These days there aren't a whole lot of flavors to PC
HD DVD drives, but Toshiba is hoping to remedy that with their new line-up of players and burners they're showing off at CEDIA. Most notable is the external USB drive they had under glass (pictured), which should be out by the end of this year, bringing plenty of HD DVD good times to all sorts of laptops and desktops that weren't privy to a built-in drive. Keep reading to spy a few internal editions, including a slot-loading version, along with a 0.37-inch thick model for stuffing into ultraportables -- which bests the
0.5-inch version we spied yesterday.
Toshiba SD-U9131 (9.5mm, 0.37-inches)
Toshiba SD-T913A (12.7mm, 0.5-inches; slot-loading)
Toshiba
SD-L902A (12.7mm, 0.5-inches)
posted Oct 3rd 2006 at 3:46PM
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Dario @ Oct 3rd 2006 4:10PM
*drools
good good, but how about Bluray drives!?
disciple83 @ Oct 3rd 2006 4:22PM
I truly can't conceive a difference between HD-DVD and Blu-Ray. They both play HD digital video. But I am still not really interested in HD video yet as I am just happy with my new Phillips DVDR/DVR combo box. You can take any DVD and load it into a player, granted, it must be progressive scan, and any HD disc or BR disc and play them both on the same tv with an equivalent HD player, doesn't matter which one, and they look about the same. The HD will be a bit brighter, true, but seriously, I do not notice enough difference to warrant the hype. Maybe its because TVs are limited, iunno, but right now, none of this is necessary.
CharlieX @ Oct 3rd 2006 4:36PM
Are you doing this test on a 1080 capable television? 480p anamorphic DVD's look pretty good, yes, but full 1080 is stunning.
Chris @ Oct 3rd 2006 4:23PM
screw bluray, theirs a reason bluray is loosing in media sales 11 to 1... and also being outsold in hardware and also hddvd has over 2x the movies out...
slot loading... sexy :)
Chris @ Oct 4th 2006 10:23AM
Well beyond space and stuff... i muts say the whole iHD (intercative layer) on the HD really is sexy especially when they really implement it fully :)
Rick Lyon @ Oct 3rd 2006 4:29PM
Wow, Toshiba is really pouring it on. My only annoyance is USB, why not Firewire?
BISH @ Oct 3rd 2006 4:40PM
why not USB
Wildside @ Oct 3rd 2006 4:47PM
just to keep it clear to u guys, HD-DVD n Blu-ray give the SAME HD quality, the difference is is that Blu-ray has more space on it. It doubles no, triples the space how much HD-DVD. That is only good for more special features, interviews, etc. u know, extras. To be honest with u, it's best to have the HD-DVD because u get the same resolution n HD quality u want, just less extras if u look at it that way when comparing. I'm all for the HD, not the extras.
Wonderboy @ Oct 3rd 2006 4:48PM
Most mainstream PCs don't come with a Firewire port (sad, but true). Wanna know how many mainstream PCs don't come with a USB port (or 8)? None.
That's why they set it up over USB instead of Firewire.
Wonderboy @ Oct 3rd 2006 5:01PM
Wildside, you're over simplifying. You're making it seem like you're guaranteed the same quality, and the only difference will be extras. Not true, not even close.
If you'll notice, Blu-Ray had a rough start because they used an inferior codec which gave an inferior picture (a problem they'll hopefully fix on future releases).
If you'll also notice, A Perfect Storm on HDDVD got poor quality reviews. Not because of codec issues, but because the movie was so long and they wanted to add features. Due to the limited (in comparison to BD) space on HDDVDs, in order to fit all the extras they wanted as well as the lengthy movie, they had to compress the movie down to a smaller size. This is something that can't be fixed. HDDVD is stuck at 30GB max.
While you're mostly right, that if studios omitted all extras and only included the feature film, HDDVD would most likely always have enough disc space... in reality your ideal situation falls through. I'm with you, I never watch the extras. I buy a dvd for the movie and nothing else, but for some reason the studios seem to think they have to cram as many extras on the disc as possible.
As such, Blu-Ray capaciousness will eventually prove superior as more and more lengthy-movie releases come out with poor quality reviews because the studio just couldn't fit the movie at max quality with all the extras they just couldn't let go of.
To sum it all up, Blu-Ray painted themselves into a corner with the codec fiasco, but paint dries, and they can do better on later releases. Unfortunately HDDVD skipped the paint and went straight to cement, now they're stuck knee deep in a foundation that they can only change by breaking every standard they've built.
Mamps @ Oct 3rd 2006 5:52PM
Wonderboy,
The Perfect Storm on HDDVD is a single layer disk only, not 2 layers which would give them 30GB available. (15 x 2 =30 GB)
David C @ Oct 3rd 2006 5:59PM
"This is something that can't be fixed. HDDVD is stuck at 30GB max."
