digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Tera-Discs To Blow Away Blu-Ray and HD-DVD?

gamestooge.com — Tech UK is reporting a startling new disc storage technology that could end the HD war between HD-DVD and Blu-Ray: the Tera-Disc. How much data? On a 1TB disc, you could store 212 DVD-quality movies, 250,000 MP3 files or 1,000,000 large Word documents. Holy flarging snit!

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Cygnus, on 10/10/2007, -4/+43Direct Link: http://www.tech.co.uk/home-entertainment/hi-fi-and-audio/other-playback-and-recording-formats/news/how-to-fit-1tb-of-data-on-one-cd-sized-disc?articleid=1665250963&source=rss

    Oh, and this is a Dupe: http://digg.com/tech_news/How_to_fit_1Tb_of_data_on_one_CD_sized_disc_800Gb_prototypes_already_made
    • doodirock2, on 10/10/2007, -12/+1QQ
    • enemyofstate430, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1This is not only a dupe, but this tech is out of date compared to "very old news;" HVDs can hold up to 3.9 TBs.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_Versatile_Disc
      • Tiak, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Optware (the ones behind the HVD) seems to be MIA of late... They were supposed to release their Holographic Versatile Cards in Q1 2007... Their site has been down since at least July 2006...

        inPhase seems to be the only one that is going to have a viable holographic storage project, and they only have the most tentative of plans for storage of 1 TB+
    • enemyofstate430, on 10/10/2007, -4/+0oops...woogley already made a comment about HVDs further down the thread...didn't mean to comment hijack, but hey, its relevant to state this here and it might save people time reading about already obsolete tech if the info is further up the comment chain. in any case, welcome to real world "planned obsolescence!" ;)
      • AscendoTuum, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Hold your horses.. It's not necessarily obsolete tech. The fact that they've already developed these HVDs doesn't mean that they'll be able to bring the manufacturing costs down any time soon and thus make it available to the average consumer.

        For all we know these Teradiscs might hit the market sooner, in which case it will be irrelevant if someone at that point would have developed zibbee-discs or whatever the hell a bigger disc were to be called.
    • Beaver6813, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Direct Direct Link: http://www.tfot.info/articles/56/Mempile---Terabyte-on-a-CD.html
    • UtilityPole, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Remember when we used to store back-up files on 3.5 inch floppy disks? Those things only held about 1.44MB.

      ... and that was only about 8 or 9 years ago. Christ.
  • EDmAN, on 10/10/2007, -8/+109I don't see this replacing HD or Blu-Ray, this technology is great, but I really don't think movie companies are going to want to have 950+ Gigs left over on a disk. Blu-ray is currently big enough, and this technology might be used to replace things like tape backups, or HD- surveillance maybe... Plus they will probably be extremely expensive... maybe 100+ $ a disk
    • loganhid, on 10/10/2007, -10/+3Damn right
    • Renton, on 10/10/2007, -9/+23That's what they said (and are still saying) about HD-DVD and Blu-Ray.
      • bingobongony, on 10/10/2007, -1/+14No they didn't. From the very beginning there was a definitely known need for extra storage over that of a DVD. Many big time movies were coming with 2 or more disks. And that was just regular def movies with the extras. The same is not true for the step up from Blu Ray to these. There are only so many extras that directors/producers are going to put into DVDs. Most of the disks will go unused.

        Quite frankly, absolutely NO ONE is expecting these to be used for movies, or probably even for home users. At least not for many, many years.
        • Chicken2nite, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13Still, one disc for an entire Star Trek series in high def... That would be pretty nice
          • mywhitenoise, on 10/10/2007, -2/+19so would having sex with a girl.
    • Johnny1337h4x0r, on 10/10/2007, -3/+39Even though I do agree about the cost of the disks, I don't agree about the space left over. The current Blu-Ray and HD-DVD disc videos are still being compressed. A larger format disk could significanly reduce or even remove compression.
      • carpespasm, on 10/10/2007, -5/+24not compressing video is a huge waste of space. after a certain point you'll never see the difference anyway. better to use good compression and add data redundancy on the disc.
        • willynilly, on 10/10/2007, -18/+10Maybe YOU won't see the difference. What you're saying is the same ***** line the vendors have been shoving down consumers' throats for years. "Digital quality" is a meaningless term, from crap-peddlers who are too cowardly even to call it "good." Seriously, in DirecTV ads, they studiously avoid claiming that the picture is "good". They just say "digital quality." Otherwise known as *****.

