Aren't bluray discs already scratch proof? Only reason why a lot of tom's guide people would want to be able to copy movies is to pirate them 😉 I get a lot of thumbs down when I talk about how the millenium act signed by clinton is in place to try to help protect the creators and authors of films, movies, and computer software. So I kinda know what the general mentality here is 😉
- Status
ThePatriot
Distinguished
- May 12, 2006
- 42
- 0
- 18,580
Copying movies, including those on Blu-Ray, is already legal in the Netherlands. Much to the chagrin of the institutions that 'defend' the rights of the recording industry. Thhat in combination with the Internet Capital of the world Amsterdam, with the highest fiber-optic density in the world, docsis 3.0, 120 Mbps for consumers, with no caps, it is more or less the best place to be. 😉
WheelsOfConfusion
Distinguished
- Aug 18, 2008
- 341
- 0
- 18,930
[citation][nom]descendency[/nom]And that's wholely legal, for a CD. Once you get to DVDs and BluRays, the laws change for some reason.[/citation]
Ostensibly it's because the Red Book standard for audio CDs didn't make any provision for DRM, so any music disc you buy with DRM protection cannot have the Compact Disc label.
DVDs had encryption allowances built into the standards, and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act makes it illegal to circumvent DRM, even if the purpose is to exercise fair use of the media behind it. So while it's shifty business practice to put DRM on a music CD and try to pass it off as conforming to Red Book, it's expected behavior with any commercial DVD release. And now it's expected for any copy you try to make of a Blu-Ray.
Ostensibly it's because the Red Book standard for audio CDs didn't make any provision for DRM, so any music disc you buy with DRM protection cannot have the Compact Disc label.
DVDs had encryption allowances built into the standards, and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act makes it illegal to circumvent DRM, even if the purpose is to exercise fair use of the media behind it. So while it's shifty business practice to put DRM on a music CD and try to pass it off as conforming to Red Book, it's expected behavior with any commercial DVD release. And now it's expected for any copy you try to make of a Blu-Ray.
[citation][nom]tayb[/nom]Buy the rights? Please do not suggest that. I'm against stealing copyrighted material you don't already own but as far as I am concerned if I go out to Best Buy and purchase a brand new copy of The Dark Knight on blu-ray I have the legal right to play it back on any medium I so choose. If Warner Bros doesn't provide me with a download link in iTunes or some other service I will download it from a torrent site and accomplish the same goal. I will watch that one copy on my cell phone, on my laptop, on my desktop, in my iPod, and on my television. I will not purchase a digital copy, an iPod copy, and a hard copy. It will be a cold day in hell before I buy a movie than buy the "rights" to watch my movie on some other device. I already bought the right to do so when I swiped my Credit Card and I don't give a damn if the RIAA says otherwise. Don't get any of statements confused with you thieves downloading games/movies/software that you don't already own. Completely different.[/citation]
What I said was "buy the rights to playback" aka after the initial purchase you are then free to have it on any medium you want. Basically we just said the same thing, just in different words
What I said was "buy the rights to playback" aka after the initial purchase you are then free to have it on any medium you want. Basically we just said the same thing, just in different words
iocedmyself
Distinguished
- Jul 28, 2006
- 9
- 0
- 18,510
For all of you people complaining about the price of Blu-ray, a moderatly newly available consumer technology...you all seem to forget...THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WITH NEW MEDIA FORMATS FFS. So perhaps a history lesson is in order just because i'm sick of the lack of perspective most seem to have on this topic.
First we have the format war between VHS and BETAMAX. Anyone remember betamax? It was out a year ahead of VHS and maintained a higher resolutions than VHS.Initially
betamax and VHS both only could do 330x480 (250 lines)
but they upped the ante in short order with Super Betamax moving up to 400x480 (300 lines)
Infact superBetaED that retailed in 1988 had a video resolution of 670x480 (500 lines) which is near the limit of standard def TV's still sold today (525 lines)
LaserDisc and VHS peaked at 560x480 (420 lines)
while analog TV brodcasts are only 440x480 (330 lines)
But sadly betawas more expensive and people prefered quantity over quality with the release of VHS's 4hour video cassettes
Same deal with the LaserDisc, came out in 77, and held steady with 560x480 throughout the 80's i believe, LD's also had the benifit of Uncompressed DTS audio (1536 kb/s) where DVD's still use the halfbit 768 kb/s DTS. Downside of LD's....they were huge, it was an aluminum record ffs and they held 30 minutes of video at thier start and worked their way up to 60 min's per 12in disc of shiny rainbows. (Laserdiscs were actually around until the mid 90's i remember my parents renting a LD player from this great independant video store to watch Abyss....why rent one? Because the players cost $600+ and the movies were $50 or so....They did have a great picture, and awesome sound quality, a huge range of titles, but still was a niche product for the most part (and was crushed with the introduction of DVDs in 1997.
