I think you are wrong on this, the consumers never did decide between VHS and Betamax, it was the industry and the money behind, nothing else.

Greetings,
I know I am relitively new to this scene here, and I will admit I've skimmed through alot of this forum however I would like to add something if you don't mind.

VHS vs. Beta
There is alot of comparison between Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD to the VHS/Beta "wars" form back in the day. However this is truely a poor comparison model, as all examples of such a "war" fail to reconize the mainstream media prior to VHS/Beta.

Magnetic Media hit the mainstream during the late 60's early 70's like the CD/DVD did for for the late 80's and 90's, as prior technology for consumer based "home theatre" was vynl record players and projection reel to reel film. Magnetic Media gained popularity because of it's portability and the production of cheaper magnetic media made is practical -- as 8 track player began to appear in our cars and everywhere else at the time. Reel to Reel magnetic media was used for professional audio, video, and even used in the early computers of the time (replacing punch cards).

The idea really took hold of the audiophiles when they combined the portability and ease of an 8-track and the sophistication (and quality) of a reel to reel system in a comveniant audio cassette tape. This tape was far superior to the quality of the 8-track not to mention smaller, so it was easier to store, however while it could match or even produce better sound than a record (since the record was more sensitive to scratches caused by the needle) the record held it;s ground by improving it's own quality and the amount of media available to it. (People simply did not want to buy something twice, and because of it's age -- it posessed a strong sentamental value to it's users.)

It was only natural to improve off of the design of the cassette and do the same to video as it did to audio, as the video of the era was strongly large reel to reel projected film for the display and the audio produced by a second device largely by vynl record. The consumer was in love with the concept, as an easy to use video system for home theatre was a breath of fresh air.

Everyone wanted one, and because of it's popularity it created a big mess in the format struggles (as everyone has clearly pointed out). However film production quality improved just like the vynl record quality did, and the cassette tapes as popular as it was only managed to phase out the 8-track, not the vynl record. Theatres, schools, and other budget aware media users still held strong to film based video, as film could not only produce a better picture of the time -- but the cost to convert was unreachable to simply to add a level of convenance.

The introduction of the CD was thought to be the end of the record, as the media would simply not loose quality like the record, and could produce a much clearer quality sound. However the ironic principle behind that is the strong following of the vynl produced sound that still holds roots today, and you can still special order audio recording in vynl format as well as walk into most local electronics stores and buy a record player.

My point?
High Definition is only in high demand for the tech geeks and more commonly to the middle and upper class, who can afford to enjoy the techno toys that come out. While the popularity of HD format is surely growing, mainly because of those born in the 8-track Era that there children are now at comsumer age (you know the kids that tried to show there parents "how to program the VCR" (aka Settign the program schedule))? Well those kids know how and can appreciate audio and video beyond the RF input -- which is STILL the most popular consumber delivery method.

Conclusion?
DVD only became mainstream because of it's cheap delivery method. "VHS/Beta War" Era generation's aging VCR's means time for replacement, and the discovery that you can by a cheap DVD player for much less than a VCR has embraced the relitively recent mainstream conversion from VHS to DVD. Don't expect much these two rival formats -- as I fear it may come out more like the LaserDisc and it's rival format than the VHS/Beta War. LaserDisc was superior over it's rivil, but not by much, however because of the simple differences and the fact that it's existance relied completely on a specialized market of those who actually cared about audio/video quality.

Personally the Blu-Ray may prevail the same unless HD-DVD can promote it's product in very close range of the current DVD media, as most consumers are willing to spend a few extra dollars for the better, and should focus on competition with the existing media format than it's so called rival if it wants to survive. Otherwise Blu-Ray will dominate sales, but I seriously doubt it will ever phase out anything, becoming no more than a great "alternative" format. I beleive technology will phase both of them out long before it can become mainstream, the idea is just too early for it to replace anything. I'd say the Holo Discs have a greater chance here in the next 5 to 10 years maybe, but that is purely a guess.

Hello and thanks for all the info !
My question is about the expected lifespan of the new burned media



My question about the next genetation blank media is:
because "pits ans lands" going to be recorded in the Blu-Ray format
in a more tiny way on an disc of the same size of 12 cm
is there any information around about the expected longevity of burned BD-R ?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blue-Ray are already used for quite a time in the industry but protected by a cartridge
and I know that TDK is putting on the market BD-R discs with an extra
"DURABIS-2" hard coating in order to prevent scratches.
But they say only: « problems are "almost" eradicated »


Title: TDK’s DURABIS Coating Technology Makes Blu-ray a Reality
http://www.tdk-europe.presscentre.co...ess%20Releases
« Recording this amount of data on a disc physically the same size as a DVD requires unprecedented recording media stability and precision. Blu-ray recording uses a narrow track pitch and high recording density. This and the fact the recording layer on Blu-ray (0.2mm) and DVD (0.6mm) sits closer to the disc’s surface means that dirt, grime and scratches on the disc can cause more serious recording and playback problems than on a CD.
With DURABIS these problems are almost eradicated »

The manufacturers will tell you that it will last 100 years of course, as we already had before..............

