterprise (small e) with desktops.[/QUOTE]
No, I'm equating Enterprise with the whole company, because that's what Enterprise solutions are for. You are talking only about one part of the Enterprise. A true Enterprise solution to backups encompasses several different technologies and media that match the job at hand. For one of our 165 TB datacenters we use an LTO-3 with around 800 slots. For the medium sized departments we have LTO-2 autoloaders, and the small, remote locations use DVD, which, as long as no major problems come up, I am planning on upgrading to Blu-ray when the tech is stable.
the speed required to match up with current single tape units are drawing board creations that are several years away from seeing the light of day.
I don't need it to catch up to tape. I need a inexpensive replacement for DVD-R and maybe some of our old DLT7K units.
During the time it will take for Blu-ray to go from potential to reality, do you suppose that disc and tape speed and capacity will stand still waiting for Blu-ray?
You mean 3 months? That's when the first Blu-ray half-height drives are expected to start shipping. No, I don't expect to see any significant increase by then. LTO-4 drives won't start showing up for another 1.5-2 years.
The sooner you realize that for true high-end, mission critical, short window backups, Blu-ray is already a non-contender, the better.
That's alot of adjectives you added there, none of which I've ever said we'll use Blu-ray for.
I've already said for low-end stuff which is a different market Blu-ray will be fine. But frankly, that's a different animal altogether. Of course time isn't of the essence there.
Agreed, which brings me back to my original question to Amir. Is Microsoft recommending computer users buy 2 different blue ray drives?
-B
[QUOTE=Brian]
Agreed, which brings me back to my original question to Amir. Is Microsoft recommending computer users buy 2 different blue ray drives?
-B[/QUOTE]
Good to see us get back to the original topic :). No we don't. Single and dual-layer HD DVD writers will be avaiable just the same as BD. The arugment then is 30 versus 50. And my point is that it doesn't matter for video applications. And for storage, if 30 is not enough, 50 is not either.
Amir
John Kotches
10-08-05, 10:53 AM
Brian:
What you (and wco) are talking about replacing is departmental level it is not referred to as enterprise.
Frankly given the cost and speed, I'd go disc to disc with the USB2/Firewire drives, but that's just me. I don't deal with departmental level solutions; I only work with the bigger solutions. Maybe I'd back up the disc to Blu-ray, I don't know. I rather like having a full image I can restore daily and lose a minimal amount of data from.
And BTW, the solution you're now talking about being available in a few months is only 25 and 50GB not the 100GB Blu-ray you were mentioning earlier. 100GB might be available in the same time frame as LTO-4.
Cheers,
[QUOTE=amirm]Good to see us get back to the original topic :). No we don't. Single and dual-layer HD DVD writers will be avaiable just the same as BD. The arugment then is 30 versus 50. And my point is that it doesn't matter for video applications. And for storage, if 30 is not enough, 50 is not either.
Amir[/QUOTE]
Wait a min......But why would I want 30 instead of 50 given a choice? Video apps aside even....50 sounds better to me. I'm trying to understand the benefit you want to point out but...I'm just not seeing it.
DeaconFrost
10-10-05, 05:11 AM
[QUOTE=amirm]Good to see us get back to the original topic :). No we don't. Single and dual-layer HD DVD writers will be avaiable just the same as BD.[/QUOTE]
Do you have a source on that? All the info I can find regarding burners, tell me that we will se a Blu-ray burner in March. On the other hand the first HD-DVD drives will be read-only, but if you want to share information that tells otherwise, I'm all ears. :rolleyes:
The arugment then is 30 versus 50. And my point is that it doesn't matter for video applications. And for storage, if 30 is not enough, 50 is not either.
