Blue Laser DVD's in your Mac? [Archive]

eclipse525

Dec 2, 2003, 09:16 PM

I've just read that Toshiba and NEC have won approval from the DVD/Industry Forum on new Blue Laser DVD technology. From what I understand in the article, a blue-laser disc can store around five times more information than red-laser discs -- which is up to three hours of high definition video. Do you believe that Apple will be one of the first to adopted this new technology or will they take a wait and see approach? I hope in this case they blaze the path, which I believe will become standard sooner than most expect.

~e

Nermal

Dec 2, 2003, 09:58 PM

Well, remember that Apple dropped floppies before everyone else did, and adopted USB pretty much straight away too. But they've had a few bad decisions too, eg. putting DVD-RAM in the Power Macs. Who uses DVD-RAM anymore? :rolleyes:

But yes, I think Apple will include blue DVD quite early on. They're already using Toshiba drives, which helps.

rainman::|:|

Dec 2, 2003, 10:00 PM

well apple was fast to adopt CD-ROM drives, slow to adopt rewritable drives, fast to adopt DVD-R media... so, i guess the cycle would make them slow for blue... i dunno. i'm not personally convinced that blue drives will be the next big thing. it's an improvement but doesn't seem like a *huge* improvement...

pnw

Flynnstone

Dec 2, 2003, 10:05 PM

Perhaps the Blue lasers (Blu-ray) and Pixlet make an interesting combination :)
I thought it was the HD-DVD group that moved? I could be wrong.

LethalWolfe

Dec 2, 2003, 10:34 PM

Originally posted by Nermal
Well, remember that Apple dropped floppies before everyone else did, and adopted USB pretty much straight away too. But they've had a few bad decisions too, eg. putting DVD-RAM in the Power Macs. Who uses DVD-RAM anymore? :rolleyes:

But yes, I think Apple will include blue DVD quite early on. They're already using Toshiba drives, which helps.

For non-video purposes DVD-RAM is much better than +/-. Just because you don't use it doesn't mean it's worthless tech.

Lethal

Sun Baked

Dec 2, 2003, 10:39 PM

Originally posted by LethalWolfe
For non-video purposes DVD-RAM is much better than +/-. Just because you don't use it doesn't mean it's worthless tech.

Lethal It's finally making it's way back to market in newer SuperDrives, the one company selling iBook G4s with SDs is using a DVD-RAM capable drive.

kanker

Dec 2, 2003, 10:43 PM

Originally posted by paulwhannel
it's an improvement but doesn't seem like a *huge* improvement... Over 20GB on one optical disc not huge? Talk about backup- you could backup most peoples hard disk to two of three discs, and for power users, archiving massive video and audio projects to optical when a dedicated HDD would have been neccissary before. The only question I'd have is how long would it take to burn 20GB- that could suck.

~Shard~

Dec 2, 2003, 11:16 PM

How do these blue lasers tie into HD-DVDs? And where are things at with HD-DVDs in general? Just curious...

Nermal

Dec 2, 2003, 11:18 PM

Originally posted by LethalWolfe
For non-video purposes DVD-RAM is much better than +/-. Just because you don't use it doesn't mean it's worthless tech.

Lethal

OK, I didn't research what I said, I only said it because I haven't seen any DVD-RAM drives recently.

G5orbust

Dec 2, 2003, 11:30 PM

Originally posted by ~Shard~
How do these blue lasers tie into HD-DVDs? And where are things at with HD-DVDs in general? Just curious...

The blue lasers allow more information to be stored on the standard sized disk. Because blue has a smaller wavelength than red lasers (red is currently used), smaller pits can be made and therefore pit desity can be increased. Pit density increase equals more storage space.

HD-DVDs just take up more room than regular DVD movies because they are either uncompressed or use a larger file/higher quality compression algorithm (can someone clarify this?) and therefore require more space to fit the movie onto.

