Why is Blu-ray the way ahead..

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by kushu, Dec 12, 2006.

  1. kushu

    kushu Guest

    The name Blu-ray is derived from the blue-violet laser it uses to read
    and write to the chalcogenide disc. A Blu-ray Disc can store
    substantially more data than a DVD, because of the shorter wavelength
    (405 nm) of the blue-violet laser (DVDs use a 650-nm-wavelength red
    laser and CDs an infrared 780 nm laser), which allows more information
    to be stored digitally in the same amount of space. In comparison to HD
    DVD, which also uses a blue laser, Blu-ray has more information
    capacity per layer (25 gigabytes instead of 15)..
    for more on this revolutionary technology:
    http://askwiki.blogspot.com/2006/09/blu-ray-disc-bd-is-next-generation.html

    Enjoy !
     
    kushu, Dec 12, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. *yawn*

    It's just more crap from Sony.
     
    Kimba W. Lion, Dec 12, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. kushu

    Edmund Guest

    Yeay right, it is so nice for costumers to have a new
    bunch of incompatible players and disks.
    If I have to make my choice, I will take something
    with the least influence from the virus company sony.
     
    Edmund, Dec 12, 2006
    #3
  4. kushu

    GMAN Guest

    If you were loser enough to buy one of the handfull of loser music groups that
    had that rootkit on it in the first place, then you have more worries in your
    life than what the next generation of disk format you are going to buy into.
     
    GMAN, Dec 12, 2006
    #4
  5. Actually, according to recent articles, CES analysts have discovered
    that the reason Blu-Ray isn't gaining ground isn't because of technical,
    comparative, studio-supported or game-platform reasons, but simply because:
    A) nobody trusts Sony,
    B) nobody trusts new "exclusive" Sony formats, and/or
    C) nobody trusts rabidly loyal Sony fanboys.

    (Me, I was with HD from the beginning, until I found out that HD used a
    Microsoft-based codec, and the reason Apple originally supported Blu was
    that it used a Quicktime-compatible codec--
    Oh, great, Sony vs. Microsoft, NOW who do I root for?) >_<

    Derek Janssen
     
    Derek Janssen, Dec 12, 2006
    #5
  6. kushu

    teem Guest

    Betamax Redux.
     
    teem, Dec 13, 2006
    #6
  7. Interesting. I didn't realize Sony's past was actually catching up with
    them.
     
    Kimba W. Lion, Dec 13, 2006
    #7
  8. Well, was a rather unscientific sampling, but they are starting to catch on:
    http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20061207-8378.html

    (Unfortunately, like Beta loyalists, looks to HD fans as if Blu may have
    more "default" establishment in the industry by the end of CES '07, and
    Warner finally going dual-release doesn't help much either...)

    Derek Janssen (just waiting to see what Apple does--Then it's okay)
     
    Derek Janssen, Dec 13, 2006
    #8
  9. kushu

    JoeBloe Guest

    Double posting retard.
     
    JoeBloe, Dec 14, 2006
    #9
  10. kushu

    Phisherman Guest

    Just watched Pirates of the Caribbean Dead Man's Chest. Disney plans
    re-release of several movies in Blu-ray format. I see more evidence
    that Blu-ray is leading over HD. We will see what Microsoft will do
    to counter it.
     
    Phisherman, Dec 14, 2006
    #10
  11. kushu

    Joshua Zyber Guest

    What evidence would that be? It certainly isn't based on sales.
     
    Joshua Zyber, Dec 14, 2006
    #11
  12. Specifically, their animated movies as big-guns--

    Unlike the promo, however, "Sleeping Beauty" will NOT be on the list
    (they just wanted to show characters saying "Blue!"), but rather:
    A) their Pixar movies,
    B) anything that was already hi-def detailed for IMAX (Beauty/Beast,
    Lion King), and
    C) anything that was already remastered for 2-disk AFTER they started on
    their Blu-Ray kick (which means Little Mermaid and Jungle Book, but not
    Bambi or Snow White)
    Again, like Beta rather than DiVX:
    Not a declaration of defeat and signed truce, just a shadow-election in
    smoke-filled backrooms, to bring the ceasefire.
    ....Aww, don't say that, man, that's depressing. :(

    (But then, as long as Warner's got Casablanca, Robin Hood and Excalibur
    going to Blu next year--and Blu will finally have some real movies on
    their catalog instead of Sony action-losers and Tomb Raider
    sequels--guess I can live with it)

    Derek Janssen
     
    Derek Janssen, Dec 14, 2006
    #12
  13. kushu

    Quanta Guest

    All of this is entirely irrelevant. There is absolutely no movement, except
    by extreme videophiles, to the new format. It is stillborn.
     