After 20 years of collecting Movies on VHS, DVD's came about. They look just like CD's....same size as the CD's everyone had grown accustomed to during the previous 15 years...but it had a movie on it! I remember the first time i saw a DVD thinking "wow, laserdiscs shrunk" But hey, it's cool, same size as a CD, same shiny rainbowed layer on the bottom....maybe you can put it in the CDrom of a computer and watch it. oh wait no..it has a different colored
"LASER"
If you want to watch one of your favorite movies on the highquality DVD it will just cost you $30-$40 for the DVD...and $1000 or so for the device with the correct "LASER" that can translate what this piece of plastic coated metal is trying to show you.
The first Couple years of DVD's were pretty weak. The majority of stuff re-released on DVD came with subtitles....if that. You got to enjoy the privledge of buying something you already have..and the possibility of breaking the damn disc when trying to release the retention tabs in the box....or maybe scratching the shiny side so minutely that you aren't even sure if it's scratched until your movie freezes up 47 minutes in with no way to skip past it.
Couldn't record anything on a dvd, couldn't copy it,could inadvertantly change the region setting on a DVD drive to only read dics made in Serbia.....and nothing else ever ever again.
But then things started looking up in 1999 when DVD recorders came out. Anyone remember what those were like in the begining? The standalone recorders cost $3000-$4000. They recorded at 1x-2x...sometimes. Though the upside was DVD recorder drives for computers. My uncle worked in the TECH world so he was an early adopter of the drive, which cost a mere $1200 in 1998/99 for this cutting edge piece of hardware that burned blank DVD's at 1x speeds (which comes out to about 1.3 MB/s) meaning it took an hour to burn one disc. These discs in the begining cost $25-$30...each. In a generous estimate they only burned coasters about 50%, buthey, they're only $25 apeice or so, who cares!
Dual layer dvd-r's still cost $2 each if you happen to find them on sale, compared with the $9 sale price on a 50pk spool of memorex discs.
How about CD's? They came out in 82, in 85 CD players still could cost $800 or more, and when the recordable drives and media came out it was a similar situation to what would later happen with DVD's.
When HD-DVD and Blu-ray were both released, i was torn because i have spent countless hours burning hundreds upon thousands of DVD's over the years...so blu-ray was looking good with alll the chatter of 100 Gig double sided dual layer recordable discs, but i didn't want to have to migrate to another data medium or spend a bunch of money on a drive that would be obsolete in short order.
So after hearing all about how HD-DVD was going to be backwards compatible with existing DVD players..i was rooting for that. Triple the capacity of dual layer discs that work with the same drives annd players everyone already uses? Sounded to good to be true.
Big surprise...it was. What they meant was they would have one side of the disc in regular DVD format....and the other as HD-DVD. So still required purchasing another $700 or $800 player to watch something they could have fit on a double sided dual layer DVD format disc. HD-DVD sucked, it continues to suck, thats why it's dead, it was more encrypted then DVD 1.0.
Blu-ray has already worked up a 250gig disc that actually does work with the existing "Laser" in the movie players that are more expensive than anything....since the last format breakthrough.
As for how expensive Blu-ray players actually are now...they really aren't, i've seen several standalone players under $120, and many more in the $250 range. If you happen to be one of the many people who has a HTPC, the Blu-ray read only drives are under $100, the Burner's are around $300 or so last i saw. The blank media as someone already mentioned is around $5 a disc meaning that compared to DL-DVD+R's blu-ray costs about twice as much for 3-6 times the data capacity.
