@MikeB

Death of Bluray. GE puts 100 DVD on 1 disc

Ex-Microsoft employees to rescue the PS3

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote: @MikeB Death of Bluray. GE puts 100 DVD on 1 disc Ex-Microsoft employees to rescue the PS3

Interesting:
Quote:

When Blu-ray was introduced in late 2006, a 25-gigabyte disc cost nearly $1 a gigabyte, though it is about half that now.

Seems to me that there is more profit to be made on DVD than on BluRay... Just another SONY DISadvantage...

@Lou

In 2007 it was $0.052 per GB for a Blu-Ray disc (at 25K SL replication, even less for higher production runs and/or DL). The article is misleading you, probably they are referring to home recording per disc and even then they are exaggerating as a rewriteable would be cheaper than that, not to mention a 10 pack with write once discs.

@ BrianK

Wasn't HD DVD already going to kill Blu-Ray and then the internet? Why a disc format which may hit the market a few years from now? Can you provide some line-up info on movies and games which will be distributed on this format?

@MikeB

Quote:

Wasn't HD DVD already going to kill Blu-Ray and then the internet? Why a disc format which may hit the market a few years from now? Can you provide some line-up info on movies and games which will be distributed on this format?

Ok Mike, you obviously object to BrianK saying "Death of Bluray" when he presented the link to this article. I'm sure you read the article and it clearly says:

Quote:

G.E. will first focus on selling the technology to commercial markets like movie studios, television networks, medical researchers and hospitals for holding data-intensive images like Hollywood films and brain scans. But selling to the broader corporate and consumer market is the larger goal.

So obviously there is no line-up of movies or games on this experimental, not finalized far from end-consumer ready format. Now Briank could have said "possible killer of Bluray" etc. That would be a fairer and more genuine way to put it. And I'd agree that that would have been a better way to put it in the interest of fair-play. But countering with ridiculous statements is not going to help here. If you want to "beat" BrianK take the high road and simply state the obvious is my advice.

And what craziness is this about HD DVD killing the (usage?, need?, existence?) of the internet? Do you have a source of where BrianK said HD DVD was going to render the internet as we know it unnecessary?

Quote:

In 2007 it was $0.052 per GB for a Blu-Ray disc (at 25K SL replication, even less for higher production runs and/or DL). The article is misleading you, probably they are referring to home recording per disc and even then they are exaggerating as a rewriteable would be cheaper than that, not to mention a 10 pack with write once discs.

The quote from the article that Lou mentioned clearly states 2006. Countering with some kind of price from 2007 is meaningless. "Probably they are referring to"? If you want to correct someone how about some substance. Stick to 2006. Thats the claim in the article. Provide sources that show you are right about 2006, again forget 2007. Or show data with projections that Blu-ray will be cheaper than 10 cents per gigabyte by 2011 or 2012 when this new format *might* *maybe* be around. Instead of giving us your idea of "probably" what the author meant, write the author for clarification and share his response if you think the author is misleading people:

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/l/steve_lohr/index.html?inline=nyt-per

Last edited by fairlanefastback on 29-Apr-2009 at 04:19 PM.
Last edited by fairlanefastback on 29-Apr-2009 at 04:16 PM.

_________________
Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0
Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS)
EFIKA owner
Amiga 1200

@MikeB

Quote:

MikeB wrote: @Lou In 2007 it was $0.052 per GB for a Blu-Ray disc (at 25K SL replication, even less for higher production runs and/or DL). The article is misleading you, probably they are referring to home recording per disc and even then they are exaggerating as a rewriteable would be cheaper than that, not to mention a 10 pack with write once discs.

That's still ~$13 for a (25GB) PS3 game vs. ~$1-$4 for a 360 multi-disc release that comes right off the top of the publisher...of a $60 game.

With 360's now supporting HD installs, who cares how many discs it comes on? It's still bad news for Sony and companies who publish PS3 games vs. 360 games...

Now let's look at movies...
A few years ago, I refused to pay more than $20 for a brand new release on DVD. As HD is the new standard, the costs associated with being the standard should also fall in line (with HD-DVD they would be). I refuse to pay $35+ for a new "video" that I wish to own. That's just one more reason why I haven't upgraded to BluRay yet.

@fairlanefastback

Quote:

But countering with ridiculous statements is not going to help here.

In your opinion maybe, but in my opinion asking ridiculous questions may provide some food for thought.

Quote:

And what craziness is this about HD DVD killing the (usage?, need?, existence?) of the internet?

I see how this was worded poorly by me. I meant HD DVD killing Blu-Ray and after HD DVD died, streaming would kill Blu-Ray.