          If you think current "HD" on broadcast, cable, or satellite looks "good", then your opinion doesn't really carry much weight.
          • emjaymj, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9There's a difference between HD and digital. Digital itself doesn't really make the quality any better, and you're right, most HD broadcasts are compressed to hell. The only channel I find that has a half decent HD picture is DiscoveryHD sometimes, the rest are pretty much always crap, although they are a bit better than standard TV. HD-DVD and Blu-Ray movies on the other hand are able to look absolutely stunning if the studios put the time into careful compression. Sometimes you get a crappy release, most of time it's still leaps and bounds better than DVD, and in some instances the quality just blows my mind.
          • Genma, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7there are lossless forms of compression that have 0 effect on the output and still make a huge difference in the amount of space required to store and reproduce it.
        • arcooke, on 10/10/2007, -3/+13willynilly, seek anger management. You have a good point, but you don't have to be so hostile..
        • ISIfunded911, on 10/10/2007, -8/+2A couple days ago I tried to compress mpeg2 videos into several mpeg4 codecs: the result, even at 80% size, was worse than mpeg2. Letters and lines were looking horrible.
          So yes, compression clearly degrades image quality. Uncompressed videos should become the norm if technology allows. I welcome Tera-discs! Of course on internet compression is useful. But from a Tera-Player to a video-projector a few inches away?
          • emjaymj, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15This is retarded on so many levels. When you compress already compressed videos, yeah it's going to look even more like crap, what do you expect? Compression doesn't necessarily mean it has to look worse though. When you zip a file, does it lose data? No. And studios trying to get good quality compression are going to spend LOTS of man hours tweaking every single second to get it to look fine, they don't just use some automatic freeware app...
          • BHSPitMonkey, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1The Zip compression format is neither lossy nor very space-effective. Popular video compression formats tend to be quite the opposite.
          • emjaymj, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The VC-1 codec is quite capable, and like I said, there are people tweaking the compression at every point in the film, they don't just run it through an automated program. I'm aware Zip isn't lossy but the point is that compression isn't NECESSARILY lossy, and with enough care even lossy codecs like VC-1 can shrink the video size considerably while remaining nearly identical to the master.
        • bingobongony, on 10/10/2007, -6/+5willynilly...if you put a well compressed video and an uncompressed one in front of you, you would not know hte differecne, despite your egotisitcal boasts.
          ISIfunded911 - I think the DVD makers know a bit more about the technology than you and would gdo a better job.
          • prolog, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0You won't be able to find uncompressed video anywhere. An uncompressed 24-bit 1920*1080 image is larger than 6MB, multiply by 30 frames per second and you get 187MB/s of video. Your 1TB disk would only store an hour and a half of video.
          • BHSPitMonkey, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Kudos on a comment that's both egotistical -and- uninformed.
      • rebrad, on 10/10/2007, -3/+11Well after 800GB of DRM you'd at least have 200GB to play with.
      • thax, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I theory a compressed video should look better than uncompressed if they both consume the same space. For example when comparing a 30 gigabyte compressed movie with a 30 gigabyte uncompressed movie the compressed one has more visual data. This means with the compressed film you can have a higher frame rate, larger resolution or a greater color depth. The end result is the compressed film looks better because it is able to deliver more data using the same amount of space.
    • AnteChronos, on 10/10/2007, -2/+19I don't see the wasted space as a problem. People will always find ways to fill up as much space as you care to give them. No, the thing blocking adoptions is that the movie studios, manufacturers, etc have already put huge amounts of time and resources into Blu-Ray and HD-DVD. They're not going to abandon them when they've barely gotten off the ground. The one place that this has any real possibility is in computer storage, since you don't have to worry about having available content right away, and you can have a plug-n-play drive rather than having to build an entire appliance around the technology
      • illt, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1i dont' really see a market for it at this time. HD space is enormous and cheap, not to mention most likely faster than the 1tB disks and drives, and companies won't be using it to distribute media.
        • AnteChronos, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I see a market in data retention and backups. Hard drives are large and cheap, to be sure, but aren't so great when you need to make off-site backups. Depending on the cost, this may make a decent solution. Especially for huge chunks of data, such as corporate databases.
        • tkstock, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2There doesn't have to be a market for it at this time - most likely these discs won't be ready for consumers for many years down the road
    • quomen, on 10/10/2007, -4/+22Yeah.. it's pretty pointless because the big bottleneck of these two mediums are not the space constraints, but the data transfer speeds.
      Typical sensationalist digg title..
      • BHSPitMonkey, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Professionalism aside, Digg is still a "news" site; sensationalism = success in modern journalism.
    • willynilly, on 10/10/2007, -10/+9Use the extra space to REDUCE COMPRESSION. Have any of you actually seen a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD disc? They're still plagued with the same old ***** banding and compression artifacts. Thanks to stupid, short-sighted design, this entire format debacle is a waste. Empty blather, like so much of the "industry" undertaken by society now.