First we have the format war between VHS and BETAMAX. Anyone remember betamax? It was out a year ahead of VHS and maintained a higher resolutions than VHS.Initially
betamax and VHS both only could do 330x480 (250 lines)
but they upped the ante in short order with Super Betamax moving up to 400x480 (300 lines)
Infact superBetaED that retailed in 1988 had a video resolution of 670x480 (500 lines) which is near the limit of standard def TV's still sold today (525 lines)
LaserDisc and VHS peaked at 560x480 (420 lines)
while analog TV brodcasts are only 440x480 (330 lines)
But sadly betawas more expensive and people prefered quantity over quality with the release of VHS's 4hour video cassettes
Same deal with the LaserDisc, came out in 77, and held steady with 560x480 throughout the 80's i believe, LD's also had the benifit of Uncompressed DTS audio (1536 kb/s) where DVD's still use the halfbit 768 kb/s DTS. Downside of LD's....they were huge, it was an aluminum record ffs and they held 30 minutes of video at thier start and worked their way up to 60 min's per 12in disc of shiny rainbows. (Laserdiscs were actually around until the mid 90's i remember my parents renting a LD player from this great independant video store to watch Abyss....why rent one? Because the players cost $600+ and the movies were $50 or so....They did have a great picture, and awesome sound quality, a huge range of titles, but still was a niche product for the most part (and was crushed with the introduction of DVDs in 1997.
After 20 years of collecting Movies on VHS, DVD's came about. They look just like CD's....same size as the CD's everyone had grown accustomed to during the previous 15 years...but it had a movie on it! I remember the first time i saw a DVD thinking "wow, laserdiscs shrunk" But hey, it's cool, same size as a CD, same shiny rainbowed layer on the bottom....maybe you can put it in the CDrom of a computer and watch it. oh wait no..it has a different colored
"LASER"
If you want to watch one of your favorite movies on the highquality DVD it will just cost you $30-$40 for the DVD...and $1000 or so for the device with the correct "LASER" that can translate what this piece of plastic coated metal is trying to show you.
The first Couple years of DVD's were pretty weak. The majority of stuff re-released on DVD came with subtitles....if that. You got to enjoy the privledge of buying something you already have..and the possibility of breaking the damn disc when trying to release the retention tabs in the box....or maybe scratching the shiny side so minutely that you aren't even sure if it's scratched until your movie freezes up 47 minutes in with no way to skip past it.
Couldn't record anything on a dvd, couldn't copy it,could inadvertantly change the region setting on a DVD drive to only read dics made in Serbia.....and nothing else ever ever again.
But then things started looking up in 1999 when DVD recorders came out. Anyone remember what those were like in the begining? The standalone recorders cost $3000-$4000. They recorded at 1x-2x...sometimes. Though the upside was DVD recorder drives for computers. My uncle worked in the TECH world so he was an early adopter of the drive, which cost a mere $1200 in 1998/99 for this cutting edge piece of hardware that burned blank DVD's at 1x speeds (which comes out to about 1.3 MB/s) meaning it took an hour to burn one disc. These discs in the begining cost $25-$30...each. In a generous estimate they only burned coasters about 50%, buthey, they're only $25 apeice or so, who cares!
Dual layer dvd-r's still cost $2 each if you happen to find them on sale, compared with the $9 sale price on a 50pk spool of memorex discs.
How about CD's? They came out in 82, in 85 CD players still could cost $800 or more, and when the recordable drives and media came out it was a similar situation to what would later happen with DVD's.
When HD-DVD and Blu-ray were both released, i was torn because i have spent countless hours burning hundreds upon thousands of DVD's over the years...so blu-ray was looking good with alll the chatter of 100 Gig double sided dual layer recordable discs, but i didn't want to have to migrate to another data medium or spend a bunch of money on a drive that would be obsolete in short order.
So after hearing all about how HD-DVD was going to be backwards compatible with existing DVD players..i was rooting for that. Triple the capacity of dual layer discs that work with the same drives annd players everyone already uses? Sounded to good to be true.
Big surprise...it was. What they meant was they would have one side of the disc in regular DVD format....and the other as HD-DVD. So still required purchasing another $700 or $800 player to watch something they could have fit on a double sided dual layer DVD format disc. HD-DVD sucked, it continues to suck, thats why it's dead, it was more encrypted then DVD 1.0.
Blu-ray has already worked up a 250gig disc that actually does work with the existing "Laser" in the movie players that are more expensive than anything....since the last format breakthrough.
As for how expensive Blu-ray players actually are now...they really aren't, i've seen several standalone players under $120, and many more in the $250 range. If you happen to be one of the many people who has a HTPC, the Blu-ray read only drives are under $100, the Burner's are around $300 or so last i saw. The blank media as someone already mentioned is around $5 a disc meaning that compared to DL-DVD+R's blu-ray costs about twice as much for 3-6 times the data capacity.