I think it's all just FUD,

Quote:

The quote from the article that Lou mentioned clearly states 2006.

"When Blu-ray was introduced in late 2006, a 25-gigabyte disc cost nearly $1 a gigabyte, though it is about half that now." (from the 2009 article)

Since when is well cheaper than $0.052 per gigabyte now (compared to 2007) half of $1.000 dollar per gigabyte?

You claim I make ridiculous comments, but seriously reread your own comments.

Last edited by MikeB on 29-Apr-2009 at 08:48 PM.

@Lou

Quote:

~$13 for a (25GB) PS3 game vs. ~$1-$4 for a 360 multi-disc

No, replication costs for both media are way way way cheaper. So much so that these costs aren't really that relevant at all.

Last edited by MikeB on 29-Apr-2009 at 08:47 PM.

@MikeB

Quote:

In your opinion maybe, but in my opinion asking ridiculous questions may provide some food for thought.

Fine Mike. To me escalation of the ridiculous statements is not going to help keep this thread meaningful. BrianK can easily turn around and say the same, that his statement was "food for thought" for the longterm future of media disc formats, including Blu-ray.

Quote:

streaming would kill Blu-Ray.

Well you don't have a crystal ball. I certainly prefer internet movie rentals via Itunes to Blu-ray ownership for almost all titles. You don't have a time machine, just like everybody else.

Quote:

I think it's all just FUD

But Mike, the HD-DVD vs Blu-ray battle was long fought and not easily won by Sony. Certainly people could have had an honest opinion during that time that HD-DVD was going to be the victor. It hardly would have been spreading FUD to say thats how one saw it.

Quote:

"When Blu-ray was introduced in late 2006, a 25-gigabyte disc cost nearly $1 a gigabyte, though it is about half that now." (from the 2009 article) Since when is well cheaper than $0.052 per gigabyte now (compared to 2007) half of $1.000 dollar per gigabyte? You claim I make ridiculous comments, but seriously reread your own comments.

I said it nicely to you before and I'll say it again. Please check with the source then. He provides his email address, he is not hiding anywhere. YOU decided the numbers should be based on "25K SL replication, even less for higher production runs and/or DL". The article does not say under what conditions those prices existed at that it quotes. You don't get to decide, because you want to show a cheaper cost what conditions the writer needs to be referring to. He did not specify the conditions of the order(s?) that made him think that was a valid price to say.

If the author's numbers are based on a different order size and/or other conditions its not fair to compare it to this page that I am guessing you paraphrase from:

http://wesleytech.com/blu-ray-vs-hd-dvd-replication-costs-revealed/111/

And BTW this page, is it valid for sure? Do you have a second source for validation? Are you sure it has no typos? Are you sure this other author's "confidential industry source" was correct?

If anyone is spreading FUD, it appears it would be you. Again you try to work the numbers. You don't like whats quoted, so you go out looking for something to dispute it to make it a more favorable picture for Sony. Whatever you find out there on the internet will do. Who cares if its not sure that apples to apples right? Its about seeming reasonable at first glance but not really being. If it were really about the truth, you'd find out the conditions under which the NY Times got its numbers before doing just what was convenient to shoot them down just to make Sony look better.

Last edited by fairlanefastback on 29-Apr-2009 at 11:26 PM.
Last edited by fairlanefastback on 29-Apr-2009 at 11:25 PM.
Last edited by fairlanefastback on 29-Apr-2009 at 11:24 PM.
Last edited by fairlanefastback on 29-Apr-2009 at 11:10 PM.
Last edited by fairlanefastback on 29-Apr-2009 at 11:08 PM.

_________________
Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0
Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS)
EFIKA owner
Amiga 1200

@MikeB

Quote:

Wasn't HD DVD already going to kill Blu-Ray and then the internet? Why a disc format which may hit the market a few years from now? Can you provide some line-up info on movies and games which will be distributed on this format?

HD DVD clearly was the better format on Day 1. HD DVD had better movie quality. Blu-Ray after what 1/2 year decided to upgrade from Mpeg2 to the superior VC-1. HD DVD had better interactivity with HDi. HD DVD needed less processing power compared to BDjava. HD DVD was lower cost to manufacture and lower cost to render. HD DVD was lower cost to license. Day 1 on the market HD DVD was superior. Blu-Ray had a larger disc size. HD DVD won the technical battle. Blu-Ray won the war for the studioes backing and not due to technical reasons. I know you love Sony but even you must admit they pulled a Microsoft cornering the market here.

Internet still poses a strong threat to Blu-Ray. In fact many players see this and are now internet streaming capable and Blu-Ray capable. Streaming appears to be growing at a faster clip.