      Stupid people and the corrupt people who use them as tools have ruined everything. The tools rush and rush to gobble up the lies and regurgitate them, becoming a posse of unpaid shills for no apparent reason. Yes, shout down any of your fellows who call for something better. "It's TOOO HARD", wail the spineless toadies inside, while outside they try to shame those who argue for quality. And all the while they bitterly defend the schlock of corporate machines that don't give a rat's ass about them or about producing anything to be proud of.
      • bingobongony, on 10/10/2007, -4/+8It is just possible that most people are not anal like you. And what I said above stands. As much as you want to beleive it, you would pick the compressed version about 50% of hte time if you had to pick which was better over 100 times.
      • emjaymj, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7You have no idea what you're talking about, there are a lot of movies released on both formats which look almost flawless. Granted studios don't ALWAYS take the most care with releases, but most of them are very good. The VC-1 codec properly used is excellent, although some Blu-Ray releases are still using crappy mpeg-2. Have YOU actually seen a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD disc?

        And lets say you put uncompressed video on the disc. Do you have any idea how fast it would need to spin in order to keep up with the film? It would probably explode.
        • ArthurSucks, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2Don't knock the power of mpeg2. A lot of studios are using the ***** Mainconcept encoder. Using FFmpeg on the highest setting looks great and makes a full 90 minute movie at about 900 MB to 1.2 Gigs. Almost identical to h264.
          • jeriqo, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2yeah right. studios don't have any idea how to encode movies.
          • cquinnd, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1They may have an idea how, but that doesn't mean they always make the effort to get the best encoding vs getting the title out the door faster than the guys using higher compressed formats.
        • ikillpeoplexx, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1Yeah, i'm not an expert but i really don't think data transfer rates are increased by speeding up the spin on the discs to a near explosion rate....
          • Meep3D, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4How on earth do they speed up data transfer from the disc without speeding up the rotation of the disc? I don't normally declare people retards but I think you qualify.
      • staticneuron, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The artifacts are due to streaming speeds as well.
    • koko775, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2On the other hand, with data files this large it makes piracy virtually infeasible considering the current state of broadband. That's not to say it won't be impossible but it will harken back to an older time when games were passed on via shareware diskettes.
      • awhiteflame, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Not really. People will just transcode to something they can pirate.
    • Tunguska, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1Tera-way disc formats be damned.
    • Kavok, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Uhm - HD-DVD can also deliver plenty of space if you're going to use the "We don't really need Xgigs of space arguement, product Y is plenty"
      • NailToTheX, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5It's obviously important to keep advancing - and hence it is interesting. what about when videos/movies go to super high def, say 2160p or more, that extra space is going to look pretty sweet then. It's pretty safe to say that HD DVD or BR DVD have got a good 5 years left before another format starts to emerge. It could be there tera discs, or those holographic discs... sufficed it to say, HD DVD or BR DVD will likely not be the last format.
    • Bossman1086, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You can get a smaller disc. I mean, they're up to 800 GB right now. I'm assuming not all of them are going to be over 1 TB.
    • BobOki, on 10/10/2007, -3/+8With 1TB is storage on a dvd, you would have NO NEED for compression. As we speak, the technologies we use to video and lightyears behind the cameras. The cameras can pick up detail so rich that a single photograph 1024x768 can be 400 meg. Take that and expand it out to a full movie, and 1 TB is starting to look a little more realalistic.
      Keep in mind, compression is what causes the distortion, detail loss, artifacts, smoothing, frame jumps, ghosting, etcetc that make even high def movies still look... odd. If you were to have enough space to not need compression, then you would be watching movies in quality so great, given a proper set it could begile real people.
      That said, older formats in non-hi def could now be greatly expanded to fit on one dvd, with extras or compilations could be made. It would show a goodbye to the 30 disc box set of your fav tvshows or series, would be better quality, have room for TONS of extras, interviews, bloopers, fun reels, etcetc. They could even start to sell classic by the boatload. "Buy now $20 for 400 classic movies".
      Video games would take a decade leap forward no longer having to try and cram everything on a single disc, or having the wonderful 4 disc games. A company could even release full series on a single dvd... Resident Evil the Boxset, Silent Hill, All of the madden games... ever.