The object of encryption isn't to make it impossible to copy the media for all time. The point is to make it so difficult to copy the media that the users decide it's not worth it. Based on the last few years, we seem to have reached the point with encryption that it's not worth it to break it.

Currently there are HDCP to SVGA converters for $400. Assuming the SVGA signal doesn't have ghosting and is good enough to justify copying it, you'll need a $1500 A/D converter, a $1500 PCI-X card, and at least $5000 in storage to have enough bandwidth to record it. Even if spatz-tech unlocked the digital output of the converter chip, you still need $6500 to do anything useful with it.

Unlike DVD, Blu-Ray disks will not be decodable in software. You'll need to buy graphics cards and laptops that decrypt and decompress the Blu-Ray transport streams in hardware and output an HDCP signal. Forget about screenshots. Video will be overlayed in the last step from a protected region of video RAM.

The actual AACS keys are kept under the tightest security even from the people working on the project. There are about 1 million people employed on the Blu-Ray project in some form. Software management and high level architecture is being done in USA. Software implementation, testing and hardware design is being done in India and Japan. JAVA interactivity is being done in England. Networking and convergence is being done by thousands more in Europe, Australia, Korea.

Of a million people, only a handful of people working on the AACS core in India actually have access to the AACS keys. You virtually have to get blown up by terrorists to get near that team.

Virtually no-one has access to an encrypted Blu-Ray disk. The Blu-Ray engineers have to work with a black box and with specially made test disks, vaguely worded documents, and nothing which demonstrates the encryption. Hardly anyone developing Blu-Ray even knows how the encryption works.

If there's a bug involving the video subsystem, they have to wait a month for the team with access to the AACS core to get to it. Blu-Ray is being developed in places straight out of Mission Impossible. Motion sensors, temperature sensors, shattering glass microphones, alarms that go off if the doors are open 20 seconds, guys with guns, everything wired but the toilet seats. It's all real.

Once burned into the ROM, the AACS keys will be blocked from downloading by features in the core that didn't exist in the DVD years. Even if everything went right, a kid somehow downloaded the keys from the ASIC, and we could decode the transport streams without HDCP and AACS, the Blu-Ray team has one ace in the hole.

Holographic storage is going to replace Blu-Ray in about 3 years. With 1 terabyte on a 5.25" disk, total incompatability with existing players, it's going to be a whole new world of encryption goodness. Holographic storage is going to have a lot of would-be Blu-Ray crackers saying "it's not worth it."

For 5 years now, we've been paying for encrypted WMA files, encrypted WMV movies, encrypted cable and satellite TV. There has never been a breach of these codecs like there was for DVD. There are no DVDShrink programs for WMV 9. No decryption utilities for Comcast or DirectTV. The #1 reason given by DRM haters is "It's not worth it."

Maybe it's because there isn't enough content in any single format to justify breaking it. Maybe it's because as soon as it's broken, a new format comes out. Maybe it's because programming computers isn't the path to riches it was in 1999. Whatever the reason, DRM has clearly come of age. It isn't being cracked the way it was.

A little off the subject but it relates... Look at all the wireless telephones out now. Does anyone KNOW what format they have with a particular carrier? People don't care. All they want to know is that it works when they want it to and that the cost isn't too high.

We started cellular with AMPS, or analog, and went to TDMA. Then they came out with CDMA. Europe was already using GSM. Now we have carriers like Sprint that use CDMA, and their new partner Nextel that is using TDMA for the phone portion, T-Moblie and Cingular are using GSM. And now we're hearing about UMTS or 3G. If you had any idea how much the carriers spend on upgrades you'd begin to wonder how they can make any money. The money will be spent where and when they decide it's needed.

If everyone would have joined together and worked together this wouldn't happen. But each group wants the recognition of having THIER format win. Have the manufacturers and engineers forgotten that it's US, the customer, that they are trying to win over?

"You can shear a sheep many times but you can only fleece him once."

Read the other posts for the design of Blu-Ray and that it was designed to last, as a format, longer than the 10 years they saying HD-DVD will be around.

Yeap, and do you know what is the boom factor to a new technology? Low prices and piracy!! Yeap that's right, piracy. DVD was only a success after it's protection was broken. Microsoft is the biggest company in the world because of windows copy's, if not, we would be using Linux that is for free! Windows piracy made it the mainstreem OS, so most software is made for windows, so company's have to buy windows making microsoft a great company.
HDDVD/Bluray has a lot disavantages to become a great success like dvd is. It implies replacing every hardware in our homes, Tv's, Pc's, Players, Amplifiers, and then after we spend a ton of money, we can't do what we want with this discs.
Look to SACD and DVD-Audio! Where are they? Aren't they HD Audio? Aren't they better than cd? So what appened? Why aren't we all using SACD/DVD-Audio? Why are we still with cd's and mp3? Same reason that we will stick with dvd's and let HDDVD/Bluray behind!