The other thing you can't deny is Moore's Law. Internet bandwidth is tracking Moore's law. If it continues HD streaming to homes is but a couple of years away. It's available now in small markets. Blu-Ray will stay the size it is. CD to DVD and DVD to Blu-Ray look at how it underperformed compared to Moore's Law. Technology moves. I still see Blu-Ray as the last hurrah of a physical format.

So as for your FUD claim that's just bullocks. Media changes -- cyclinders to 45s to 33s to reels to 8 tracks to cassettes to CDs to ONLINE. Movies are not going to be any different... Beta to VHS to DVD to Blu-Ray to....ONLINE. Blu-Ray will end it's an item to carry content. Content is bits. Bits should stay bits because atoms are really expensive, polluting, and a hassel.

I think pushing a new format that holds 100 DVDs might be a hard sell to the movie home market. Certainly having all 20 seasons of the Simpson on 1 'DVD' will be nice for some people. Instead I see this as a storage medium.

Last edited by BrianK on 30-Apr-2009 at 04:01 AM.
Last edited by BrianK on 30-Apr-2009 at 03:57 AM.

@BrianK

Quote:

Internet bandwidth is tracking Moore's law.

Not true, Moore law discribes exponential gains. That's not the case:

"Broadband Access Improves, but US Still Lags Behind

In the race to increase broadband Internet access, the United States continues to make gains; but compared to many other Western countries, the U. S. is beginning to lag behind. The Lichtman Research Group recently published a report demonstrating that the rate of broadband Internet expansion has slowed considerably in 2008, compared to the levels of growth over the last seven years.

broadbandIn fact, the report said that growth was slower in the second quarter of 2008 than in any quarter since the group began keeping track of broadband expansion seven years ago. Cable companies in the US are still managing to expand broadband access at a reasonable rate; but rural area broadband access has slowed significantly this year, creating the possibility of an “information gap” between Americans who live in urban areas, and those who live in the countryside.

Even more bad news for the expansion of high-speed Internet in the US comes from the Communications Workers of America (CWA). The CWA recently sponsored a study which suggests that the U. S. is falling behind other nations regarding the speed of our broadband Internet access.

This CWA tested over a quarter of a million broadband connections throughout the US. The results were somewhat shocking: broadband speeds averaged just 2.3Mbps in the U. S., placing us well behind most other industrialized nations.

Japan for example, has an average broadband download speed of 63Mbps, or nearly 30 times that of the US. South Korea isn’t far behind with average speeds of 49Mbps. Most European nations also had 7 to 10 times America’s average broadband speed, with countries like France averaging 17Mbps.

Back in the U. S., Rhode Island is the state with the fastest average broadband access, coming in at only 6.8Mbps. On the low end of the scale, Alaska came in 50th with a meager 0.8Mbps average broadband speed. The speed of Internet access is important for many reasons, but as Larry Cohen, president of the Communications Workers of America notes, “speed matters to our economy and our ability to remain competitive in a global marketplace.”

Cohen also pointed out that the US is the only Western nation lacking a high-speed Internet access policy at the federal level. Many experts believe this lack of a centralized vision for high speed Internet access is to blame for the dismal average access speeds in the US. Countries like Japan, Korea, Norway, France and Germany all have a national policy with the goal of providing high-speed Internet access for all citizens.

In order to better compete with our European and Asian allies, the US would be wise to adopt a similar high-speed Internet policy at the federal level. And the time to do it is now — Japan’s average Internet speed is increasing by 20% annually."

http://www.romow.com/internet-blog/broadband-access-improves-but-us-still-lags-behind/

BTW Blu-Ray is performing fine for Japan with its fast broadband internet compared to the US:

December 2008: "GfK pointed to falling prices for the "rapid growth" of Blu-ray in Japan. "GfK Retail and Technology estimates that the price will continue to be reduced in the build-up to Christmas and the product may become 'one-to-watch' during the winter sales," the firm said.

Furthermore, GfK has indicated that the transition from DVD to Blu-ray is happening much faster than the previous transition from VHS to DVD."

Last edited by MikeB on 30-Apr-2009 at 08:32 AM.
Last edited by MikeB on 30-Apr-2009 at 08:05 AM.

@fairlanefastback

Quote:

But Mike, the HD-DVD vs Blu-ray battle was long fought and not easily won by Sony.

Compared to what?

This format war lasted for less than 2 years, it was a very short lived war compared to the VHS vs Betamax vs Video 2000 format war which lasted well over a decade.

@BrianK

Quote:

HD DVD clearly was the better format on Day 1

Not at all, there may have been codec differences early on, but both formats supported the same codecs very early on.