      Also in the video game world they would be able to take another giant leap forward in their games to make them more of controlable movies. Long have RPGS and the liked wanted to do this, but who has 1TB+ for a game? Well, now you do. FF the movie quality graphics, full spoken dialog in multiple languages. Full dolby digital music, High def everything, and game SIZE would once again be able to go back to the old days when it took you a month just to see 75% of the game world. Not like today where you have three small islands to cruise through in a leniar hunk of time waste.

      Lastly, backup. Actually I DOUBT this would be even remotly a use for this. With as slow as writers are, it would take many hours to burn the data to a one-shot disc. Most networks that run backups have a 4-5 hour window, not quite long enough.
      • BHSPitMonkey, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Four-disc games? Wha?
      • DarkSamus, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0i got goosebumps reading "what's possible on a TD" in this response
    • Chewie67, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I'd buy it for backup purposes -- if the burner was under $300 and the blanks were less than $5.

      Until we hit that point, it's a nice piece of technology that the average person will never touch.
    • xcomputerman, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2"640K ought to be enough for anybody."
    • mediatedthought, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Just wait till people start shooting with the RED camera. www.red.com
      Even with that RAW compression, thats a lot of data.
    • dillibob, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1maybe it could be used as hard drives?
  • Sk8SkaNJ, on 10/10/2007, -2/+54Why is this in video games? article makes no mention of them.
  • kinseyincanada, on 10/17/2007, -31/+169oh for ***** sake lets just stick with DVD's
    • LaSepultura, on 10/10/2007, -17/+11No way, after viewing Blu-Ray and HDDVDs in 1080p, DVDs look like i'm streaming the video over the internet.
      • MScrip, on 10/10/2007, -1/+17How on Earth do you watch old reruns on your TV? Or regular TV in general?
        • emjaymj, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3Wait for the remastered editions to be released in high def and subscribe to a digital HDTV package?
          • patik, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3The original content is 'lo-def' so any such repackaging is not going to be any better. You can't get better than the source, and once we're watching bit-perfect copies of the source (which we essentially are for TV shows before 2000 or movies before 1990) it levels off.
          • lacronicus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1the original source wasn't shot digitally. barring quality issues, you can take any old film strip, scan it, and have instant HD footage. You can't do that with digital footage, but they've already done it with a ton of other movies.
          • emjaymj, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Yes, why was patik dugg up? Obviously he hasn't seen 50 year old films like Casablanca which look absolutely gorgeous when remastered from the original negatives...
      • MagicCake, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Obviously there's a very noticeable different between a DVD and a Blu-Ray, but good DVDs still look good. I usually don't mind watching them at all, even though I have the means to play HD movies.
    • vuke69, on 10/10/2007, -5/+20Agreed, seeing as how you can fit two hours of 1080p h.264 + AC3 on a DL-DVD, whats the point of HD-DVD or Bluray?
    • therealknewman, on 10/10/2007, -2/+13are you kidding? move on to solid state already
      • vuke69, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Sure, if you don't mind everything being a couple orders of magnitude more expensive.
      • asdfrewq, on 10/10/2007, -0/+15Solid State is a redundant step. Logically, the next advancement should be moving towards online streaming/downloads. Physical media is a thing of the past. Quality will, at first, be a step backwards from hd-dvd/blu ray, but so long as they stay within the standard dvd quality range people will flock to it. Assuming they don't burden the consumer with horrendous DRM, that is... Come to think of it, this will never happen. Sigh.
        • Ramble, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4You still need a place to store the video on the web server.
          • Murdats, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3and what they use matters to no-one but the admins, we are talking about consumer level products and distribution methods, not content hosting methods
        • awhiteflame, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I disagree. There will be too many "get off my lawn" folks who will never, ever accept not having a physical copy of a purchase.
          • patik, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1So those people never go to the theatre? There's no physical movie, you're just watching it 'stream' from the projector. People pay for all sorts of intangible things.
          • AzraelRose, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Yes. And huge amounts of time and energy are poured into disguising this fact from those same curmudgeons. Imagine if the cinema didn't issue tickets at all but instead used some sort of biometrics on the doors to the actual screening rooms.
      • Bossman1086, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I do think solid state is a good idea. Price will come down eventually. DVDs were expensive at first...so are Blu-Ray discs now. All new technology is and solid state stuff is relatively new. Give it another couple years and we'll see it take over...more importantly, I want it to replace hard drives. Moving parts = bad. And it will be faster.
      • BHSPitMonkey, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3All these ideas are small-minded. The future lies in preserving, extracting, and duplicating raw thought from the minds and imaginations of our most talented writers and directors. Once we tackle this process, and work out some kind of biological distribution format, we'll be gold.
      • Archeologist, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I still want to see those data cubes in Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy.
    • ut2k4king, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0Seriously, if they just use better compression there'd be no problem. You can fit a 90 min. 1080p Blu-Ray movie onto a standard single layer DVD with the proper compression (I think it was XviD with AC3 audio).
      • archer75, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1This is true.
      • CCmachined, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1more like 2+ hours.

