|
THE NEW BLUISH DVD
FORMAT BATTLE BEGINS
By George Margolin,
Editor
Editor@Netsurfernews.com
Before we get into the
DVD wars to come, let’s revisit what came before.
In the Beginning --
there was the battle of the VCRs
Sony was first with
its Beta format which provided great quality
BUT
Then came JVC with
its VHS format and longer playing time.
And although it didn’t
provide quite the same quality as Sony’s Beta, it gave
longer recording time, so a 2 hour TV movie could be
captured and played back on one tape..
So VHS won the hearts
and dollars of the viewing public. Thus BETTER quality,
failed and LONGER play time won!
More recently came the
battle of the DVD recording formats, with “Plus” and
“Minus” persuasions. (Actually the "Plus" and "Minus"
designations were brought on by the newer kid on the
block -- the "Plus" group to indicate their
"superiority" to the "Minus" group. Even though there
is not much serious difference between the two under
MOST usage circumstances. So here -- we will eliminate
the pejorative ”Minus” and refer to it from now on as
"Dash" to differentiate from the "other" (Plus) group,
And we’ll refer to it as "DASH-R AND DASH-RW" to lower
the decibel levels created by some of the Plus,
marketing folks).
The Dash (read “-“)
format was off the blocks first. And it worked quite
well with some limitations as an editing medium. And the
first re-writeable iterations "seemed" to require a
lengthy (as much as an hour) PRE-formatting before use
and the inability to record and erase randomly for
editing. This, however was actually a common
MIS-conception with DVD-RW. Pre-formatting is not
necessarily required as the media could be formatted on
the fly. But though this mis-conception was fodder for
the "Plus" group’s marketing cannons -- it made little
difference. Why? Because most users neither cared nor
would have been bothered, since about 90% of the
recordings are made using write ONCE media. And only
about 10% were using the re-writable formats, Write-once
(DVD-R) formats do NOT require formatting at all.
Thus these two opposing
camps and formats shared more positive similarities than
negative differences. But those Promotional talking
points, coupled with the fact that Dash could not be
universally played on ALL then current DVD home players
and because the first Dash recorders and media were only
designed to record at 1X (normal playback) speed, meant
a two hour show took two hours to record AFTER the
pre-formatting IF it were an RW disk. With a write-once
disk, which required NO pre-formatting -- the 1X
recording limitations were actually a function of the
limitations of the reading and writing technologies in
the beginning stages of this marvelous recording
technology.
But, these perceived
mechanical and media "limitations” left the door open
for a competitive “improved” approach designed to
eliminate these pioneering low cost optical device
characteristics.
Though some may
consider the "improved” approach of the "Plus" group
largely (but certainly not entirely) marketing hype, its
competitive introduction rapidly advanced the
capabilities and speed of BOTH systems. The Plus method
for DVD recording and playback system was pioneered by
Philips, Ricoh, HP, Thompson, and other “heavy hitters”,
while Sony supported Dash systems in many of their
consumer devices.
It pays to remember that
"DASH" had a strong early start and worked very well for
its time. But the "Plus" camp claimed to permit
playability on a slightly larger percentage of the older
(let’s call them “legacy) TV-top players and the fact
that its recording hardware and media speed started out
at 2.4 times faster than that of the original 1X Dash
recorders.
In addition, the +RW
re-writeable disks, required only a few minutes
pre-recording set-up time. So its more than two times
recording speed advantage and quick start helped it get
off the ground despite the fact that the “Dash” units
had a few years marketing advantage.
And though it seemed
that the Plus group was the first to provide faster than
1X recording speeds, when they first arrived on the
market, it must be noted that Pioneer had already
introduced their 2X DVR-A03 recorder and media in 2001
-- BEFORE the +RW machines shipped from Philips, HP,
Ricoh and Thompson.
And while the Plus
system used a similar physical sized disk, it provided a
new type of precise positioning indicators throughout
the disk, which they felt permitted much more latitude
in writing and editing, whether video or computer data.
It consisted of a High frequency “Wobble Grove,” while
the Dash formats use a “land prepit” scheme permitting
BOTH formats to have a similar, if not exactly the same
degree of address precision.
And while the
RE-writable Dash disk had to be completely erased before
RE-writing, the Plus disks could be RE-written without
wasting reformatting time and losing all the material on
it. To be fair, the Dash Re-writeable disk can be
"quick formatted' in about two minutes -- but that
destroyed all the information on it.
