DVD Forum approves 51GB triple-layer HD DVD spec
By Nilay Patel 
posted November 15th 2007 9:11PM
posted November 15th 2007 9:11PM
Toshiba's been demoing a triple-layer hybrid HD DVD / DVD system for a couple years now, but it's been all unofficial until today, when the DVD Forum steering committee voted to approve the spec as part of the official HD DVD standard. The third 15GB layer bumps the total capacity of HD DVD up to 51GB, matching Blu-ray's 50GB disks. Of course, we wouldn't expect to see a flood of content on the new disks anytime soon, what with all those shiny new double-layer players getting sold right now, but it's interesting to see HD DVD step up in the one area Blu-ray was clearly superior. The stalemate continues!
I don't get it. The article says "The third 15GB layer..."
But currently a dual-layer HD-DVD is 30 GB, so wouldn't that make a 3 layer 45 GB if indeed the third layer was 15 GB too?
This makes me wonder... will the current HD-DVD players be able to play this new 3 layer disc? With its 15 GB - 21 GB ~ish new layer?
Let's see,
Blu-ray: Higher maximum bitrate
HD DVD: No region coding, no BD+ DRM
I'll take HD DVD.
they squeezed a few more gigs out of each later. It should work on present and first generation HD-DVD players. It states in the A1 manual which is a first generator player that it accepts 3 layer HD-DVDs. Firmware is all it needs. Also all HD-DVD players are 2x which is 72mbps but are set to 1x by firmware which limits the speed the drive can read at to 36mbps. So spec wise it should out perform blu-ray if they enable both triple layer and 2x speed via firmware.
damn spelling errors /shakefist
I have players for both formats. And two little words make HD-DVD a winner for me: Region Free!
Really, I don't get how Blu-Ray fans *want* BD+, extra layers of DRM and region code lock-in. Plus, HD-DVD delivers on Profile 2.0 features right now!
But really -- how can you not love a format that's REGION FREE?
the problem is not us, it's the studios! THEY want region coding. i'm german and i LOVE hd-dvd for being codefree, but watching movies in original versions is pretty common over here in germany.
and some studios are already holding back the hd-dvd-realease FOR MONTHS while releasing the bluray several months in advance...just because of region coding.
sucks...
"and some studios are already holding back the hd-dvd-realease FOR MONTHS while releasing the bluray several months in advance..."
By "some studios" you of course mean *ONE* studio, right?
too bad hd-dvd requires 3 layers to do the same job BD's do in 2. Ahhh, the inferiority. Enjoy compressed audio and your limited studio support =)
Wow. Do you even know what compression even is? Moron.
i think this whole format war is interesting, i mean who remembers the DVD + - war? they ended up with drives that do both.
The war between dvd+ and dvd- was caused by a few differences but bluray and hd-dvd are really different.
if anyone hasnt noticed, if space is ever an issue Blu can go triple too and go for 75gbs...
As blu-ray fanboys say, "it doesn't mean anything until it's approved!"
...or 100GB, or even 200GB on 8 layers. It's all theoretically possible.
::Grabs popcorn::
I'm counting the minutes until the Blu-ray group comes out and touts the 75GB triple layer Blu-ray disc!!!
"I'm counting the minutes until the Blu-ray group comes out and touts the 75GB triple layer Blu-ray disc!!!"
With the way the BD is going... that would be profile 2.1 after you shelled out $700 for profile 1.0, $700 for profile 1.1 and $700 for profile 2.0 and they will be offered for the low price of $700.
$2800 anyone?
For $399 you can get a fully upgradeable BD player that also plays games, surfs the net, rips cds, steams media, plays network media, and does lots of other stuff. I dont Know where you got this $700 minimum price tag from, but if i had to guess id say it came from the same place you keep your head.
vishus, your $399 drive does burn dics. Please pay attention to mlody's post before you start bashing.
Of course I meant *doesn't burn discs*
@Daren
Many problems here.. First of all, you are stating as fact that ALL existing players will be able to read this three layer disc. I don't know the actual answer to this, but I *HIGHLY* doubt you do either since it hasn't been revealed publicly. And even if they eventually say that it "should" be compatible with a firmware update, we all know how that will go...
"six layer multi hundred gigabyte disk your referring ..."
I'm glad you are so capable at basic arithmetic. I believe 100GB / 25GB per layer would equal 4 layers total, NOT SIX.. and where did he refer to a "multi hundred gigabyte disk"??
Did you actually read his post? Or are you just stupid?
"matching Blu-ray's 50GB"??
I think topping would be a better word.
51 GB is great....but i rather wait for the 200 gb BD !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Great news for HD-DVD. Not sure if this included a boost to bandwidth as was rumored.
Anyone notice the implication that the current dual layer players won't be able to play the tripple layer discs??