        problem is though, compressed reduces picture quality somewhat :(
    • archer75, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2DVD's with a good upconverting DVD player or a HTPC look almost as good as HD-DVD or Blueray.
    • charlescheese, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2Yeah, and let's stop using light bulbs too. Candles work just fine. Now that you mention it, cars suck too, let's just walk. What's wrong with out legs? They work just fine! When we were kids we walked 30 miles in 6ft deep snow...and we LIKED it!
  • MrLazySmurf, on 10/10/2007, -6/+2Its about time, i remember reading about them developing this about 2 years ago. Finally, aren't they using regular DVD's for this?
  • BrandonMills, on 10/17/2007, -4/+13Another standard for the format war? :{ Nooooo!!!
  • darkyplasma, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10How are they going to make profit?
    • gamer31, on 10/10/2007, -2/+66By selling them for more then it costs to make them
      • Dested, on 10/10/2007, -5/+17I know these comments always get dugg down, but that was the funniest thing ive read on here in a while.
      • DaRizat, on 10/10/2007, -5/+0ZING!
    • iofthestorm, on 10/10/2007, -2/+20????, duh.
    • Nick5309, on 10/10/2007, -0/+41) Research and develop a product
      2) Mass produce product in a foreign country for cheap
      3) ???
      4) profit!!!
    • minigamer1896, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4They are more'n'likely aiming this product at corporate IT centers right now.
      • cquinnd, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1And government agencies.

        NASA alone would probably want a couple of these to store all their current astronomical data.
    • SgtQuackers, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I think what he means is that one of these discs will hold enough to last the average user for a long time so they won't sell to many of the discs.
  • treelovinhippie, on 10/10/2007, -6/+111Lets fix up our Internet infrastructure and get some decent bandwidth... then we won't need to get high-def content on flimsy discs, just stream HD over a 100mbps-1gbps net connection. It's possible (and already being done in some places), just needs the infrastructure in place.
    • willynilly, on 10/10/2007, -11/+3Wrong, for several reasons. First, the Internet is already bogged down with *****. It can't handle every HD movie, TV channel, radio station, and phone call on the planet, no matter how much infrastructure you throw at it. Second, a disc is portable and can be taken on the road, viewed in the car or a hotel room or a plane.
      • BHSPitMonkey, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Exactly. No matter how hard we try, we could never achieve widespread internet access with bandwidth sufficient enough to equal our mighty TV and radio broadcasting systems and mobile phone networks. Even if it were possible (though it isn't), it wouldn't work in a car, or on a plane- or ESPECIALLY in a hotel room. Can you even fathom how wide the tubes would have to be, or where we would put them?

        You read too much.
    • bingobongony, on 10/10/2007, -11/+1Yeah, let's pay to give 100 Meg connections to houses that don't have a neighbor within a mile. That'll be cheap.
    • shortarabguy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5You're thinking of Japan, but Japan doesn't really count since the population density is so high that just a little fiber optic( like to a single building) means potential earnings from thousands of people, and that's a very small amount of money invested. That same money invested in the states instead MIGHT bring fiber optic to a single guy in a rural area, but that's just not worth it, and don't even begin to concern yourself with connecting to people in mountainous locations...
    • Dgen_X, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10While it is a good idea...I will NEVER support media-less media...

