TDK begins production of BD-R / BD-RE (BD-RW) discs

Just in case you were curious to see what you'll have spindles of probably by this time next year, TDK's officially started production of single and dual-layer single sided BD-Rs and BD-REs (which is just their nomenclature for "BD-RWs"). They're apparently apt to hyping Durabis, the anti-scratch / smudge / dust coating on Blu-ray discs (even though Durabis is standard for Blu-ray media), but no word on cost per disc. Just don't be surprised when it's, um, a lot — you know the price we all pay for being an early adopter. Remember how much CD-Rs used to cost?

[Via Akihabara News]

[Rotax @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

How long will it take to burn a 50 gig disc ? Imagine the system anomalies that could occur to help you make an expensive coaster...

[Connor @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

Those discs hace more memory capacity than my laptop. Could somebody please find a way to make a 200GB 1" drive affordable? Dammit.

[Brian @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

With Blu-Ray versus HD-DVD and all the confusion that's going to cause, the last thing we need is to replace RW with another acronym.

[hmurchison @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

When are these people going to start announcing pricing? I can give a rip about them producing BD-RE discs if they're $29.95.

Neither format has been open about pricing or availability. Frankly many of us are tired of the incessant Press Release coming from both camps.

SHIP SOMETHING.

[British @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

I predict 5 years from now optical drives specced on new computers will have no less than 20 acronyms listed after the speed.

[hafa @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

yep all these next trend thingys.

i kind of hope the future will move toward 8-cm storage device. now some digicam had already apply it. but so far just some cds, dvdrs, rws, or dvdroms. normal around 1.4GB, max 2.8GB for a little thing like that. Could technology bring in higher density, or multiple layers (such as hddvd/blueray)into these little 8cm cds, medias would be more portable, and definitely cost less to produce.

[Hiero @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

seems a little underwelcoming after news the other week about 300gb halo disks by maxell next year

[zombieflanders @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

#7: Well, yeah, if you've got $10k+ to spend on a burner and an extra Franklin for each disc. Holographic storage is still a couple years away in terms of consumer-level prices and reliability.

[The White Fedora @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

forget optical drives and go with flash drives. companies can sell products through bittorrent and the broadband companies can hook up more T1 lines.

[Richard @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

Brian:

I'm pretty sure RE (Recordable-Eraseable) was chosen for ease of pronunciation. I've pointed it out before, but I'd much rather Blu-Ray win just for the 5 syllables saved by BD-RE over HD-DVD-RW.

[Corey @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

A couple of nights ago, I went on eBay on the hunt for BD... The recorder cost about $4,000 and the disc are $100-300. Early adopters burn in the ring of fire.

[Andrew @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

I was instantly teleported back to the first time I was talking about DVD-R with a friend. It around early spring of 2001 and Pioneer was about to released their 3rd generation drive at ~$1,000 (A bargin since Gen-1 had been $10k and Gen-2 had been $5k). The discs were $25-$30 each.

At the time, my friend was seriously thinking about buying one. But I was pointing to how quickly the CD-R world had dropped in price and predicted the same result; saying something about the drive being $200 and discs being $10 within a few years.

Almost five years later, a Dual Layer burner costs $40 and 4.7g blanks are less than $1 each.

[Andrew @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

I forgot about history repeating itself; check this out on the development of the DVD.

{From Ars:}
Back in May of 1994 when many of us were all struggling with our Windows 3.1 installations, the 1x or 2x CD-ROM drive was a staple in any computer system. The CD-ROM, as you well know by now, holds 650MB of data, and in those golden days could read between 150K - 300KB/sec. But while we were all enjoying our CD-ROM drives, something new was in the works. Sony and Philips announced that they would be jointly developing a new high-density disc format that would be the same physical size as a regular CD, but would be an order of magnitude larger in storage capacity than current CD-ROM technology and would support high-resolution video. They called it Multimedia CD (MMCD).