Flynnstone

Dec 3, 2003, 12:02 AM

My understanding;
Blue laser store more information, but are incompatible with red laser discs.
HD-DVD is an improved compression mechanism that give High Definition quality using effectively a red laser disc. So it is (or should be) compatible with red laser discs. Disc manufactures like this !

kanker

Dec 3, 2003, 01:08 AM

Originally posted by Flynnstone
My understanding;
Blue laser store more information, but are incompatible with red laser discs.
Really? It is of course obvious that a red laser could not read a blue disc (red's wavelength is too great to register the small pits of the blue disc), but it seems that it should (or at least could) be possible for a blue laser to read a red disc, as it would just have to read comparatively large pits. That would certainly aid adoption of the new laser, as CD compatibility certainly helped DVD acceptance and sales.

eclipse525

Dec 3, 2003, 01:25 PM

From what i hear...once they start producing BlueLaser Players, they will be backwards compatible. The BlueLaser Players will be able to open your old DVD's. How? I have no idea but i'm sure they'll figure it out. They have to, too many people got too much invested in normal DVD's.

~e

patrick0brien

Dec 3, 2003, 01:51 PM

Originally posted by eclipse525
From what i hear...once they start producing BlueLaser Players, they will be backwards compatible. The BlueLaser Players will be able to open your old DVD's. How? I have no idea but i'm sure they'll figure it out. They have to, too many people got too much invested in normal DVD's.

~e

-eclipse525

The blue laser, as G5orbust mentioned, allow for smaller resolution due to the wavelength being much smaller, in the range of 450nm, meaning that the pits can be that size as well. There is nothing keeping a blue laser from reading a larger pit or land of a red laser DVD player.

The same concept applies to current red laser players as they can read CD's relatively huge pit and lands.

Remember, CD's only need an infra-red laser to read them - much lower wavelength than red.

Blue is simply the next step from red.

UV would possibly be the next step if the disks were still to be used into the future.

But due to that hint I just dropped, I don't believe blue lasers will be around as long with holographic coming shortly on the heels of blue laser release.

Holographic will kill the disk paradigm altogether.

kanker

Dec 3, 2003, 02:10 PM

Actually, IIRC, an article that I read about the development of the blue laser said it actually was much closer to the purple range than blue. Hopefully this means that an UV wouldn't be that far off.

johnnyjibbs

Dec 3, 2003, 02:23 PM

I thought there were two rivals for the upcoming blue laser technology of which they were not compatible with each other? :confused: :(

Yes, this could be the next best thing but hasn't BlueRay sunk in Japan? People are slow to adopt. Yes, you can fit a lot more on a blue disc than a DVD but the mass market is only just starting to accept DVDs (and CDs!!). It will take a long time for major adoption if we all have to buy new players again.

benixau

Dec 3, 2003, 08:16 PM

There are two competing techs:

BluRay and HD-DVD

HD-DVD is a red laser technology and uses a higher compression to get more storage cpace on a DVD - compatible with current players but limited in storage. A good short-term solution

BluRay is a blue laser technology and uses less compression yet has more storage through smaller areas needed for pits and lands (the bits on a compact disc). BluRay is better quality the HD-DVD and will hold much more than HD-DVD ever will. HOWEVER - BluRay comes in a cartridge format. This is good but history shows that people prefer cute little discs to bigger, better, protected discs.

HD-DVD is able to be made for HD movies now. BluRay has some discs now but they are only at 5-7GB.

HD-DVD is primarily Toshiba and NEC.
BlueRay is primarily Pioneer and Sony.

Who will win? Who knows. But I think BluRay is the next big thing where as HD-DVD will just be marketed for fitting HD movies onto a DVD.