    Quanta, Dec 15, 2006
    #13
  14. Until we get the Analog->Digital switchover in '09, and then everyone
    who wasn't up on the headlines thinks they HAVE to rush out and buy an
    HD set.

    Derek Janssen (who finally found one of those old school "box" 32"
    widescreen 1080 sets that earlier nut was raving about, for $600)
     
    Derek Janssen, Dec 15, 2006
    #14
  15. kushu

    Dan Luke Guest

    People are *already* rushing out and buying HD sets. That is having no
    effect on new-format DVD player sales because the increased picture quality
    over a good upconverting player is not noticable to most viewers.

    Prices will have to fall well below $200 before the new players start to
    sell. Will that happen?

    --
    Dan

    "Almost all the matter that came out of the Big Bang was two specific sorts;
    hydrogen, and stupidity."

    -Robert Carnegie in talk.origins
     
    Dan Luke, Dec 16, 2006
    #15
  16. kushu

    JoeBloe Guest


    Properly designed "HD" level playback devices will likely never (nor
    should they) fall to that EL Cheapo crap level as the hardware inside
    that makes them do what they do has a substantially higher cost than
    standard DVD players. There are typically high end audio chips that
    one finds formally in high end stereo receivers and the like. It
    requires a processor to decode the data stream coming off the disc.
    Much more processing power than a standard DVD does.

    Cost of manufacture IS a factor. If you do ever get your El Cheapo
    level player, it will barely playback the disc, and will have trade
    offs on it audio playback capacity.

    It isn't a friggin' wristwatch.

    You want $2.00 Mickey Mouse Watch convenience store prices, you're
    gonna get Mickey Mouse Watch quality as well.
     
    JoeBloe, Dec 16, 2006
    #16
  17. kushu

    Mark Jones Guest

    Right now a major cost factor is the manufacturers recovering
    R&D costs, not strictly the price of making the products. Paying
    that price is what you put up with if you want new technology.

    The prices will probably be a lot lower by the end of 2007. If
    they don't get the prices down, the conversion to HD movies
    is going to occur very slowly.
     
    Mark Jones, Dec 16, 2006
    #17
  18. The Frustrating Loop is that:
    - Prices won't come down until production steps up and assembly parts
    become more commonly available,
    - Production won't step up until sales pick up,
    - Sales won't pick up until people start buying them,
    - People won't start buying them until there's a clear "winner" in the
    format wars,
    - There's no clear winner in the format war because of low sales,
    - Low sales have kept companies producing small numbers of the players
    at high prices and low demand for rare assembly parts.

    At this rate, the industry could snip the Loop with their own scissors
    by either calling a truce, like DVD-vs.-DiVX did, or negotiating a
    secret winner behind our backs, like VHS did.
    And we already know they're too mulehead-proud to pick the first
    one...From all the recent Blu-Ray activity, got the distinct hint it's
    the latter.

    Derek Janssen (I just read it in next month's newspaper)
     
    Derek Janssen, Dec 16, 2006
    #18
  19. kushu

    Dan Luke Guest

    Too bad for hi-def DVD, then.

    Unless there is huge market of hi-def players, the producers of DVDs will
    eventually not bother with it. Why should they, if there are only a few
    videophiles to sell to?

    Not trying to be rude, but who cares? 10% of the video buying public?
     
    Dan Luke, Dec 18, 2006
    #19
  20. kushu

    AZ Nomad Guest

    The same was said for DVD players, hi-fi VCRs, and even CD players at one time.
     
    AZ Nomad, Dec 18, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.