Amir
LOL - do you actually believe this yourself Amir? ;)
amillians
10-10-05, 09:39 AM
[QUOTE=DeaconFrost]Do you have a source on that? All the info I can find regarding burners, tell me that we will se a Blu-ray burner in March. On the other hand the first HD-DVD drives will be read-only, but if you want to share information that tells otherwise, I'm all ears. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]The DVD Forum Steering Committee minutes and recent HD DVD PRG presentations show that the recording side of the equation for HD-DVD is getting reworked, with a "new" rewritable format (15GB SL and 30GB DL) and confirmation for 30GB DL HD-DVD-R. Toshiba has announced a laptop burner, but with the major format changes just surfacing, I would expect it's delivery will get pushed out (nothing moves through The DVD Forum very quickly).
But, yes, the first HD-DVD units will be players, with recorders to follow. For better or worse, Toshiba has used a strategy of "win the ROM, the recording side will follow" for HD-DVD.
[QUOTE=Gai]Wait a min......But why would I want 30 instead of 50 given a choice? Video apps aside even....50 sounds better to me. I'm trying to understand the benefit you want to point out but...I'm just not seeing it.[/QUOTE]
Sure, here are a few but let me caveat that this is very preliminary data. Neither side has anything close to definitive data on volume manufacturing just yet. More will be know in Q1 of next year.
HD DVD-30 media will be cheaper, potentially much cheaper than BD DL 50. A lot of the problems that we talked about for ROM, creeps into recordable area just the same, and sometimes even worse. You still have a shallow recording depth for example in BD, require additional steps to protect the top layer. Here it is even worse because dust, fingerprints, etc. could interfere with recording in addition to playback (they get you coming and going :)). So the cost for bit for HD DVD is bound to be a lot lower.
This is super early data but estimates for manufacturing lines for BD media is astronomical. Some are as high as $7M versus a few hundred thousand dollars for HD DVD. We know that replicators are complaing about $1M+ BD ROM lines so I imagine how excited they will be about these prices.
Due to high line costs and manufacturing difficulties of BD, we may face volume problems there which keep prices high. Note that with ROM prices eroding due to BD companies have to give major concessions to studios, they are going to try to make even more money from recordable to make up the difference. So don't expect fast reduction in BD.
Again, please don't jump on me asking for "proof" for the above. But if you are tempted, start by telling me how much you think BD media will cost and when they ship in volume :).
[QUOTE=amirm]Note that with ROM prices eroding due to BD companies have to give major concessions to studios, they are going to try to make even more money from recordable to make up the difference.[/QUOTE]
You have actual info. (which you may or may not be able to divulge) which leads to this conclusion?
Or is this conjecture on your part?
DeaconFrost
10-10-05, 10:50 AM
[QUOTE=amirm]Sure, here are a few but let me caveat that this is very preliminary data. Neither side has anything close to definitive data on volume manufacturing just yet. More will be know in Q1 of next year.[/QUOTE]
Preliminary data from where?
HD DVD-30 media will be cheaper, potentially much cheaper than BD DL 50. A lot of the problems that we talked about for ROM, creeps into recordable area just the same, and sometimes even worse. You still have a shallow recording depth for example in BD, require additional steps to protect the top layer. Here it is even worse because dust, fingerprints, etc. could interfere with recording in addition to playback (they get you coming and going :)). So the cost for bit for HD DVD is bound to be a lot lower.
I'm sorry, but I'm just not convinced although I can't dismiss your claim. This sounds like your personal opinion to me and not a 'representation of the known facts concernong disc-costs sofar'. :D
This is super early data but estimates for manufacturing lines for BD media is astronomical. Some are as high as $7M versus a few hundred thousand dollars for HD DVD. We know that replicators are complaing about $1M+ BD ROM lines so I imagine how excited they will be about these prices.
Those numbers ($7M) don't quite match the numbers I've read (also mentioned by toshiba) elsewhere. Besides - if Blu-ray proves to be the winning format with 100% support from all the major filmstudios, then the price of a HD-DVD/Blu-ray productionline dosn't really matters does it? Who would want to buy a 'cheap' productionline, producing discs of the loosing format?
Due to high line costs and manufacturing difficulties of BD, we may face volume problems there which keep prices high. Note that with ROM prices eroding due to BD companies have to give major concessions to studios, they are going to try to make even more money from recordable to make up the difference. So don't expect fast reduction in BD.
