Overall it's much cheaper though. They're already standard in many phones and the readers are very cheap to produce compared to what I assume a blue laser reader would cost. Spinning a disc consumes a ton more power too. Also, flash is only going to get cheaper; this attempt at a new/retro storage medium is really a dumb move. Stick with flash.
You need to concider whos bearing the cost. With this the media is cheap, the cost gets dumped onto the consumer throught the hardware. With SD the cost is a heavier burden onto the the content owner. one of the things that it comes down to is have the consuper pay 5$ per minidisc thing or well over 5 for an SD card. The second is locking the content down, its a lot harder for someone to make bootlegs of this than anything they can do no sd.
LOL, this huge thing will NEVER see itself on cell phones. After all the effort to shrink from full-size SD to miniSD, then to microSD, all to save just a few square mm of space, they would never give up several square inches (and also a lot more volume than SD). This thing is DOA (the only way they could save it is if it stored 100GB+).
Oh, and as far as movies driving adoption of this, just look at the very limited success of Sony UMD. While this COULD be put into more than 1 device (unlike PSP), see my post above as to why that won't happen.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
1GB SD cards and a reader would be much easier and cheaper to make and mass produce rather than this.
Agreed. Something like this would have been cool....
in 1991
I know. You can get a flash card that can hold 32 gigs and is still smaller than that.
flash cards dont cost 5 dollars
"flash cards dont cost 5 dollars"
Overall it's much cheaper though. They're already standard in many phones and the readers are very cheap to produce compared to what I assume a blue laser reader would cost. Spinning a disc consumes a ton more power too. Also, flash is only going to get cheaper; this attempt at a new/retro storage medium is really a dumb move. Stick with flash.
You need to concider whos bearing the cost. With this the media is cheap, the cost gets dumped onto the consumer throught the hardware. With SD the cost is a heavier burden onto the the content owner.
one of the things that it comes down to is have the consuper pay 5$ per minidisc thing or well over 5 for an SD card. The second is locking the content down, its a lot harder for someone to make bootlegs of this than anything they can do no sd.
"flash cards dont cost 5 dollars"
Probably will tomorrow.
In fact: http://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-SDSDB-1024-A10-Secure-Digital-Package/dp/B000I5ZC3W/ref=pd_bbs_2?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1202837103&sr=8-2
LOL, this huge thing will NEVER see itself on cell phones. After all the effort to shrink from full-size SD to miniSD, then to microSD, all to save just a few square mm of space, they would never give up several square inches (and also a lot more volume than SD). This thing is DOA (the only way they could save it is if it stored 100GB+).
Oh, and as far as movies driving adoption of this, just look at the very limited success of Sony UMD. While this COULD be put into more than 1 device (unlike PSP), see my post above as to why that won't happen.
Well I picked up a 2 GB micro SD, for $11, so $5 cards aren't that far away.