      Because the provider will ALWAYS own the media, not the consumer, even though the consumer pays for it. If I'm going to pay $20-$30 for a movie I want to be able to toss it on my shelf and be sure I can watch it in 3 days/weeks/months/years. *****, want to take a trip down memory lane when you hit 85...do you think that Comcast will still be offering that copy of Harold and Kumar go to White Castle on demand, in 30-55 years?
    • bfineman, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0Completely agree (with parent). Physical media for content delivery is not the future. The Internet is the future. Step back for a second and look at cable TV's "on demand", Netflix and Amazon's downloadable movies, and the game industry's "direct to disc" game sales. Now imagine if we had enough bandwidth to make services like this work properly with high quality content, and the current ridiculous DRM situation figured out.

      Addressing points from above: yes, the Internet is currently bogged down. More infrastructure is the answer. Spend a few minutes on one of the two national US research backbones and you will see what I mean. Sure, a disc is portable. But so is the Internet. The Internet is already available in cars (cellular modems), hotel rooms (wifi) and planes (satellite). Sure these links are too slow for high quality media streaming now, but if you think they won't get faster, think back to 1984 for a moment.

      Infrastructure cost is certainly the limiting factor, but it's not a fatal factor. There was a time when it was a big deal to get phone lines to rural locations. The day will come when the same is true of fiber.

      Last comment was addressing DRM, and I agree the current DRM situation is unacceptable. We need to be able to really own the digital media that we purchase. This too will become resolved in time - change is already beginning with iTunes and some other sellers offering DRM free music downloads.
    • CCmachined, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1NOT MORE DRM!!!

      downloadable content == insane DRM limitations. you know it's true.
  • hassanchop13, on 10/10/2007, -8/+2if you can already get like 1080p on like 30 gigs, why do you need 1TB when nobody has TV's for it anyway.
  • DFENS, on 10/10/2007, -3/+47It says 2 to 3 years away from being on shelves. That means it is completely irrelevant to the BlurRay and HDDVD battle.
    • ISIfunded911, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3No, because many people look critically at that war, and realize that they are trying to sell us HC-HD: Highly Compressed HD.
      Both camps rushed to market with the first disk they could produce that could contain a 1080p movie, whatever the image quality, whatever the compression factor.
      The more people realize that 3 years from now we could get real HQ-HD, the faster we will manage to get rid of mediocre BR and HD-DVD.
      • BHSPitMonkey, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4No, many people do NOT look critically at that war. You are mistaken.
    • DFENS, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5HC-HD? What about GEFCSMPCTTD-HD? Good-enough-since-most-people-can't-tell-the-difference High Definition? See, I can make up acronyms too.
      • MagicCake, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Ah yes, GEFCSMPCTTD-HD. That would be what DirecTV sells.
    • themindoverall, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3What's the FC stand for?
  • PhoenixAvatar2, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2It's way to early to have a new format that could actually compete. At this point, with the studios split among two and sales picking up, there's no way that a third could work it's way in for anything except something like a video game console where the disc type doesn't quite matter (Think Gamecube discs). Perhaps in another ten years or so, once the current gen discs are settled and DVD is going out the way VCRs are now.
    • petard, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Gamecube discs are just mini-DVDs which is a standard. A more appropriate comparison would be dreamcast's GDROM
      • BHSPitMonkey, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Gamecube DVDs are just as nonconforming as Dreamcast CDs. Neither will read in your unmodified optical drive.
  • pgillan, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Holy flarging snit indeed!
  • obviouslyshane, on 10/17/2007, -15/+8809 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  • woogley, on 10/17/2007, -1/+40I'd rather have a 3.9TB HVD

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_Versatile_Disc
    • unruled, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1exactly.. HVD has a better chance then this by far. Its also been in development for longer
    • prisoner24601, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6As long as they make the standard be 8cm discs instead of the 12cm ones we have to deal with now. With all these huge capacity formats there's no good reason we can't have "pocketable" discs.
    • Tiak, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Its on wiki, that must mean it's true!!!

      Honestly, if a company has everything going well, they don't replace with website with an "under construction" page for well over a year, and they don't suddenly disappear from the media radar when they were supposed to have product launches(which as far as I can tell, never happened. HVDs don't, and may never exist in that form...
    • Puphles, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2What about a 50TB PCD?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein-coated_disc
  • itseffinkasey, on 10/10/2007, -5/+8I'll give you one good reason why this won't make it to shelves, SONY.
    • dandonia, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Microsoft will probably adapt it in there next console which will come out around the same time where as sony will still be slapping away bluray for a few more years.
      • Tiak, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Are you kidding me?... Is there any good reason for Microsoft to adopt it?... 200 layers of 5 GB means much more expensive to produce (i.e. an extra $10 on every game). And honestly, developers are nowhere near using up 1 TB of binary data... Especially not 1 TB of data that can't be accessed any faster than current data (basically that'd mean developing the same games, but making them 300x longer than they currently are... I don't know of any studio that would be remotely interested in this.
        • dandonia, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1All im saying is in their next console they are going to change media, they wont stick with hd-dvd becasue its already less storage than the PS3's disk so they aint going to try call something a next generation console if sonys current generation console already has the upper hand it wouldnt be a wise move, especially when you figure the PS3's price after the next 5 years will be far less than the wii.