Do you have a source confirming this development or is it your personal opinion? :rolleyes:
Again, please don't jump on me asking for "proof" for the above. But if you are tempted, start by telling me how much you think BD media will cost and when they ship in volume :).
I didn't ask for 'proof' - i asked for a 'source', and you elegantly dodged the question I asked with your statement at the top. Just my opinion ;)
Sometimes you just know the reaction to a post before you even write it :). No, I am not going to provide any sources. The data is confidential and not cross-checked. But search back on my future predictions and you see that I don't throw out stuff for no reason. A year ago I said BD would have to adopt more codecs than MPEG-2 and here we are. At the time, I couldn't give you any "sources" either but here we are today.
To be clear, nothing I posted in my personal "opinion" other than retail price reduction of BD material but even that is grounded in conversations with BD companies super frustrated with the bottom falling out of ROM business before the products even come to market. I can tell you that they are universally putting their hope in recorders (especially since Sony took away the player business from them also).
Again, I welcome you all to post counter claims. This can't be a one-sided street :). Claim has been made time and time again that BD is superior in recording. Let's hear something about that.
Amir
[QUOTE=DeaconFrost]Those numbers ($7M) don't quite match the numbers I've read (also mentioned by toshiba) elsewhere. Besides - if Blu-ray proves to be the winning format with 100% support from all the major filmstudios, then the price of a HD-DVD/Blu-ray productionline dosn't really matters does it? Who would want to buy a 'cheap' productionline, producing discs of the loosing format?[/QUOTE]
I think you may be confusing my data above with ROM production. I am talking about the lines to produce blank recordable media. This process has nothing to do studios as those lines are completely different than recordable lines.
Amir
Yet even more pithy, bickery comments have been edited and posts deleted. Although fewer than last time.
DeaconFrost
10-10-05, 01:19 PM
[QUOTE=amirm]I think you may be confusing my data above with ROM production. I am talking about the lines to produce blank recordable media. This process has nothing to do studios as those lines are completely different than recordable lines.
Amir[/QUOTE]
You are correct - I'm talking about ROM media and what the filmstudios and replicatorfirms/discproducers have stated sofar concerning BD ROM. Sorry about the confusion. :)
But as you stated yourself - the filmstudios are concerned with prices of ROM media - not R/RW media. Even if the scenario you present shows to be true and BD-R disc will be more expensive than HD-DVD-R discs, it will make no difference to the selection of BD movies or the studios commitment to issue films in BD. For the record, I don't suspect the pricegap between a HD-DVD and BD productline to become so huge as you indicate, and as I mentioned earlier - if BD wins the formatwar, the price of a HD-DVD productline dosn't really matter, does it? And as the price of R/RW media will have next to no impact on the filmstudios decisions to support HD-DVD or/and Blu-ray (which is the keyfactor), then what's the point...? ;)
If Blu-Ray doesn't prove to be price-competitive -- ROM, recordable, whatever -- then you really should have no fears about HD-DVD, right?
The cost advantage should translate to big price advantages and the market will sort out the winner. You won't have to worry about BD+, BD-Java, etc.
[QUOTE=amirm]Sure, here are a few but let me caveat that this is very preliminary data. Neither side has anything close to definitive data on volume manufacturing just yet. More will be know in Q1 of next year.
HD DVD-30 media will be cheaper, potentially much cheaper than BD DL 50. A lot of the problems that we talked about for ROM, creeps into recordable area just the same, and sometimes even worse. You still have a shallow recording depth for example in BD, require additional steps to protect the top layer. Here it is even worse because dust, fingerprints, etc. could interfere with recording in addition to playback (they get you coming and going :)). So the cost for bit for HD DVD is bound to be a lot lower.
This is super early data but estimates for manufacturing lines for BD media is astronomical. Some are as high as $7M versus a few hundred thousand dollars for HD DVD. We know that replicators are complaing about $1M+ BD ROM lines so I imagine how excited they will be about these prices.
