Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Community Discussion' started by ghall, Aug 28, 2007.
So, what does everyone think? Could this be the new killer DVD format?
Perhaps in 10-15 years time. For now it's between HD-DVD and Blu-ray.
if a HD film only takes up 10gb with the right codec, why would you need 1tb for a film?
I can see other uses for this.
15.4" MBP - 25Ghz Octo Core - 100GB RAM - 20GB Graphics VRAM - BluRay TeraDisc Superdrive
Time to get the screwdriver out I think
Anybody want to look into time travel for me because I cannot wait!!!
That sounds really exciting that format, hope it becomes a reality sometime!!
yeah. tv series. no longer do you have to fumble with 30 discs for a tv show, you can have it all on one disc.
for some reason, i see tv shows being ignored as a factor in the format wars, but i personally see it, more people want their tv on dvd.
It's not just about the disc itself: it's about the video codecs, DRM, and methods supported for creating interactive menus and whatnot.
There's a good article on Roughly Drafted this week about the next-generation DVD battles between Microsoft and Sony. He makes the point that Apple is poised to do an end run around the entire debate by strongly pushing digital downloads instead.
Even if Blu-Ray or HD-DVD eventually reaches some sort of market dominance, TeraDisc would be awesome for data storage. I just wonder how long it would take to write 800GB to a disc.
Haha...yeah, that would rule.
In like 10 years when this **** becomes mainstream, people are going to be getting much faster internet pipes and all **** will be done digitally online. You want to watch a movie? You download it in Full 1080p 60fps from iTunes/etc.
Hours after hours of pure HD porn?
Digital Downloads Will Not Take Over
Digital downloads are not going to takeover for a long, long, long time. Much longer than 10 years even. Maybe never.
People just aren't ready to shift to a digital (ie. non-tangible) medium. If digital music downloads haven't taken over the music market how do you think downloaded movies will take over the home video market.
Plus people like the extras. With digital downloads you don't get that.
Look at the iTunes movie store. Sure you get the movie, but where are the extras - the behind the scenes documentaries, audio commentaries, and deleted scenes.
And now with HD DVD and (soon) Blu-ray offering extras like PiP commentaries it makes it even harder to believe that digital movie downloads will take over.
Then you have to think of all the older people who make up a considerable amount of the market. They are used to having the tangible media. They've had the CED (Ten points if you know that is ) Beta, VHS, LaserDisc, D-VHS (Double points if you know what that is), DVD and now HD DVD and Blu-ray.
The same goes for the home theater enthusiasts (such as myself). I don't want downloadable media to takeover for lots of reasons. Mainly, quality.
Yeah maybe in ten year they can give me Dolby Digital 5.1 (maybe even DTS) but they probably won't give me Dolby Digital Pus or DTS @ 1.5 mbps. Most certainly not Dolby TrueHD, DTS-HD or DTS HDMA. And especially not uncompressed 7.1 PCM. Or the choice to view my 1080p at 24 fps not 60 fps. I won't have the commentaries. I won't have the cases (and yes that is a very big deal to some). I won't even have a menu.
It's not that Digital downloads are bad is just that they can't and (probably) won't offer anything better than what I have now. Why, in Ten plus years would I want no other choice than to buy something that is inferior to an older product.
The Ultimate Porn Collection?
Why does the industry have to choose between a tangible and download formats? Surely they can co-exist quite happilly, provided the download infrastructure is upgraded significantly.
Sure there are those who like something tangiable and well presented, but I see an increasing amount of people who would rather have more entertainment on demand, but the network capacity just isn't there yet.
I would rather see breakthroughs in the communications industry, like a bittorrent based satellite downlinks at super high speed, and DSL or CABLE for uplinks from households
Great! Another bloody format to make things even more complicated is exactly what the world needs.
if stored unused in perfect condition, and 0.5 year under normal use.
that costs $50K per disk
i.e. everything else.
i.e. at the moment, they don't. 1 layer is all you get.
Yup. Don't expect to see this soon. That 'within 2-3 years' figure is strictly to attract investors.
But the article quotes Dr Erez as saying they've already managed 800GB on one disk.
I'm pretty sure I saw this article on Slashdot a few months ago. Funny how it wasn't duped there.
Unless it's cheaper than HD DVD or Blu-Ray, it'll never catch on.
Blu-Ray already produces an image which is higher resolution than most TVs can display anyway, and even then, 'basic' HD (720p) is more than stunning on anything up to 40".
Digital-VHS. I actually looked into it a while ago. Seemed pretty nifty, and it could record HD (720p only I think, or maybe 1080i).
The problem with satellite links is the latency. It's usually 500ms plus. No need to send the data that far, especially for densely populated areas.
Plus, all fails in the presence of HVD.
Yeah, prototypes, which I'm guessing are nowhere near mass production, and probably don't work too well anyway. I just want this to be over, it's the only thing keeping me from buying.
it was either 50cm wide or they wrote several layers on different thin disks then stuck them together afterwards (as a test of multi-layer reading). Note how they imply they haven't achieved multi-layer writing yet.
You forgot the yellow tinted screen problem.
Just like it was ZOMFGwow!!!111!!! when that Israeli company announced holographic discs with 140GB storage capacity and read/write/access times faster than current hard disks. Whatever happened to that?
(Looks at slashdot, finds this) http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/05/18/0546244
I think I'll wait. After all, it only took 40-odd years so far. What's another 20 or so?