Please note that the
following numbers and percentages are arguable and were
provided by the participants and competitors in each
side.
The “Dash” side claimed
compatibility with about 80% of the legacy players and
the “Plus” folks claimed that “Dash” was playable on
only about 70%. The Plus folks also claimed that “Plus”
disks were compatible with “up to "90%" of the existing
DVD players. But, it was and is a matter of testing on
your own equipment to see if it works with one or the
other, because sometimes the Dash disks were readable
where the Plus disks were not and vice versa. And, both
the Dash and the Plus sides claimed a slight edge in
compatibility.
COMPETITION PUT THE
MARKET IN OVERDRIVE
After the initial
introduction of the “Plus” format," things changed --
FAST! The “Dash” group advertised their highest
recording speed 2X, then boosted it to 4X and more.
While the “Plus” group upped theirs faster than 16X as
we write this, while still retaining the ability to
selectively RE-write their re-writeable disk line.
Fortunately this is all
in the history books. Compatibility ratios depend a
great deal on how one defines “compatibility”— does this
mean ability to spin up, or does it mean play through an
entire disc without any hiccups? The good news is it
doesn’t matter much because almost every player shipped
for the past couple of years onward will play either
camp’s discs equally well.
But while both camps
were beating each other to death and dividing the market
-- -
Sony rocketed out with a
DUAL format DVD burner, forever changing the landscape.
SONY -- always
perceived as a premier manufacturer, COMBINED the two
standards into ONE burner, obliterating much of the
competition. At that point users could buy whichever
type of disc they wanted, or which were the most
compatible with their DVD players, or which were
cheaper! So the consumers won because Sony’s clever
move forced ALL DVD Burner manufactures to offer Dual
format systems.
With trivial differences
in the price of the single or dual format machines, who,
in his or her right mind would buy the single medium
machine? Apparently NO ONE! SO DUAL RULES!
But the story and the
competition continues ---- DOUBLE LAYER DEBUTED -- WITH
ITS DOUBLE YOUR PLEASURE -- DOUBLE YOUR DATA STORAGE
Philips, a particularly
competent and innovative large company, combined the
“DOUBLE LAYER” technology used in manufacturing the kind
of play-only disks made for marketing of motion
pictures, with their writeable and re-writeable players.
They and their very high class consortium of giant
companies (including Sony, HP, Ricoh, Thompson and more)
-- created a line of Double Layer burnable and
Re-Writeable disks that were Planned to be readable on
virtually all current home DVD players..
In other words, they
designed within the capabilities of the now-selling home
players to virtually DOUBLE the capacity of burnable DVD
disks. This means that they could now record about 8.5
GB on a single sided disk, although this media, selling
at more than three times the price of a single layer
disk.
As the late night TV
Commercials say: “But that’s not all!” These new
burners played and burned virtually ALL the current disk
types and at the latest speeds! They are virtually all
able to write CD-Rs, CD-RWs, DVD Plus and Dash Rs AND
Plus and Dash RWs.
Even better for
consumers, if not manufacturers, the prices of these
devices have PLUMMETED! With ads this week, for Double
Layer machines from Sony, Toshiba and the excellent ones
from Pioneer and Plextor, at the highest current speeds,
are selling close (above/below) $50. Who could resist?
Not I!
NOW IT’S THE ATTACK OF
THE KILLER BLUE LASER DISCS
The big bad Blue Lasers
have now attacked the winners of the DVD battles.
Another War of the
Recorder Worlds has already begun, even before the dead
bodies of the Plus vs. Dash -- combined with Double
Layer soldiers, are dragged from the battle field of
Optical Storage. But this war is not being fought with
flying disk shaped UFOs, but with real optical storage
discs for your own computers and set-top DVD players.
Once again there are TWO
flavors of technology ready to duke it out in the market
place. Their opening salvos have already been shot
across the bows of the movie studios that will NEED the
kind of storage density that either or both camps can
provide in the short term -- for the burgeoning HUGE
market for MONSTER screen HD TVs and the HD players
needed to store and play the new class of videos –
already being delivered – at no increase in cost – by
Netflix.
(Keep “short term” in
mind.) It is clearly a replay of the Sony Beta vs. JVC
VHS format wars. And this time the two sides are named:
Blu-Ray (also called BD) vs. HD-DVD.
There are great
similarities and some serious, serious, differences.