Due to high line costs and manufacturing difficulties of BD, we may face volume problems there which keep prices high. Note that with ROM prices eroding due to BD companies have to give major concessions to studios, they are going to try to make even more money from recordable to make up the difference. So don't expect fast reduction in BD.
Again, please don't jump on me asking for "proof" for the above. But if you are tempted, start by telling me how much you think BD media will cost and when they ship in volume :).[/QUOTE]
You said if 30 GB wasn't enough, 50 would not be either...that is my question...how is 30GB better than 50...if your answer is cost than...ok.
[QUOTE=Gai]You said if 30 GB wasn't enough, 50 would not be either...that is my question...how is 30GB better than 50...if your answer is cost than...ok.[/QUOTE]
Sorry, I misunderstood your question. Let me address this one with my own situation.
My main photography machine at home has 600 gigabytes on it (I shoot 16 megabyte RAW files). The only way I would back that up on optical is if I could put it all one disc: hit a couple of buttons and have it write it all. Needless to say, this is not possible on 30 or 50 gigabytes. My solution therefore was to buy a 1 Tbyte server and back up all of it that way. My sync application updates the server with one click (or automatically) and I am done. Then for really critical images, I keep those on a third spindle on my laptop. I sleep really easy :).
Once I got the server, now the rest of my family backs up everything there too. My wife for example, stores all of her quilting patterns there. With another copy on her laptop, she has no worries and is super happy compared to burning discs before. Recently she lost a file and had it back in an instant instead of searching through slow optical media.
Not saying my situation is for everyone but with every PC and most laptops shipping with larger disks than 50 gigabytes, you are into multiple discs and few people want that hassle.
Amir
AnthonyP
10-10-05, 07:58 PM
My main photography machine at home has 600 gigabytes on it (I shoot 16 megabyte RAW files). The only way I would back that up on optical is if I could put it all one disc: hit a couple of buttons and have it write it all. Needless to say, this is not possible on 30 or 50 gigabytes. My solution therefore was to buy a 1 Tbyte server and back up all of it that way. My sync application updates the server with one click (or automatically) and I am done. Then for really critical images, I keep those on a third spindle on my laptop. I sleep really easy .
The issue is that we are not all MS VPs :), my desktop has around 100GB HDD and most likely a bit below100GB is used that means needing 3-4HD-DVD disks or 2 BR. My laptop is 60GB around 35-40 is used right now, BR is good HD-DVD not as good.
I agree with your general point, there are many situations when 50 is just as useless as 30, but I still think 50 is better then 30.
AnthonyP
10-10-05, 08:02 PM
You said if 30 GB wasn't enough, 50 would not be either...that is my question...how is 30GB better than 50...if your answer is cost than...ok.
his point is simple, he thinks 50GB is not enough of an advantage to be worth anything.
Let's say you can pick between a glass and a pitcher. A glass is good enough if you want a drink and a pitcher is not big enough to be any better to fill a pool.
How much is that 1 TB server?
How much more storage is going to be needed for a media server to store managed copies of say a 100-title (high-def of course) library? A 200-title library?
How much is such storage? How much is the front-end and a multi-room networked installation?
I would guess most of the market who'd buy these high-def discs, over the course of their life, will be asking these questions. As the saying goes, if you have to ask, you probably can't afford it.
So if most people are asking, that tells you about the prospects for MC as a mass-market phenomenon.
Ok, I see the point you were makin Amir...however, for many people having 20 extra GB will come in handy for many other reasons. Certainly better than having 20gb less. Since we're basically talking about two competing optical discs...that's basically like saying I have 2 hand held pistols..one holds 8 rounds...the other 12 . And then you could have a belt fed GE Vulcan 20mm canon with an 800 round drum...but then you open up a whole new era of reasoning that isn't really relative to those people who are going to use these discs.
The way you make it sound..is like you can have 30gb...and if that isn't enough, you better start carrying a HD with you to give to people.