But then, when Sony has liked a format it has normally become either niche or just died (BetaMAX (dead), MS Stick (niche), DVD-R/RW (losing))

kanker

Dec 4, 2003, 12:20 AM

Originally posted by johnnyjibbs
It will take a long time for major adoption if we all have to buy new players again. Not necessarily. The DVD has been adopted fairly quickly because most of the extra tech involved- the drive mechanism, laser transport mechanisms, etc... had been R&D'd and paid for with CD machines, which helped the initial DVD machines to be relatively cheap. I got my first DVD player almost immediately after they first came out and it was less than $250. I wouldn't expect a blue laser system to come in any more expensive than that, or at least not significantly.

manitoubalck

Dec 4, 2003, 03:48 AM

Originally posted by kanker
Actually, IIRC, an article that I read about the development of the blue laser said it actually was much closer to the purple range than blue. Hopefully this means that an UV wouldn't be that far off.

Just an unfounded thought. Wont UV lasers damage the plastic discs?

manitoubalck

Dec 4, 2003, 03:58 AM

Some losing and lost formats:
Laser Disc: developer, Better audo than DVD's?
Giga-byte Disc (GD ROM): Sega Dreamcast developed by Toshiba
Mini-Disc: Developed by Sony.
VCD: developer? wide spread success in Asia, little else where
SACD, DVD-A: developers? Next gen music, hasen't taken off yet.
DVD RAM: Developer? one of the early contenders on the race for a re-writable DVD media.
of course Beta: Sony, much better quaity than VHS
JAZ: iomega, 2GB cartrages
Clink: iomega, 40MB cartrages.

can anyone add to this list?
Also what is DVDR+-/RW losing the battle to?

johnnyjibbs

Dec 4, 2003, 05:07 AM

Originally posted by kanker
Not necessarily.....I got my first DVD player almost immediately after they first came out and it was less than $250. I wouldn't expect a blue laser system to come in any more expensive than that, or at least not significantly.
True, but us Mac users are generally likely to be at the forefront of technology and the earliest adoptors of new devices. A large proportion of the UK at least does not yet own a DVD player (especially older generations).

Manitoubalck: wasn't the Dreamcast 1GB disc just a proprietry CD that was MUCH BETTER at stopping piracy? They never had any intention of making it a proper format because it was a stop-gap between CD and DVD. They could have used DVD for Dreamcast but it would have been much easier to copy and abuse (like PS2).

The Nintendo GC 8cm discs (proprietry 1.5GB mini DVDs) are a better example because Nintendo said it invisaged them being adopted as the media for small devices in coming years (including successor to GBA) but that shows no signs of happening. I personally love the mini discs though.

Regarding DVD-R/RWs: I thought they had far better compatibility than DVD+Rs. It sounds like most PC manufacturers sided with DVD+R because it was the opposite to what Apple had done, just like WMA vs AAC, etc...;) At least Microsoft has pledged support for both DVD-R/DVD+R in Longhorn. We'll be on BluRay then..;) :D :p

When I come home for Xmas I will be able to check out our new family Dell P4. According to my mum it has a DVD-writer (probably +R) but I have a feeling she may just be getting confused with a combo drive. I'll be able to compare that with my SuperDrive, although I doubt the PC discs will work in my DVD player...

~Shard~

Dec 4, 2003, 06:49 AM

Originally posted by manitoubalck
Some losing and lost formats:
Laser Disc: developer, Better audo than DVD's?
Giga-byte Disc (GD ROM): Sega Dreamcast developed by Toshiba
Mini-Disc: Developed by Sony.
VCD: developer? wide spread success in Asia, little else where
SACD, DVD-A: developers? Next gen music, hasen't taken off yet.
DVD RAM: Developer? one of the early contenders on the race for a re-writable DVD media.
of course Beta: Sony, much better quaity than VHS
JAZ: iomega, 2GB cartrages
Clink: iomega, 40MB cartrages.

can anyone add to this list?

Just wanted to correct you on a couple items. Firstly, the Sega Dreamcasts discs were never meant to become an adopted format, it was proprietary.