[citation][nom]Hanin33[/nom]that feature was actually part of the standard since early on, just never incorporated. price still determines how well this will do and how fast, if at all, it will be taken up and i don't believe it'll be fast. verbatim recently figured out a way to make the bluray blanks cheaper to make but it will prolly be months to years before we see anything from it. i'd like to know wot the percentage of ppl in the mainstream actually own a TV capable of taking advantage of HD movies at all at this time. i don't believe it's above 20%...[/citation]
Considering every single person I know has a TV in their house capable of at least 720p - and the fact that over 90% of TVs in the current market are HDTVs - I have a feeling you're way off with that 20%-or-less prediction.....
Considering every single person I know has a TV in their house capable of at least 720p - and the fact that over 90% of TVs in the current market are HDTVs - I have a feeling you're way off with that 20%-or-less prediction.....
For iPod users, sometimes they want to backup the music, video or pictures on iPod to computer. This makes iPod users headache for iTunes doesn't providing this feature at all. Tipard Studio releases a program that can backup their files on iPod to PC. Using Tipard iPod to PC Transfer you would never worry about the files losing problem. This iPod to PC Transfer help you copy songs and video from iPod to PC without losing anything. Tipard iPod to PC Transfer supports all the versions of iPod devices. So you can easily transfer music and video from iPod, iPod Classic, iPod Nano, iPod shuffle, iPod Touch, iPhone to PC. You could easily share your iPod music with your friends.
Key Features:
﹡Filter and quick search
The “Track Filter” function can help you to make your backup in a good order and to find your profile easily.
﹡Show you the version of your iPod player.
For the beginner of iPod you can know the generation and name of your iPod from Tipard iPod to Computer Transfer. And you can also know how many spaces have used and how many left in your iPod.
Key Features:
﹡Filter and quick search
The “Track Filter” function can help you to make your backup in a good order and to find your profile easily.
﹡Show you the version of your iPod player.
For the beginner of iPod you can know the generation and name of your iPod from Tipard iPod to Computer Transfer. And you can also know how many spaces have used and how many left in your iPod.
[citation][nom]maury73[/nom]Just one note... I live in EU, and EU copyright laws clearly states that anyone who puchases a legal copy of CD/DVD/BD and so on has the right to make one personal use LEGAL copy for backup purposes.So the problem it's simple: it's illegal in EU for any company/consortium/forum to prevent a legal user from making a personal use identical copy. Period.But those companies are too much powerful and have too much money to pay attention to laws...[/citation]
I think you are wrong. Just recently accepted law oficially prohibits copying protected stuff. That was the reason while cloneCD moved to US from EU.
I think you are wrong. Just recently accepted law oficially prohibits copying protected stuff. That was the reason while cloneCD moved to US from EU.
I agree with the previous comments... why would I make a backup copy if the blank disc to make a backup copy on costs almost exactly the same amount as an entire new movie? Blank disc at $20, or new movie for $25? And if existing players don't work with this technology, then you can forget it. If the disc breaks, then it was my fault and I probably should go ahead and buy a new one anyway to teach myself a lesson.
demonhorde665
Distinguished
- Jul 13, 2008
- 802
- 0
- 18,930
[citation][nom]maury73[/nom]Just one note... I live in EU, and EU copyright laws clearly states that anyone who puchases a legal copy of CD/DVD/BD and so on has the right to make one personal use LEGAL copy for backup purposes.So the problem it's simple: it's illegal in EU for any company/consortium/forum to prevent a legal user from making a personal use identical copy. Period.But those companies are too much powerful and have too much money to pay attention to laws...[/citation]
UShas had that kind of law for ages its under the Fair Use Act, the problem its there ARE NOT any laws saying that a company can't block copying attempts ( in US and the EU nations ) , so it is quite leagal for them block you from making your leagal personal use copy, all that law does is prevent them from sueing you for making a copy if the item is encrypted agaisnt copying.
UShas had that kind of law for ages its under the Fair Use Act, the problem its there ARE NOT any laws saying that a company can't block copying attempts ( in US and the EU nations ) , so it is quite leagal for them block you from making your leagal personal use copy, all that law does is prevent them from sueing you for making a copy if the item is encrypted agaisnt copying.
Huzzah, we'll be able to make a copy... but I bet PC users will still be screwed with the stupid PAP and all the other blu-ray compatibility garbage.