AnthonyP
10-10-05, 10:21 PM
Gai, I think his point is that it is not enough for a full backup (not realizing that not everyone has an extremely large HDD. BR is just right for HDD and standard PC is not too big yet. On the other hand if you will use it for a couple of word documents or pics from your 2MP camera of your vacation, does not need 50GB or even 30GB and a DVD or even CD would be enough
On the other hand when you just need 25GB/30GB is no big difference and 8.7GB (DL DVD)/15GB SL HD-DVD same issue. So to me BR gives more options
Extra Small= CD
Small = SL DVD
Medium= DL DVD/SL HD-DVD
Large= SL BR/ DL HD-DVD
Extra large= DL BR
So BR/HD-DVD are matched up to XL that is only for BR :)
I guess what he is saying is that for the few times when you would need a 30-50 GB solution you could always use two HD-DVDs
Semblance
10-10-05, 10:31 PM
You have to understand how HD DVD people think. 50 GB is no better than 30 GB, but 30 GB is a huge gigantic improvement over 25 GB. See? :D
[QUOTE=wco81]How much is that 1 TB server?[/quote]
About $900.
How much more storage is going to be needed for a media server to store managed copies of say a 100-title (high-def of course) library? A 200-title library?
Hard to say. Depends on encoding rate. I assume most people won't rip the extras. So this leaves us with the movie. I am too lazy to do the math :). But let's assume if a movie is on HD DVD 15, it is about 10 Gigabytes in size. That means my server can hold all 100 movies. Note that this is actually less space than recording ATSC broadcast at 19 Mbit/sec and most people buy PVRs for that purpose.
How much is such storage?
Per above, it is $900 but that is an entire NAS (network attached storage). If I just wanted to buy the drives to hook up to an existing PC, it would be cheaper.
How much is the front-end and a multi-room networked installation?
If you are using our product, then PCs/Media Center can be the client. Other companies will build digital media receivers to do the same. Wiring today is 802.11 A+G or Ethernet. Come next year, 802.11n would be another option.
I would guess most of the market who'd buy these high-def discs, over the course of their life, will be asking these questions. As the saying goes, if you have to ask, you probably can't afford it.
I assume we have people here can afford to ask and pay :). Seriously, the HD content investment is bound to dwarf the hardware over time. To fill the above 100-movie server, you would be paying $2,500 in disc costs (assuming $25/title for early adopters). If I am watching HD movies on a media center, adding a few hunderd dollars worth of storage to give me freedom of watching anything I want with true random access will be worth the money. And then I am all set when I invest in a second client later.
So if most people are asking, that tells you about the prospects for MC as a mass-market phenomenon.
Folks can bet against technology trends and they will always be wrong :). My first computer was an Apple II with 32 Kbytes, yes Kbytes of RAM. My first hard disk was 5 Mbytes (yes, Mbytes) and I paid $350 for it which in today's dollars is over $2K I suspect (new Honda Accord was $3,500 then versus $25K now). But I am dating myself :).
But yes, this is not for everyone. Heck, HD is not for everyone. This stuff will take time to build up demand and by then, lot of things fall in place for managed copy.
Amir
[QUOTE=Semblance]You have to understand how HD DVD people think. 50 GB is no better than 30 GB, but 30 GB is a huge gigantic improvement over 25 GB. See? :D[/QUOTE]
We don't brag about this because of the extra 5 Gigabytes. We brag about it because BD lovers used to tell us that more space was always better no matter how efficient the codecs, or any other argument. Now that the tables have turned, folks just complain about the people themselves :).
Seriously, I actually don't think we need 30 gigabytes for a movie. A lot of movies will look great in HD DVD 15 with VC-1. And that is the beauty of HD DVD: content owner can choose to not waste money on capacity they don't need. Heck, I even expect HD content to be available in DVD-9 (do you really need more than this for an Indian or Chinese import movie? That audience simply doesn't care.).