And this that KrisKhaos said is another reason. It's too soon, HDDVD/Bluray isn't yet on the market and there is already a sucessor for it!!! Holographic media................. Goodbye violet laser!!!!

In the mean time why don't we all enjoy what dvd5 and dvd9 has to offer, its been here for 5 years and yet some haven't even been exposed to it. Can ya say that most are still using VHS, CD for all their recording? thought the quality is not top notch but it serve it purpose causes its cheaper and convenient.

I am trying to compile a corporate list and keep on monitoring who tilts the balance. I have been reviewing on this site I came across iNods.com which searches for reviews online.

So far:

HD-DVD
Microsoft
Intel
HP
Universal
Warner Brothers
Paramount
NEC
SANYO

Blu-Ray
Sony
Phillips
Samsung
Panasonic
All major Studios including Tri-Star Columbia


LG is confusing me. Which side are they finally?

Hello and welcome,

all you have to do to answer your qestion is to read capter 1.3 from the Blu-ray FAQ or you simply look here.

I hope your question is answered

Thanks, I missed the list there...that was dumb of me..but then "irony of life - u miss the obvious".

By the way I don't know if the Blu-ray or for that matter HD DVD will get enough buffer time to catch on. Since I had come across articles on the Holographic Optical drives with a capacity of 300Gb and due commercial launch by next year.

I just saw and ad today at BB
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage....=1134699969167

Will write-once BD-R discs from TDK be a lot better
for long time archiving ?



While reading all what is published about the so called «format war» Blu-Ray vs HD-DVD,
among all the arguments about capacity, costs and copy protection for movies
I found far more interesting the following things about the sensitive material that is going to be used for recording in the new formats.
My surprise was that TDK says that they use 2 non-organic layers
for manufacturing their write once BD-R discs.
I don’t know if others companies that have already announced Blu-Ray discs (like Sony for example) are going to use a similar technique for their BD-R discs or not ?




Press release from TDK about manufacturing of their BD-R discs
published on January the 5th 2006:
http://www.tdk.com/tecpress/20060103_bdship_ces.html
Here is the interesting part about how the data are written and protected in the BD-R format:
Fig. 6 Recording process with write-once type BD-R media



[b]1. When the recording laser makes contact, its heat melts the Si and Cu alloy, which become mixed.

2. When the mixture cools, the hardened Si and Cu alloy become a composite, in which the recording mark is formed




---------------------------------------------------------
Comparison with HD DVD still using organic dye:
http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/News...x?NewsId=16533

Thanks for this thread. It's a good educational thread.

Dunno since when, but videohelp has a next gen section. blu ray and hd dvd

http://www.videohelp.com/dvdplayers

I have an idea on how to fix this whole debacle. It's an idea to replace the Bluray/HD-DVD issue and I think it could work. Let me elaborate:

I) There shall be two formats: ONE for video, ONE for data.
II) Hollywood video discs shall not be playable in a PC. The industry shall not build video disc PC drives.
III) Video discs and data discs will be large and equal in storage size to appease all.
IV) Video disc players shall all be burners and one (or two) DRM-enabled machine-locked copies of each master can be made and will not play in another player.
V) Copies of copies can NEVER be made in the video player. Copies can only be made from a master video disc.
VI) Data PC drives may burn video on a data disc. A data disc with video will be playable in a video disc player.
VII) Video discs or data discs with video may use the same video codec, and said codec will be new.
VIII) A master video disc can make a backup copy on any video disc player.
IX) Rental video discs may never be copied.
X) Both disc formats must have an extra scratch guard layer.

So there you have it. My "Ten Commandments" for next-gen disc formats that can actually work and keep everyone happy. How's that sound? Now the only flaw that I see is that casual copiers could lend their master video discs to friends and they could each make a copy for their player. Ok, I admit that flaw, but at least video copying for profit would be all but eliminated since those that make mass copies and sell them would need every customers video player to make the copies work. With DRM and data encryption, I think Hollywood would be happy with a proposal like this. Now that Sony has allowed Bluray PC drives to hit the market, and HD-DVD drives are soon rolling out, it's just going to be a repeat of DVD, but now worse since both are competing for two separate spaces, just wait and see!

Do you think anyone would follow your "ten c."??

Maybe not the technology companies, but I think it would appease both consumers and the MPAA.

As a side note, I think if all video players are also burners for making a backup copy, the original master should come with a blank disc and a place to put it in the jewel case.

Considering HTPC's are becoming a bigger market I doubt this will go well with them.