I wish they'd fix all the current issues with blu-ray compatibility before cramming more 'features' into the format.
I wish they'd fix all the current issues with blu-ray compatibility before cramming more 'features' into the format.
antilycus
Distinguished
- Jun 1, 2006
- 397
- 0
- 18,930
[citation][nom]maury73[/nom]Just one note... I live in EU, and EU copyright laws clearly states that anyone who puchases a legal copy of CD/DVD/BD and so on has the right to make one personal use LEGAL copy for backup purposes.So the problem it's simple: it's illegal in EU for any company/consortium/forum to prevent a legal user from making a personal use identical copy. Period.But those companies are too much powerful and have too much money to pay attention to laws...[/citation]
Who is going to hold Sony or any other company responsible? A law is pointless if there is no consequence. And without consequence nothing changes.
Who is going to hold Sony or any other company responsible? A law is pointless if there is no consequence. And without consequence nothing changes.
antilycus
Distinguished
- Jun 1, 2006
- 397
- 0
- 18,930
again, the ONLY reason that blu-ray won over HD-DVD is 1) Sony paid Universal to switch sides and 2) it had better copy protection then HD-DVD. There is SOOO much back side why BD-DVD is worse, but guess what, most people are too stupid or lazy to care. and for the record, the video read rate on HD-DVD and BD-DVD are the same. The audio track was a bit higher on the read cycle for BD-DVD, but considering everything that has to happen for BD-DVD to overtake DVD, its just noever going to happen. Ti costs over 1 billion USD to build a BD-DVD production plant. Guess how much it costs for an HD-DVD one... NOTHING. It uses the same as the CD/DVD plants... oh screw it, the human race is too stupid and too lazy...
iocedmyself
Distinguished
- Jul 28, 2006
- 9
- 0
- 18,510
Antilycus....How about you do a little research before spewing forth incorrect BS while calling the rest of the human race stupid
and lazy.
First off your claim of HD-DVD plants costing nothing to build as they use the same plants..sorry but no. You may be thinking of
3xDVDs which are identical to normal DVD's except they have three times the bandwidth of regular DVDs. For 1080p content you would
have to use a dual-layer DVD which would still only give about 85 minutes of video. I have an optirite DVD burner i got about 5
years ago that allowed me to burn 1.4gigs onto a regular 700mb CD-R because it used the DVD laser to record on the CD, it doesn't
make it the same as a DVD.
Blu-Ray and HD-DVD both used the same 405nm violet last....where as DVD's use a 650nm RED laser.
For the record, guess what the read rate on hd-dvd and blu-ray are not the same. In fact HD-DVD only had higher audio quality with
Dolby-Digital Plus...Blu-ray is considerably faster overall though, in fact thanks to wiki i can be specific
Raw data transfer on blu ray is 53.95 Mbits/s HD-DVD's is 36.55 Mbit/s
Audio+Video+Subtitles transfer for Blu-0ray is 48.0 Mbit/s HD-DVD's 30.24
Video transfer ALONE for blu-ray is 40 Mbit/s HD-DVD is 29.4 Mbit/s
lossy Audio codes
Dolby Digital Mandatory Blu-ray @ 640 kbit/s HD-DVD Mandatory @ 504 kbit/s
DTS Mandatory @ 1.5 Mbit/s both formats
Dolby Digital Plus[d] Optional Blu-ray @ 1.7 Mbit/s HD-DVD Mandatory @ 3.0 Mbit/s
DTS-HD High Resolution Optional Blu-ray @ 6.0 Mbit/s HD-DVD Optional @ 3.0 Mbit/s
Lossless audio codecs
Linear PCM Mandatory both formats
Dolby TrueHD Optional Blu-ray @ 18 Mbit/s HD-DVD Mandatory @ 18 Mbit/s
DTS-HD Master Audio Optional Blu-ray@ 24.5 Mbit/s HD-DVD Optional @ 18 Mbit/s
But hey, you can be right in your own mind, even if you arne't in anyone elses.
As for disc cost, 25Gig blu-ray discs are as i previously said between $2.50 and $3.20, the 50gig disks are still pricey at around
$10-$15 Similar to the price difference of what dvd-r's Vs. DL-DVD-rs were until very recently.
As found on Wikipedia..