Amir
AnthonyP
10-10-05, 10:48 PM
content owner can choose to not waste money on capacity they don't need.
exactly why I love that it is not available in BR :)
On a side note I think he was talking r/rw not rom.
fill the above 100-movie server, you would be paying $2,500 in disc costs (assuming $25/title for early adopters).
but ou would need to buy those 100 disks. so it will be 2500+ MC+HDD+latest PC
[QUOTE=AnthonyP]On a side note I think he was talking r/rw not rom.[/quote]
I don't think so. He was asking for managed copy, whole house distribution, etc. None of that makes sense in the context of recordable movies.
Amir
[QUOTE=amirm]Seriously, I actually don't think we need 30 gigabytes for a movie.[/QUOTE]I was reading some working drafts for updating the ATSC and cable standards to support H.264, and there was an interesting note.
The original bitrate limits per profile/level were apparently orginally one-half what they are today. But doubled to enable support for low-cost camcorders...
[QUOTE=amirm]Folks can bet against technology trends and they will always be wrong :). [/QUOTE]Unless it concerns BD discs? :)
Sorry, couldn't resist... :)
DeaconFrost
10-11-05, 06:26 AM
[QUOTE=amirm]
Seriously, I actually don't think we need 30 gigabytes for a movie. A lot of movies will look great in HD DVD 15 with VC-1. And that is the beauty of HD DVD: content owner can choose to not waste money on capacity they don't need. Heck, I even expect HD content to be available in DVD-9 (do you really need more than this for an Indian or Chinese import movie? That audience simply doesn't care.).
Amir[/QUOTE]
Wasn't it Bill Gates who once said, that 640kb of RAM would be sufficient for most people in future use of homePC's? But I guess this way of thinking (we don't need 'outstanding' if we can profit on 'good' and convince people that they don't really need or want 'outstanding') is perhaps just Microsoft in a nutshell... ;)
This seems extremly shortsightet to me - even by Microsoft standards. :cool:
[QUOTE=kjack]I was reading some working drafts for updating the ATSC and cable standards to support H.264, and there was an interesting note.
The original bitrate limits per profile/level were apparently orginally one-half what they are today. But doubled to enable support for low-cost camcorders...[/QUOTE]
Are there specific plans to support it or they're just talking about it? The way people are howling about analog component support, what would be the uproar if existing ATSC tuners were made obsolescent by H.264 broadcasts and required new tuners?
What kind of bitrates are they talking about?
[QUOTE=DeaconFrost]Wasn't it Bill Gates who once said, that 640kb of RAM would be sufficient for most people in future use of homePC's? [/QUOTE] Urban legend.
Bluescale
10-11-05, 11:08 AM
[QUOTE=spa]Urban legend.[/QUOTE]
At least according to Bill Gates it's an urban legand. Oddly enough, I cannot find anything on Snopes about it. They usually discuss true, false and unverified urban legands (which is where this one would fall, it seems).
Not to dredge up an old comment directed at me, but it seems to have pulled us off into a teangent, so I'd like to clarify John's comprehension of what I wrote.
[QUOTE=John Kotches]If it's a real enterprise, and they're talking about multi-terabyte database backups where the goal is to have the shortest possible backup window then optical just isn't fast enough period. Even 4x Blu-ray (about 200 Mbits/second) is only 25MB/second maximum sustained.[/quote]
For nearline, I totally agree. Most Big E enterprises are jettisoning tape for disc-based level 2 storage (even tape is considered not fast enough when you need non-sequential reads).
This pales in comparison to LTO (80MB/second), current 8mm and other options which have storage in the multiple hundreds of Gigabytes to nearly 1 TB per cartridge.
I don't know what enterprise you play in, but in the enterprise I play in Blu-ray at 100GB and even 10x spindle is just too slow as a near-line storage. [size=4]Archival off-site[/size] is another story.