          Their not going to switch to bluray for the same reason plus a little pride so they are going to need a disk that blows them out of the water. Bluray disks arnt cheap and when they were first heard of people were saying things like "thats going to be too expensive to make"

          Im not aware of any disk that is better than bluray that is out, granted i aint up on that so there could be?

          I dont see them using a TB any time soon but who knows. The market could change to the point where multiple games are coming out on one disk like back on the mega drive with the Mega Games series. So Bungie could release a huge halo disk with all the games and the movie in HD which will be out by then and TV show and so on.

          It was just a guess though an I wouldnt put any money on it or anything. lol
    • Tiak, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4OR how about PRICE?... (both of the media and the drives)
  • Chuck1988, on 10/10/2007, -12/+1Use this greater technology and submit to the Jews?????? NEVER, I already gave them Hollywood, Israel, and Brooklyn, but I will never give them my entertainment center. Long live Blu-Ray (what used to be the better format)!!!!!!
    • mrASSMAN, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7What the ***** are you talking about? Seriously, I'm curious.
      • latpack, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Jews = world domination, haven't you heard a word Mel Gibson said?
      • Chuck1988, on 10/10/2007, -3/+0"Mempile in Israel says it’s able to fit an incredible 1TB of data onto one “TeraDisc” which is the same size as CDs and DVDs."

        The Jews make a few good movies and start a couple of deli's and now they think they can start making technology as well??? Well guess what, I'm not gona let that happen. I dont hate the Jews I just think we have given them enough. I man we buit them their own country how much more can a people want.
  • Notsafetoeat, on 10/10/2007, -3/+108one scratch and you lose like 100GB
    • Krun, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I was just about to say something like that. Soon you'll need to use sterile gloves just to put a disc into your video player/PC.
    • Bossman1086, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3Yeah, and people thought the same way when CDs or DVDs first came out. One scratch and you lose 4 GB. That was quite big at the time. Give it more time and a few hundred GB will sound like nothing.
      • dandonia, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1yeah like 50 years or so, 1TB is never going to be a small amount dude. The internet would have to go through a massive change and give speeds of 1GB/s before it would be any where near the same and ISP's would have to be letting your load limit be like 60TB per month, that aint going to happen any time soon. Fair Usage Policies ruined the internet and its development
    • arkmannj, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Back in the day we used to have CD disk caddies, perhaps a semi-permanent (although thinner than the original caddies) would be used.
      a nice thin protective cover. It's not a perfect solution but I think it would survive standard use, assuming that it's not your player (ie xbox720) that's scratching the disks.
    • awhiteflame, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Remember MiniDisc by Sony? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MiniDisc / http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hi-MD

      Little discs similar to CD's but in square cases. In actuality, there is no real reason why CD's have to be out of a case like this, except to be more vulnerable to scratches.
    • Kr4t05, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I remember seeing a small article in PopSci about making it harder to scratch a disc. Some disc maker had decided to place slightly raise bumps or plastic all around the outer edge of the disc's underside. That way if you dropped it or set it data-side down, the entire surface of the disc would still be raised a fraction of an inch off of the surface that it was sitting on, and it wouldn't be scratched as easily. For some reason, I haven't seen this on any of the media I've bought recently.

      Also, something that the military was working on; healing plastic. When the plastic is broken, tiny capsules filled with a type of SuperGlue will break open and heal the crack or scratch. Granted, this is something that would most likely be applied to armor in the near future, but I'd like to see it in consumer goods in about 10 years.
    • Krumm, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Why not use a big chunk for parity?
      The way Hard Disc manufacturers turn the 1000 // 1024 measurements to their advantage, why not say it's 1TB, and have 24GB of parity in there on a middle layer as far away from damage as possible.
      You could have a Video format that uses all the space for data, a Data format with standard Parity (CD/DVD) and Archive format with 10+% reserved for parity.
    • cbuddha42, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1It would be much more vulnerable to scratches because of how thin the layers are. I'm guessing cases would be a must which means the disc takes more space vertically. You might as well just but some thicker blank layer under the data layers so they aren't exposed. Anyway, it wouldn't be nearly as convenient, so I reckon narrowing the laser wavelength is still a better policy. Blue and whatever is after that should provide enough capacity until we hit holographic discs.
      • AzraelRose, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Those same people who are working on the 1TB disc using a red laser are also about to start on a 5TB disc using a blue laser.