I like how they managed to squeeze that extra 1GB in there, 'cause if I'm looking to buy a blank 50GB disc, an extra 1GB is going to convince to buy the other format /sarcasm off
Actually, while most HD DVD players will play 51gb discs, there is no chance we'll ever see a 51gb HD DVD-R or RW. Just not possible domestically from what I can tell.
Sarcasm aside, I'd love to see the price of a tripple layer HD-DVD burner. All the prior posters who dreamed of stashing their porn collections on these tripple layer disks are much better off buying an enclsure and several hard drives.
If you ask me, the increased capacity does nothing for us consumers. It's inaccessable to us for personal storage and unused for most movies.
I couldn't give two craps about Hi Def movies, but, the data storage capabilities has me interested. I have to admit, though, while I'd love to back up my entire movie and/or porn collection onto a single disc, I'd be worried about potential data loss. When a CD gets damaged, you don't lose much data. DVDs get damaged, it's still easy to recover. Lose 50+GB, and you're SOL>
I have both as well and i prefer HD DVD. For starters they look the same and i have a 1080p projector 92' across so if anyone is going to see the difference i can (and there is none) you can throw silly specs at me all day and at the end of it they will still look the same when i go home and pop in spiderman 3 or transformers. They sound the same as well dispite fanboys saying if something is layerd more it will sound worse.
There should be something like the coke pepsi challenge where people look at the same movie on two different formats but with all the same equipment except the players. and judge which is which
HD DVD is cheaper and if blue ray wins the prices will be higher longer because they still need to build the infrastructure to produce them. That and the reigon free thing makes hd dvd the more logical option.
So we have a much smaller pits than regular DVD and now 3 layers, you best buy some velvet gloves too, to handle them.
And I wonder how long you can store these things even when extremely careful, we all heard about DVD-R's not lasting more than 2 years often :/
@Jensen
"The majority BD discs are not even using the same codec so they are hardly "using one encode" as you say. It's more like Blu Ray is paying for it's own mistakes."
Your are full of fail. All neutral titles have used the same encode for over a year now.This leaves the Blu-ray with the dumbed down HD-DVD compatible encode. Thanks for playing.
Man, that visible bit-rate meter was such a bad idea.
Dude, a couple of years ago they used to do exactly what you wish they would now: give different encodes for BD and HD DVD versions of the same movie, taking up more space on the BD with a higher bitrate. And the *only* difference between doing this and using the same encode for both was that it cost more. There is a point after which quality plateaus, and it stops making a difference how much more bandwith is being eaten eating up second by second. What matters more is which codec is being used, and what matters more than that is how skillfully it's being applied (it's not an automatic process). It's highly unlikely you'd notice any improvement if every 30 GB Blu-ray you have used up the remaining empty space.
Navstar:
"I have players for both formats. And two little words make HD-DVD a winner for me: Region Free!
Really, I don't get how Blu-Ray fans *want* BD+, extra layers of DRM and region code lock-in. Plus, HD-DVD delivers on Profile 2.0 features right now!
But really -- how can you not love a format that's REGION FREE?"
You are full of fail. Blu-ray is also region free.
You beat me to it HD-DUD Killer, almost all of the BR films I've got where they are also available on HD-DVD use exactly the same encode for both. This is a shame for BR users as its capable of using more. That said, when the encode is as good as it is on some films anyway, is there really any benefit from a higher bitrate encode anyway?
It would be better to fill the extra space with more extras etc..
Also, as you say, although BR has region coding in the spec, hardly anyone enables it. This is why I've just been able to import a copy of Ratatouille from the US before its even ended its run at the Cinema here in the UK. A lot of the BR films I have are imports, thanks to the value of the $, it makes it so cheap to import :)
One area that will benefit from higher capacity BR discs will be the Playstation 3, that is one format that will make use of the increased space. There are some games at the moment which use around 25GB (Uncharted: Drake's Fortune) and whilst its still off the 50GB, in time I'm sure they'll find ways to fill it up.
Blu-ray is most assuredly not region free, although its regions allow a little more geographical leeway than DVDs do. As with DVD, region coding is an option, but it's not like nobody is exercising it.
Also, no response about the DRM?
Actually, scrub what I said about Ratatouille, its one of the few region encoded discs! Grr @ Disney Pixar, Grr @ Ebayer who said it was region free.
Actually Paramount, when they made BDs, used separate encodes, most of the time. But some of the time they used MPEG-2 for BD and VC-1 for HD DVD, so they didn't take advantage of the extra space, since they used the less efficient codec on BD...producing very similar results. There was at least one title though on which they used VC-1 for HD DVD and very high bitrate AVC for BD. One title was Flags of Our Fathers. Some perceived the BD to be slightly sharper (whether that was prefereable was disputed), though both discs were given excellent marks.
A lot of y'all are talking about data back up for whatever reason, but I don't really see the point in it so far. The burners are expensive, the disks are expensive, and slow. Plus they are not rewritable. I'd prefer to by 2x1TB HDD and go from there.
Easier to just erase the drive if I need to hide something.