So when I said:
[quote=Ursa]Many corporate buyers were and are shifting away from tape for near-line back-up, but the disaster recovery plans still mandate off-site physical storage. Thus, these guys have been waiting for a format that would pass their [size=4]archive requirements[/size] for durability, which tape fails, but have lacked a successor.[/quote]
You apparently thought I was arguing for tape or optically-based near-line (level 2) storage? Hopefully this is cleared-up. Many corporate buyers in IT departments had a good long look at their disaster recovery plans about four years ago, and realized that a) tape is not durable enough for level 3 storage, b) tape was not the right technology for near-line storage due to sequential reads, and c) there was not a medium available that was both durable and capacious enough to satisfy what they thought the needed. Many, many CIOs have red flags on their disaster processes because of this, and there is currently nothing readily available to remediate it. Why optical might work in level 3 storage (i.e., archiving) is that you can feed it from your level 2 system without impacting the up-time of your primary.
Now, having received the answer implicitly that Amir believes that HP, Dell, et al., are separating out the Enterprise class needs from the consumer market, despite some potential synergy there, I am now surprised that Michael Dell is so adamant on any piece of technology since Dell's IP portfolio is, shall we say, negligible compared to HP's and MSFT's. The only thing that made sense was cross-over from the "E" side of the house.
Later,
Bill
[QUOTE=amirm]To be clear, nothing I posted in my personal "opinion" other than retail price reduction of BD material but even that is grounded in conversations with BD companies super frustrated with the bottom falling out of ROM business before the products even come to market. I can tell you that they are universally putting their hope in recorders (especially since Sony took away the player business from them also).[/QUOTE]
Again, since no one seems to have commented on this...
Amir - I read this last bit as an explicit acknowledgment of the impact the PS3 will have on the BD-ROM player market. Are the recent "reassurances" that there will be $200 HD-DVD players on the market on Day 1 for HD-DVD tied into countering the impact of PS3 among the studios? Toshiba had initially estimated a $1000 price tag for a player at launch, but that talk seems to have died off post-E3/PS3.
Is MSFT going to lend a hand to the HD-DVD camp in this regard, as was originally speculated? ;)
Later,
Bill
TheFerret
10-11-05, 01:11 PM
Bill, I wouldn't expect $200 HD-DVD players. Actually, other than a raw featureless BD-ROM player ability in the PS3 I am sure there will be little other reason for buying the PS3 as a movie source.
In fact, at the time of launch of the PS3 and Sony (and partners) release movie titles, I am betting Sony will hit the streets with a more expenseive standalone BD player, and a much more expensieve ES-line BD player. And since Toshiba and its partners (with the exception of M$) don't make gaming-console based HD-DVD ROM players, I would expect anything Toshiba and its partners do come out with will be on the same price-targets that Sony's standalone non-PS3 players will come out at. Isn't this a reasonable assumption?
I would no more expect Toshiba & company to hit the streets with players $800 or more if Sony's standalone units are $400-500 (not including the PS3). Market driving forces speak for themselves in this area, no?
Dahlsim
10-11-05, 04:10 PM
[QUOTE=Ursa]Again, since no one seems to have commented on this...
Amir - I read this last bit as an explicit acknowledgment of the impact the PS3 will have on the BD-ROM player market. Are the recent "reassurances" that there will be $200 HD-DVD players on the market on Day 1 for HD-DVD tied into countering the impact of PS3 among the studios? Toshiba had initially estimated a $1000 price tag for a player at launch, but that talk seems to have died off post-E3/PS3.
Is MSFT going to lend a hand to the HD-DVD camp in this regard, as was originally speculated? ;)
Later,
Bill[/QUOTE]
Ah, the billion dollar HD format question. Does HD have anything left to counter the PS3? While some consumers will certainly want standalone players, the fact remains the PS3 will likely be the cheapest way by far to get into easy HD movie playback. In some pricing scenarios the BRD is almost a free addin for PS3 owners.
The fact that this is such a potent weapon for BD is clear in the statements of the Studios that are hopping on board Blu Ray and citing PS3 as a huge factor.
MS so far has seemingly maintained the hedge position with the 360 showing much more interest in providing PC based High Def movies via networking etc.