Technology wise it was easy to see Blu-Ray is better, allowing higher bitrates using the same codecs (higher transfer rate and more storage capacity). Also less prone to disc scratching.

The only thing HD DVD had going for it was early pricing (not surprising considering lower specs). Blu-Ray players provided better loading times, eject times, Java, etc.

Crucial was that Blu-Ray since day one had a far wider industry support, both from consumer electronics companies and movie makers.

@BrianK and @MikeB

Since we know the results, Blu-Ray vs DVD-HD is almost a sleeper...

Last edited by Hammer on 30-Apr-2009 at 11:53 AM.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3A+/Emu68)

@Lou

...hmmm... seems I missed a zero in my original read...

@MikeB

Quote:

Not true, Moore law discribes exponential gains. That's not the case: "Broadband Access Improves, but US Still Lags Behind

I'd agree that bandwidth doesn't exactly follow Moore's law. In many other countries it's actually exceeded the prediction of Moore's law.

EDIT: Moore's law is characterized by a doubling every 2 years.

Modems -- 1996 was V.34 and 14,400 baud (14 kpbs). Moore's law says this should grow 64 fold by 2008. 64x15=960kpbs. Homes in the USA do have 6-8Mbps. So clearly this is out stripping Moore's law. Europe this is outstripping Moore's law even faster.

DVD -- 1995 was 4.7GB. Moore's law says this should grow 64 fold by 2007. That's 300GB in 2007. Yet in 2006 we saw only a 25GB medium (Blu_Ray) come to the fold.

Certainly Blu has some larger formats in the future. The newer and larger 100 DVD on a single disc format is 470GB. So if that was to launch today it's still under the 600GB we'd predict if Moore's law was in force with media.

BTW 6Mbps is fast enough to send 1080p content. One needs about 2Mbps. No need for Blu_Ray.

Last edited by BrianK on 30-Apr-2009 at 02:31 PM.

@MikeB

Quote:

Broadband Access Improves, but US Still Lags Behind

Mike, BrianK did not say its tracking Moore's Law in the U.S. specifically when he first mentioned Moore's law. As long as its tracking the law via someplace on earth his statement was fair on its face. If you want to disprove it fine, just do so fairly.

EDIT: updated grammar used

Last edited by fairlanefastback on 30-Apr-2009 at 03:25 PM.
Last edited by fairlanefastback on 30-Apr-2009 at 03:24 PM.
Last edited by fairlanefastback on 30-Apr-2009 at 01:50 PM.

_________________
Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0
Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS)
EFIKA owner
Amiga 1200

@MikeB

Quote:

MikeB wrote: @fairlanefastback Quote: But Mike, the HD-DVD vs Blu-ray battle was long fought and not easily won by Sony. Compared to what? This format war lasted for less than 2 years, it was a very short lived war compared to the VHS vs Betamax vs Video 2000 format war which lasted well over a decade.

I was not comparing its length to anything. There you go trying to shift to something else when you clearly were talking junk on your original point. You said people were spreading FUD if they predicted an HD-DVD victory back then. The HD-DVD/Blu-Ray war was long in my view, certainly long enough that it hurt its adoption by the general public.

_________________
Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0
Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS)
EFIKA owner
Amiga 1200

@fairlanefastback

Where does it track Moore's Law?

@fairlanefastback

In Japan there never was a serious format war. As globablly adoption is taking place at a similar rate as was the case for DVD, I don't think HD DVD had that much effect from the grand perspective.

You seem a bit upset? Why?

@MikeB

Quote:

MikeB wrote: @fairlanefastback Where does it track Moore's Law?

Lets review the sequence of events.

BrianK says internet bandwidth improvements are tracking Moore's law.

You want to counter that, so you hit Google. You find an article speaking about the U.S. not improving in bandwidth as fast as some other nations. You use this to promote the idea that the U.S. improvements are not tracking Moore's law. But you don't show any evidence, at its slower rate or not that it does not track Moore's law.

Its a blatant troll given your history as you make no actual point, but throw something that sounds like its related to cloud the discussion at hand. Even if the US is not tracking Moore's law BrianK did not specify the U.S. in his original statement.

Beyond that BrianK then posts a plausible argument that even in the U.S. it is tracking Moore's law. But you ignore that and instead say to me "Where does it track Moore's Law?"

Stop playing games Mike. You used to be a mod here. Its disappointing to see you have no apparent interest in honest communication on this board.

Last edited by fairlanefastback on 30-Apr-2009 at 07:20 PM.

_________________
Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0
Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS)
EFIKA owner
Amiga 1200