Note the two “seriouses.” Between the "Blu-Ray (BD) and
"HD DVD discs."
First off -- They BOTH
use burning and playing technologies that (more or less)
EXIST TODAY, but with different takes on disc
construction and burner production and manufacture.
Second -- Both use
blue/violet lasers of 405 Nm (nanometer) wavelength.
This, alone, permits AT LEAST 2.6 times the data density
over a current DVD’s RED laser of 620 Nm. But there
are further differences explained below.
The numbers indicate
smaller wavelength, which equals closer packing of
smaller data dots (bits), which translates into an
INSTANT advantage in data storage of video or other
information.
Third -- They are BOTH
capable of recording a full length HDTV film in
exquisite quality, plus many of the “normal” add-ons of
DVD merchandising, like commentaries and
behind-the-scene looks, multiple languages and camera
angles and more.
Fourth -- They would
BOTH greatly improve the optical disk capabilities for
computer data as well. BUT -------
THE DIFFERENT BLUE
DEVILS ARE IN THE DETAILS
Their differences result
from their two approaches to technology. The HD DVD
school -- wants to build burners and discs that they can
reproduce by the millions using only slightly modified current
disc stamping equipment, even if this means that they
can’t produce the same capacity or bit rate as Blu-Ray
discs.
This
also means that the DVD PIRATES will be able to continue
their piracy without having to shift (BUY$$$) costly,
new equipment. Good for the thieves but bad for the
studio originators who spend millions PRODUCING, not
COPYING original work.
STORAGE – SIZE DOES
COUNT -- BIGGER IS BETTER
At this point HD DVD’s
maximum storage is 15 GB on a single layer disc and
about 30 GB on a double layer disc.
But the Blu-Ray folks
have already advanced to the next stage of
optical recording technology. This provides much
greater storage -- 25 GB on a single layer disc and 50
GB on a double layer disc, meaning that they’re STARTING
OUT with a full 40% greater storage than HD DVD. It
also means that they bypassed the older, perhaps
obsolete, technology of their HD DVD competitors.
Remember? I commented
earlier about “short term?” Well, here it is. The HD
DVD approach may “work” for “now,” but it can hardly be
expected to be adequate in the very near future. (Next
month maybe?)
Also, even though the
fight for deliverables has hardly begun, the Bu-Ray camp
can already provide 166% more bang for the buck related
to Replicated discs (the kind we buy in the store). And
even when the HD-DVD side is doing double layer
recording -- this means an approximate additional 166%
advantage of the Blu-Ray discs for recording.
WHICH BLUE FLAVOR TO
CHOOSE -- WHICH WILL WIN?
So I ask the question
-- If someone were to offer you a choice between two
diamonds of equal beauty, quality and brilliance, with
one being a full 166% LARGER, for the same price, which
one would you pick? (No coaching from the audience,
please.)
Or, because I often have
need to drive a truck or a van, if someone offered to
sell me a truck that carried more than half again as
much as another truck -- at the same price and if this
stronger, higher capacity truck were the same physical
size and weight, got better gas mileage AND WENT FASTER
-- would I need to be Einstein, to figure out which to
choose? I think not!!
CONCLUSION:
While it is clear that,
compared to current red laser DVDS, Blu-Ray and HD DVD
are both desirable choices for our entertainment and
data storage -- doesn’t it seem strange that one is
already an advanced technology and the other is, at the
moment, not even state of the art?
And while HD DVD may
have enough recording density for many, if not most, of
today’s HD Video titles, it is clearly NOT the
right choice for our growing archival computer data
needs.
Please look at the
following simple chart:
I have two to four 250
GB drives on each of the two main computers on my desk,
so let’s see just how many of which medium I need to
back up ALL the information on just ONE of my 250 GB
drives:
250 GB 1.4 MB
Floppy 178,571 Floppies
250 GB 700 MB
CD 357 CDs
250 GB 4.7 GB
DVD 53.2 DVDs
250 GB 8.5 DL
DVD 29.4 DBL DVDs
250 GB 15 GB
HD DVD 16.7 HD-DVDs
250 GB 25 GB
Blu-Ray 10 Blu-Rays
250 GB 30 GB
DL HD-DVD 8.3 DBL HD-DVDs)
250 GB 50 GB
DL Blu-Ray 5 DBL Blu-Rays
Copyright(c) 2011 NetSurferNews. All rights reserved.
|