$200 standalone HD DVD players though does seem like a fairly good counter if standalone BRD's are not sold as cheaply. Still seems unlikely to match the penetration of the PS3 though.
amillians
10-11-05, 04:26 PM
The last word on the price of HD-DVD players was that Toshiba has provisionally dropped the MSRP on the AX1 from $999 to $899. The XMAS 2006 MSRP target still appears to be $500.
Don't expect $200 next gen players (HD-DVD or BD) anytime soon. Even if it did bow at $599, the PS3 will still be the cheapest avenue to next gen discs.
[QUOTE=amillians]The last word on the price of HD-DVD players was that Toshiba has provisionally dropped the MSRP on the AX1 from $999 to $899. The XMAS 2006 MSRP target still appears to be $500.
Don't expect $200 next gen players (HD-DVD or BD) anytime soon. Even if it did bow at $599, the PS3 will still be the cheapest avenue to next gen discs.[/QUOTE]
Toshiba has come down, but there was some talk in several of the other threads about cheap HD-DVD players being available at launch (perhaps aided by kjack's company's chips... ;) ). So while there may be higher-end players at $500 next Christmas, I am curious about whether this will be true this spring at launch.
BTW, I wouldn't believe any firm pricing on a specific model until the standard is nailed shut. :)
Later,
Bill
Palladin
10-11-05, 08:19 PM
[QUOTE=amillians]The last word on the price of HD-DVD players was that Toshiba has provisionally dropped the MSRP on the AX1 from $999 to $899. [/QUOTE]
I missed that one, Alex. Was it at one of the recent trade shows? Got a link or source? And uh...what exactly does 'provisionally' mean in this context?
___________________________________________________
Palladin
Chance favors the prepared mind
Bluescale
10-12-05, 07:46 AM
[QUOTE=Palladin]I missed that one, Alex. Was it at one of the recent trade shows? Got a link or source? And uh...what exactly does 'provisionally' mean in this context?[/QUOTE]
I think "provisionally" means "if they ever make the darn thing." After all, there's no point in making it if no one wants one and there's no content for it...
AnthonyP
10-12-05, 09:43 AM
Bluescale: lol
Palladin: I think it was in article
but remember seeing it a few days ago
amillians
10-12-05, 09:50 AM
Good one, Bluescale. Yep, it was mentioned in passing in a CED article...I added the qualifier since there's a chance the AX1 won't see the light of day.
dialog_gvf
10-12-05, 10:02 AM
[QUOTE=Ursa]Are the recent "reassurances" that there will be $200 HD-DVD players on the market on Day 1 for HD-DVD tied into countering the impact of PS3 among the studios? [/QUOTE]
What reassurances? There are wildly speculative assumptions that a few Chinese makers will cause the price to drop to that level faster than expected, but there are fundemental costs involved that can't be ignored.
(1) Upwards of $40 in royalties per unit. There won't be cheat boxes this time.
(2) An OEM drive would cost minimum $100
So, begin at $140 of a manufacturers' cost, and then add all the other stuff, and allow the maker and retailer a profit. There is no way we could see $200 until at least 2-3 years after launch.
And even then, there will be a definite push by the CEs (even the Chinese) to not put themselves in margin hell again. In other areas of leading A/V technology they add features to maintain the justification for a higher price level.
Gary
Given where DVD loaders are priced, why would an HD-DVD loader in OEM quantities be $100 six months from now?
As for "margin hell", that's what they sign up for when you are fundamentally assembling someone else's IP. Keith Jack's company will sell "kits" to a lot of people, and competition does what it does. My guess is that the initial pricing, abesent the impact of increased royalties, will look like the current AVEL LinkPlayer and Buffalo Linkstation.
Later,
Bill
Palladin
10-12-05, 01:48 PM
[QUOTE=amillians]Good one, Bluescale. Yep, it was mentioned in passing in a CED article...I added the qualifier since there's a chance the AX1 won't see the light of day.[/QUOTE]
Thought that last part sounded a little odd. Ahhh...The ways of Tainted Love. :D
_________________________________________________
Palladin
Chance favors the prepared mind
vBulletin v3.0.6, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.