51GB triple-layer HD DVDs in the pipeline?
By Darren Murph 
posted Jan 8th 2007 1:11PM
posted Jan 8th 2007 1:11PM
Just after Verbatim announces that it's shipping 30GB dual-layer HD DVD-Rs our way, here comes some more news to slightly deflate that bubble. At an HD DVD presentation held at CES, at interesting PowerPoint slide caught our eye, as it (very briefly) described plans to "expand HD DVD disc capacity from 15GB to 17GB per layer, and moreover, to add a third layer as well, eventually resulting in a 51GB HD DVD disc. Aside from upping the ante on Blu-ray's capacity by a measly 1GB (currently, at least), it's also noted that "technical feasibility" has yet to be confirmed, and that standardization wouldn't occur until Q4 of this year at the earliest, but it's a novel idea to say the least. So if you're looking to pick up an HD DVD player right this moment, and can't wait to embrace all the potential compatibility issues with a drive never made to play these newfangled, triple-layered discs, have at it -- of course, all those conflicts rely on this pipedream ever being realized. It should be interesting to see how (if at all) the BDA addresses this potential new disc in their press conference later today, and if they'll pay any attention to possibly being leapfrogged in an area they currently lead. Pfft, and you thought the HD DVD / Blu-ray war was settled.
Pardon me, but could you direct me to the Engadget CES coverage? I know it's supposed to be around here somewhere, but for the life of me I can't find it, what with all mediocrity. It seems to be just an average day.
Did Peter et al stay out late last night, and are still back at the hotel room nursing a hangover? No comments on the stories, either. It must have something to do with the fact that it takes an hour now, after posting a comment, before you get the confirmation email. I don't know what the problem is, dudes, but you better fix it before you irreversibly kill the social aspect of your site and people stop visiting. You don't want to become another Gizmodo do you?
With the advances in the capacity of flash memory, I would think discs would be a dying technology.
I don't even want to imagine how long it would take to burn that much data.
Why? Why in the world would they risk screwing early adopters for a mere 13% capacity increase. I mean, the original plus side to HD-DVD was price and the arguement that 30GB was plenty of space for a HD movie and a some extras. Well, apparently someone on the inside seems to think 30GB isn't enough, and the cheap-factor gets demolished if you've got to upgrade players every 18 months because the format has been tweaked.
Blu-Ray touts higher capacity, but higher cost and more DRM... but HD-DVD isn't a stable format. No wonder there hasn't been any headway in the format war.
Of course, when Blu-Ray's cost comes down, when the capacity that fits within the standard (up to 200GB) is increased to lay utter waste to any HD-DVD claims of capaciousness, and when the DRM is broken, I think we'll have a undisputed king.
As long as HD-DVD doesn't smarten up and win the war before those things happen.
Oh don't go starting another format war...
Honestly though, I don't know if movies will go solid-state for a while... the consumer is too in love with the CD/DVD physical format disc (and it's too dang expensive right now).
The CD keeps getting larger. It started out as 650MB and 74 minutes, remember.
The CD jump tp 700MB was only a .075% increase and was made possible by utilizing what was otherwise wasted space on the original design. Of course, newer formats have utilized the max space of the disc. A 15% increase is only possible by adding slightly more area to the outside of the disc... changing the size of it (not likely), by adding to the middle of the disc (also not likely since at that low circumfrence you'd need a lot of space to get 2 GB), or by somehow re-arranging the bit structure or bits/square inch, both of which will mess with current players.
If it were simple to add the 2GB they would have done it from the beginning.
Blu-Ray has more DRM than HD-DVD?
Nope - they both use AACS.
Cost isn't much of an issue either - BD-ROM discs are generally no more expensive to buy than latest release DVD's.
Right now the only problem is that the hardware price is a bit high, but that will come down in price over time - CD Drives/Writers/DVD Players/Writers all cost hundreds of pounds at the start of their production too.
Yes as you mentioned, in the same vien as the 51GB HD-DVD, the 200GB BD-ROM has already been "announced".
Only 51GB GB with 3 layers. Pretty bad. Blu-Ray makes 60 GB with only two layers. Can't wait to see what new in Blu-Ray that comes from CES.
yeah, BD-50 contains 60GB, that's why they're called "-50"?
dumbass.
and that's how you kill a format...
Not to mention that you will probably need to buy yet another DVD-HD drive that could read the triple layer disks...
Does anyone remember the last CES? TDK showed a 2x 100GB Blu-ray disc:
http://www.engadget.com/2005/05/19/tdk-announces-100gb-blu-ray-disc/