And secondly, mini-discs. Mini-discs are huge in the UK, and elsewhere in the world. I know many, many people who use them, so I wouldn't exactly categorize it as a "lost format". All the others though I'd pretty much agree with you on...

johnnyjibbs

Dec 4, 2003, 06:55 AM

Mini-discs have never had mass appeal though. You either love them, or have never used them before. I admit that they are more popular than they used to be, but they are likely on the way out now. It isn't standard on most CD players, for example.

legion

Dec 4, 2003, 07:07 AM

Originally posted by manitoubalck
Some losing and lost formats:
Laser Disc: developer, Better audo than DVD's?
Giga-byte Disc (GD ROM): Sega Dreamcast developed by Toshiba
Mini-Disc: Developed by Sony.
VCD: developer? wide spread success in Asia, little else where
SACD, DVD-A: developers? Next gen music, hasen't taken off yet.
DVD RAM: Developer? one of the early contenders on the race for a re-writable DVD media.
of course Beta: Sony, much better quaity than VHS
JAZ: iomega, 2GB cartrages
Clink: iomega, 40MB cartrages.

can anyone add to this list?
Also what is DVDR+-/RW losing the battle to?

Pioneer was the developer of LaserDisc
Panasonic/Matsu****a was the developer of DVD-RAM
SACD is by Sony
DVD-A, I believe is by Dolby
Beta still exists in a way as Digibeta (pro use) and VHS was invented by JVC
Philips was a developer of something with Sony, but I can't remember which product.

MiniDisc is alive and well in many affluent areas. Iomega formats were always intended to be proprietary. DVD-RAM is still used when mastering DVDs and CDs in pro use (when sending for reproduction.)

kanker

Dec 4, 2003, 03:01 PM

Yeah, consumer Beta has been gone for a long time, but in TV, Beta has been THE tape format for years. Mini discs are still a very popular format as they are small enough to sneak into concerts for the purpose of making legal or illegal bootlegs. It's a format that should have a pretty decent mid term future as they continue to increase the amount for time that they can compress onto one disc, although I've never seen a minidisc reader for a computer- that would be cool, a straight import from mini (is it out there anyone?).

patrick0brien

Dec 4, 2003, 03:11 PM

Originally posted by legion
Matsu****a

This is just funny.

Rower, you see this?

manitoubalck

Dec 4, 2003, 03:44 PM

Originally posted by ~Shard~
Just wanted to correct you on a couple items. Firstly, the Sega Dreamcasts discs were never meant to become an adopted format, it was proprietary.

And secondly, mini-discs. Mini-discs are huge in the UK, and elsewhere in the world. I know many, many people who use them, so I wouldn't exactly categorize it as a "lost format". All the others though I'd pretty much agree with you on...

Friends of mine bought mini-disc, but have since sold them in favour of an ipod and CD/MP3 players. Mini-disc players are still very expencive.

I know the GD ROM was only for the DC, but now that the DC is defunct (lives on in the hearts of the few) it is a lost format. Also I believe it reads from the outside in? I could be wrong.

Bring on BluRay DVD's, I heard about them a while back but nothing since, until now.

Rower_CPU

Dec 4, 2003, 03:57 PM

Originally posted by patrick0brien
This is just funny.

Rower, you see this?

Yup. Happens every time. :)

tpjunkie

Dec 4, 2003, 04:16 PM

Originally posted by manitoubalck
Just an unfounded thought. Wont UV lasers damage the plastic discs?

I wouldn't think so, for a couple of reasons; the data is actualy on an aluminum sheet sandwiched by the plastic, and the particular UV they would use wouldnt necessarily have to be a very energetic (extremely short, and more damaging) wavelength

krimson

Dec 4, 2003, 04:27 PM

OutThere

Dec 4, 2003, 05:52 PM

It would probably be a good idea for Apple to adopt it quickly, beacause if they don't then people will be able to use that as an excuse not to buy a mac, since they could get one for their PC. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

eclipse525

Dec 4, 2003, 06:01 PM

Originally posted by OutThere761
It would probably be a good idea for Apple to adopt it quickly, beacause if they don't then people will be able to use that as an excuse not to buy a mac, since they could get one for their PC. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

I think that's a BAD reason. If they are going to be pioneers in this BlueRay technology, they have to come up with a great reason or marketing angle to really excite and convice everyone that it's a must. Adopting it just for the sake of being the first kid on the block, doesn't cut it.