According to Adams Media Research, high-definition software sales were slower in the first two years than standard DVD software
sales.[43] 16.3 million standard DVD software units were sold in the first two years (1997-1998) compared to 8.3 million high-
definition software units (2006-2007).[43][44] One reason given for this difference was the smaller marketplace (26.5 million HDTVs
in 2007 compared to 100 million SDTVs in 1998).
According to Singulus Technologies AG, Blu-ray is being adopted faster than the DVD format was at the same period of its
development. This conclusion was based on the fact that Singulus Technologies has received orders for 21 Blu-ray dual-layer
machines during the first quarter of 2008, while 17 DVD machines of this type were made in the same period in 1997.[48] According
to GfK Retail and Technology in the first week of November 2008 sales of Blu-ray recorders surpassed DVD recorders in Japan.[49]
According to the Digital Entertainment Group the total number of Blu-ray Disc playback devices (both set-top box and game console)
had reached 9.6 million by the end of 2008
HD DVD had a head start in the high definition video market as Blu-ray Disc sales were slow to gain market share. The first Blu-ray
Disc player was perceived as expensive and buggy, and there were few titles available.[33] This changed when PlayStation 3
launched, since every PS3 unit also functioned as a Blu-ray Disc player. At CES 2007 Warner proposed Total Hi Def which was a
hybrid disc containing Blu-ray on one side and HD DVD on the other but it was never released. By January 2007, Blu-ray discs had
outsold HD DVDs,[34] and during the first three quarters of 2007, BD outsold HD DVDs by about two to one. In a June 28, 2007 press
release Twentieth Century Fox cited Blu-ray Disc's adoption of the BD+ anti-copying system as a key factor in their decision to
support the Blu-ray Disc format.[35][36] In February 2008, Toshiba withdrew its support for the HD DVD format, leaving Blu-ray as
the victor
In January 2007, Hitachi showcased a 100 GB Blu-ray Disc, which consists of four layers containing 25 GB each.[94] Unlike TDK and
Panasonic's 100 GB discs, they claim this disc is readable on standard Blu-ray Disc drives that are currently in circulation, and
it is believed that a firmware update is the only requirement to make it readable to current players and drives.[95]
In December 2008, Pioneer Corporation unveiled a 400 GB Blu-ray Disc, which contains 16 data layers, 25 GB each, and will be
compatible with current players after a firmware update. A planned launch is in the 2009-2010 time frame for ROM and 2010-2013 for
rewritable discs. Ongoing development is under way to create a 1 TB Blu-ray Disc as soon as 2013.[96].
and lazy.
First off your claim of HD-DVD plants costing nothing to build as they use the same plants..sorry but no. You may be thinking of
3xDVDs which are identical to normal DVD's except they have three times the bandwidth of regular DVDs. For 1080p content you would
have to use a dual-layer DVD which would still only give about 85 minutes of video. I have an optirite DVD burner i got about 5
years ago that allowed me to burn 1.4gigs onto a regular 700mb CD-R because it used the DVD laser to record on the CD, it doesn't
make it the same as a DVD.
Blu-Ray and HD-DVD both used the same 405nm violet last....where as DVD's use a 650nm RED laser.
For the record, guess what the read rate on hd-dvd and blu-ray are not the same. In fact HD-DVD only had higher audio quality with
Dolby-Digital Plus...Blu-ray is considerably faster overall though, in fact thanks to wiki i can be specific
Raw data transfer on blu ray is 53.95 Mbits/s HD-DVD's is 36.55 Mbit/s
Audio+Video+Subtitles transfer for Blu-0ray is 48.0 Mbit/s HD-DVD's 30.24
Video transfer ALONE for blu-ray is 40 Mbit/s HD-DVD is 29.4 Mbit/s
lossy Audio codes
Dolby Digital Mandatory Blu-ray @ 640 kbit/s HD-DVD Mandatory @ 504 kbit/s
DTS Mandatory @ 1.5 Mbit/s both formats
Dolby Digital Plus[d] Optional Blu-ray @ 1.7 Mbit/s HD-DVD Mandatory @ 3.0 Mbit/s
DTS-HD High Resolution Optional Blu-ray @ 6.0 Mbit/s HD-DVD Optional @ 3.0 Mbit/s
Lossless audio codecs
Linear PCM Mandatory both formats
Dolby TrueHD Optional Blu-ray @ 18 Mbit/s HD-DVD Mandatory @ 18 Mbit/s
DTS-HD Master Audio Optional Blu-ray@ 24.5 Mbit/s HD-DVD Optional @ 18 Mbit/s
But hey, you can be right in your own mind, even if you arne't in anyone elses.