But there was another competitor creeping onto the field. Toshiba and Time-Warner had been developing a technology called Super Disc (SD). It was similar in concept, but incompatible with that of Sony/Philips. Over the course of the next year, both camps would attempt to garner support by touting their own product's strengths and pointing out the opponent's weaknesses. By the spring of 1995, the whole notion of the perfect high-density video/data-storage format was beginning to look like it would end up just like the BetaMax/VHS video wars of yesteryear. Until something unexpected happened�

A group of hardware and software companies (namely Apple, Compaq, Fujitsu, HP, IBM, and Microsoft) stepped in and refused to support both formats. These companies effectively forced the hands of each group and created a "perfect" solution by taking the best technology from each camp. Toshiba's superior disc technology would be used along with Sony's advanced data coding techniques. The end result was a format we now know as DVD.

From: http://arstechnica.com/reviews/02q3/dvd-r/pioneer-dvra04-1.html

[otakucode @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

I swear to myself that THIS TIME will be different. I won't buy one of these drives until they are reasonably priced. Seriously! I swear it! This time, I will be patient... is it hot in here?

BTW, anyone want to lay bets on whether dual-layer DVD media will drop below $1/disc before Blu-Ray does? It doesn't appear DL discs have any intention of dropping in price in any significant way. Is there a reason for this outside of market pressures?

And when will we ever see a day again where a consumer can actually backup their computer? You buy a computer now and it comes with a 300GB drive. How are you going to back that up? Burn 67 DVDs? 6 dual layer BD-REs? There was a day a Colorado tape drive and a couple tapes you swapped each week kept you with a good backup record. Now, our online storage capacity so far outstrips our convenient backup possibilities, it's entirely unreasonable for consumers to backup their machines. That's to say nothing for power users such as myself who have well over a terabyte of space spread over multiple machines on a network. Guess crossing our fingers and praying for the best will have to continue to be data insurance enough.

[clicclic @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

#14 - DL-DVDs will come down when a massive launch of Blu-Ray/HD-DVD begins.

Until then those damn DL discs are going to be cost prohibitive.

[Mu Doggy @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

I called http://www.slidirect.com/bluray for info on their blu-ray stuff (they have it on their site already, but not able to buy yet) and they've given me the best answer yet. Before January, as many sample pieces you want (pretending you're a company) price PROBABLY $450 - $500 each. Because it's sample, you must buy over the phone.

[John Stracke @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

CD-Rs: A couple of months ago, I bought a stack of 100 48x CD-Rs for $11. A week or so later, while cleaning out a closet, I came across an old 2x CD-R I'd bought in 1996; it was still in the package, with the price tag from Fry's: $12.

[jg @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

#15 DVD-R had gone down in price before Dual Layer burners were widely available. The price of these discs should already be at 1-1.50 a disc but its not even close.

I have no confidence that blu-ray discs will drop in price until i see it for myself. It shouldn't take the next technology to drop the prices of the writable discs.

[Nobuyuki Idei @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

"it's entirely unreasonable for consumers to backup their machines."

You don't do backup anymore, instead you get a mirrored drive. Easier. Faster. More convenient. And probably cheaper.

[benhc911 @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

I dont think media will shrink in size until we have reached a capacity that can hold the highest rez human eyes can see, at the highest fps we can see, with the best sound we can hear. Until then, we will probably keep the same format.

Just like the replacement of hardrives with flash might take YEARS after it is feasible. Sure you can get them now/soon, but they wont REPLACE the old form until they are near identical in price and capacity, or close enough that the other attribute ameliorate the cost disparity.

Although the posibility of a parallel existance is quite possible, as mini blu rays could easily hold a dvd quality movie. Unfortunatly that sub format may not take off, because like UMDs people dont like rebuying their movies in a several month period JUST to have it portable. They will likely just continue with portable players that play the full size media.

[Weird Al @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

19. (Mr Idei) said "You don't do backup anymore, instead you get a mirrored drive. Easier. Faster. More convenient. And probably cheaper."

Mirrored drives don't save you from user or software errors, like if I accidentally permanently delete something. Mirrored drives only save you from hardware errors.

It's best to have a mirrored drive AND do regular backups and archiving to disc or tape.

[Nobuyuki Idei @ Dec 19th 2005 12:56AM]

Weird Al,

Then have a third drive (or skip the mirror), and do backups to that. Point is, backing up to removable disc or tape is sooo last century.