~e

legion

Dec 4, 2003, 06:27 PM

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Yup. Happens every time. :)
Rower

I'm always a bit annoyed when using that company's name it gets "filtered"; makes me feel a bit guilty of doing something wrong... any chance the obscenity filter could make an exception for the full name of the company (shouldn't cause any harm unless those trying to avoid the filter start using that full name as a euphemism for the internal word.)

Wow, that's pretty hard to write without using the word(s) in question:p

legion

Dec 4, 2003, 06:31 PM

Originally posted by eclipse525
I think that's a BAD reason. If they are going to be pioneers in this BlueRay technology, they have to come up with a great reason or marketing angle to really excite and convice everyone that it's a must. Adopting it just for the sake of being the first kid on the block, doesn't cut it.

~e

There's plenty of convincing reasons

(a) lots more storage room (backup etc)
(b) Apple's trying to move FCP into mainstream film making and broadcast... HD will need this kind of space (...or everyone could be bound to hauling around hard drives)

mikeyredk

Dec 4, 2003, 06:59 PM

it also has to be fast extremly fast

Nicky G

Dec 4, 2003, 08:19 PM

MD-Data did once exist, never caught on. I wish it had.

A cool format that never seemed to go anywhere was Dataplay -- looks like you can still get the discs online, but are there any players on the market?

www.dataplay.com

They're little discs that look like a MiniDisc, but are the size of a QUARTER! They can be double-sided, and hold 250MB per side. If mass-produced and in wide use, they would be cheap as heck. Talk about killer format for tiny electronics!

What was this thread about, again?

edit: Oooh, the Dataplay discs aren't re-writable. BUMMER.

LethalWolfe

Dec 4, 2003, 09:49 PM

Originally posted by legion
There's plenty of convincing reasons

(a) lots more storage room (backup etc)
(b) Apple's trying to move FCP into mainstream film making and broadcast... HD will need this kind of space (...or everyone could be bound to hauling around hard drives)

eclipse525 didn't say there were no good reasons, he said adopting it first for no other reason than adopting it first is not a good reason.

I agree w/your "a" reason, but your "b" reason is pretty weak. DVDs are, and Blueray will be, a format used to deliver the final product. They will not be a standard in post/production. The HD you get at home is a far cry from the HD used to create what you are watching. 1 hour of broadcast quality HD can eat up half a terabyte of space. And there are some very cutting edge cameras, target towards filmmakers, that stream the image straight from the camera into harddrives that require 500gigs for just 45 minutes of recording. So having an optical disc that can hold 20gig isn't going to help out much. ;)

Anyway, in post/production HD is already here, has been for a few years, and FCP supports it.

Lethal

MoparShaha

Dec 4, 2003, 10:53 PM

Originally posted by legion
Philips was a developer of something with Sony, but I can't remember which product. I think they were the ones who made the original compact disc (CD).

Rower_CPU

Dec 5, 2003, 02:27 PM

Originally posted by legion
Rower

I'm always a bit annoyed when using that company's name it gets "filtered"; makes me feel a bit guilty of doing something wrong... any chance the obscenity filter could make an exception for the full name of the company (shouldn't cause any harm unless those trying to avoid the filter start using that full name as a euphemism for the internal word.)

Wow, that's pretty hard to write without using the word(s) in question:p

Unfortunately, the word censor can't be that specific, and turning off compound words containing that word would allow a bunch of words through the filter. Sorry.