As for disc cost, 25Gig blu-ray discs are as i previously said between $2.50 and $3.20, the 50gig disks are still pricey at around
$10-$15 Similar to the price difference of what dvd-r's Vs. DL-DVD-rs were until very recently.
As found on Wikipedia..
According to Adams Media Research, high-definition software sales were slower in the first two years than standard DVD software
sales.[43] 16.3 million standard DVD software units were sold in the first two years (1997-1998) compared to 8.3 million high-
definition software units (2006-2007).[43][44] One reason given for this difference was the smaller marketplace (26.5 million HDTVs
in 2007 compared to 100 million SDTVs in 1998).
According to Singulus Technologies AG, Blu-ray is being adopted faster than the DVD format was at the same period of its
development. This conclusion was based on the fact that Singulus Technologies has received orders for 21 Blu-ray dual-layer
machines during the first quarter of 2008, while 17 DVD machines of this type were made in the same period in 1997.[48] According
to GfK Retail and Technology in the first week of November 2008 sales of Blu-ray recorders surpassed DVD recorders in Japan.[49]
According to the Digital Entertainment Group the total number of Blu-ray Disc playback devices (both set-top box and game console)
had reached 9.6 million by the end of 2008
HD DVD had a head start in the high definition video market as Blu-ray Disc sales were slow to gain market share. The first Blu-ray
Disc player was perceived as expensive and buggy, and there were few titles available.[33] This changed when PlayStation 3
launched, since every PS3 unit also functioned as a Blu-ray Disc player. At CES 2007 Warner proposed Total Hi Def which was a
hybrid disc containing Blu-ray on one side and HD DVD on the other but it was never released. By January 2007, Blu-ray discs had
outsold HD DVDs,[34] and during the first three quarters of 2007, BD outsold HD DVDs by about two to one. In a June 28, 2007 press
release Twentieth Century Fox cited Blu-ray Disc's adoption of the BD+ anti-copying system as a key factor in their decision to
support the Blu-ray Disc format.[35][36] In February 2008, Toshiba withdrew its support for the HD DVD format, leaving Blu-ray as
the victor
In January 2007, Hitachi showcased a 100 GB Blu-ray Disc, which consists of four layers containing 25 GB each.[94] Unlike TDK and
Panasonic's 100 GB discs, they claim this disc is readable on standard Blu-ray Disc drives that are currently in circulation, and
it is believed that a firmware update is the only requirement to make it readable to current players and drives.[95]
In December 2008, Pioneer Corporation unveiled a 400 GB Blu-ray Disc, which contains 16 data layers, 25 GB each, and will be
compatible with current players after a firmware update. A planned launch is in the 2009-2010 time frame for ROM and 2010-2013 for
rewritable discs. Ongoing development is under way to create a 1 TB Blu-ray Disc as soon as 2013.[96].
Who cares about this BS. Most new blu-ray disks are dual layer and a dual layer disk, just one, is $35. You can get software already to backup your Blu-Ray Disks. Checkout Fab5 or actually now its called Fab6. As far as I know you do have the LEAGAL right to back it up anyway. Not to mention they did not tell you that to by a Blank Blu-ray disk that is dual layer will cost more than buying another copy of the movie. Most new blu-ray disks are dual layer and a dual layer disk, just one, is $35.
hardwarekid9756
Distinguished
- Jul 15, 2008
- 28
- 0
- 18,580
If PS3 doesn't update their firmware to support it, absolutely not. And a huge market won't either. If they can get it to be just firmware, I'm sure it'll be worth it. Otherwise, I can think of plenty of other untraceable and less-than-legal methods to make it happen. Until it's push-button backup ready, I think i'm not in the minority either.
- Status
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
Question Does Tidal provide Audiobooks for uses?- Started by pinkiena
- Replies: 5
-
Question Phone stuck at boot screen logo after having 99% disk space usage
- Started by desbest
- Replies: 1
-
-
-
Question Looking for upgrade.msd for Samsung UE32D5700RSXZG (T-MST5DEUC)
- Started by Sebasstian
- Replies: 1
-
-
Question Best Wireless Earbuds for iPhone & Android – Expert Review- Started by anjelinaw3
- Replies: 4
Facebook
Twitter