Actually, triple-layer 45GB are expected in the not to distant future. Not quite as much space at double-layer Blu-ray discs, but close.
hmurchison @ Oct 3rd 2006 6:18PM
Wonderboy
Although your comments would suffice for MPEG2 most HD DVD movies use VC-1 and rare is the movie that takes up more than 25GB for the movie alone.
Microsoft has announced a new verison of the VC-1 encoder which is far more efficient. They are claiming usable bitrates down to 9Mbps and we should see equivalent quality movies @12Mbps rivaling or besting today's VC-1 encoded movies at 16-18Mbps. We're going to be fine with 30GB movies for the long term.
tristanfey @ Oct 3rd 2006 6:35PM
Actually, it may seem that Wildside is oversimplifying, but he/she is correct that both formats offer the same HD quality in capability. The format speciifications of Blu-Ray and HD-DVD both require support for the following three codecs: MPEG4, h.264 and VC-1. It is entirely up to the movie studios, which codec they intend to use on their movies.
The only real difference from a spec front is the space. HD-DVD is 15GB per layer and Blu-Ray is 25GB per layer. Currently HD-DVD is up to two layers (30GB) and working on a third for a total of 45GB. Blu-Ray is still on one layer (25GB) and working on a second layer to bump it to 50GB. Not sure how fast they plan to work for a third layer as 50GB should be enough for all but the most intensive projects or movie collections at the moment.
Ed @ Oct 3rd 2006 6:41PM
HD DVD has 15GB (which is fine for most) 30GB and soon 45GB and also HD DVD/DVD Tripple layer combo. Plus HD HD DVD uses VC codec which can store more data than Blu Ray old MPEG codec even if blu ray disc is 50gb. In other words you can store the same or more data into a 15GB HD DVD than a 50gb.
rantanamo @ Oct 4th 2006 8:52AM
The reason why (most)people are wasting their money on either..........................Most people don't have a 1080p display to see it with. What's the benefit if you don't have this? Most people don't even have Hi-Def yet(1080i or 720p) or know what it all means. CART BEFORE THE HORSE, big time. Both would likely have the most success if they'd concentrate on the PC market first, where they could sell cheaper drives.
rantanamo @ Oct 4th 2006 8:51AM
going with PC drives is certainly the right way to go. It's what drove the early DVD's. People that had it had drives first.
Chris @ Oct 3rd 2006 5:46PM
I wish everything was slot loading. Especially toast. *drools* Horizontal toast...
Alex D @ Oct 3rd 2006 5:50PM
is that a PS/2 cable sticking out the back in the first pic? sure as hell looks like it...
snowglyder @ Oct 3rd 2006 6:05PM
Is that a PS2 mouse plugged in the back of that external drive???
mb @ Oct 3rd 2006 6:43PM
doable, but really pushing USB. Don't use your mouse while watching a movie!!! :P
Wildside @ Oct 3rd 2006 8:44PM
i am a he by the way, yes i agree with all of u about HD-DVD n Blu-ray. If HD-DVD can pull off more movies with good quality, then ill good with that. It's cheaper to buy HD-DVDs then Blu-ray, y get Blu-ray?
im the type of guy who likes the movie resolution n quality with not a whole lot of extras.
Alan Hoffman @ Oct 4th 2006 12:51AM
Any word if these will work on macs? Since apple isn't installing any built in HD or bluray drives.. yet..
elpitufo @ Oct 4th 2006 8:31AM
How much? That's the thing! :P
cwhitey2 @ Oct 5th 2006 8:22AM
Bluray has my vote for data storage over HD DVD for one simple reason. You can fit upto 200GB on a Bluray while HD DVD will only offer upto 45GB. Which would you prefer a copy of your hard drive on one Bluray or two maybe even three copy's for HD DVD. For me size matters, Bluray is pretty much a portential 'Hard Drive' disk in its self.
rkmarty @ Aug 30th 2007 11:36PM
Well BlueRay might not make the consumer line because Sony once again banned the use of there product for Porno Producers.
It has been confirmed that no porno production company may be allowed to licence the use of BlueRay for any sales.
Thats OK in a Christian sence. As a television producer, who cares!
Because of that, Im thinking as a television producer like myself. Ill prefer to use BlueRay for our television archives. Most of you will have no need for any large media like BlueRay since Apple-Macintosh has since created the new H.264 codec. With that codec in place as our new STANDARD for media, any mainstream movie will fit with tones extra room on a regular HD DVD disk.
Honestly, as a consumer, most will and should go with HD DVD. The over all cost is much less than BlueRay.
Sony will now be dropping there BlueRay players since the market is purchassing there PlayStations.
Hmmm! You do the math.
I think the bottom line is, everyone is looking for the best price and to what will the average consumer purchase.
Remember VHS and BETA? Who won? They both won. Sony is mainly for perfessional use only. Still to this day, Beta is used for broadcasting.
Cheers.