        Also, for those disc caddies that everyone seems to love to hate; why can't the caddy be the purchase packaging? Print the title. logo etc. on the front of the caddy, have the blurb and ratings on the back and away you go. No more mucking about with cases and having the wrong disc in the case then spending half an hour looking through your entire collection only to find that the disc you wanted was already in the player.
  • xlar54, on 10/10/2007, -3/+14Cool. Now we can watch the amobea that sits on the gnats ass that rides on the dog's nose. Still aint nothing on tv worth watching.
  • mrASSMAN, on 10/10/2007, -11/+5So incredibly lame. This will never become a consumer product.

    Apparently this blogger doesn't understand the importance of cheap and fast mass manufacturing. Hundreds of layers set microns apart? No ***** way.
    • denhamcoote, on 10/10/2007, -5/+11and 640k will be more than enough for anyone...
      • bingobongony, on 10/10/2007, -8/+2Except no one said that.
        Seriously..time to put that myth to resdt. It makes no one look bad but yourself.
        • mrASSMAN, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2it's like that often quoted "Al Gore invented the internet LOLZ!" myth.
          • bingobongony, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0Except there is actual footage of Al Gore saying that. Out oif context, sure. But he said it. Bill Gates never said that, even out of context.
      • mrASSMAN, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1Sure, we will need more space in the future, but this won't replace the HD-DVD or blu-ray, no doubt in my mind. In the future we will have much more efficient methods of storage, this "tera-disc" will be nothing more than a research project.
      • Tiak, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1...This media is like proposing that we start widely using two foot-wide floppies back in that era... It may contain 1 TB, but reading all of that TB into memory (even assuming that none of it is actually kept there), would take 27 hours.
    • oilcan, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3yes, we are currently at the apex of what technology will ever be, there is NO WAY we could possibly do more than what we do now.


      :D
      • mrASSMAN, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Nowhere in my comment did I suggest that.
  • dumpling, on 10/10/2007, -1/+14Here's something startling that could end the HD war: charging $29.98 for 2 Fast 2 Furious.
    • themacx, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5in Europe a BD disc is that price in Euros... so ad at least 6 dollar to that price... and availability sucks
    • oilcan, on 10/10/2007, -11/+3here's an idea....charge a nominal price for the entertainment such that people are willing to afford it over the hassle of stealing it. what if DVDS cost say your mom's *****? then we'd make a million pussy ***** per ***** second and the world will be completely buried into the sperm chasm of modern civilization. isn't that what evolution is all about?
      • latpack, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6it suddenly makes sense!
      • Kr4t05, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Sir, on the behalf of the Internet, I have to ask you to step away from your keyboard.
    • joeleslie, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Why do Americans always complain about prices? In the UK, a new release DVD (Yes, DVD. None of this HD crap) will set you back about £15. Or, about $30. Same with the PS3. We have to pay the equivalent of about $800 for it.Yet, you were all still complaining about it's price in the US after it's price drop.
      • TheDragonTony, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Just because they're gouging you more doesn't mean they aren't gouging us too. Furthermore just because other people have it worse than you doesn't mean you shouldn't do something (or failing that bitch) about your bad situation.
      • DarkSamus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0we are very spoiled, true
    • awhiteflame, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I always liked Europe's pricing.
      New amazing laptop! US: $1000, UK: £1000, FR: 1000 € !!

      Not a very good sales strategy, eh?
    • ChromaVita, on 10/10/2007, -0/+130 bucks is still too much for 2 Fast 2 Furious...
      • AzraelRose, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Maybe if you gave me $30.
        But I'd rather have a proper Frisbee, thanks. Slightly more chance of it flying straight...
  • sofa0ne, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8After working in the electronics industry as a electronic test technician for 9 years I can tell you that from a manufacturing point of view there is always something better more improved than what is being released to the public at any given time. I can say that planned obsolescence is part of the game. Eventually things improve in someway and justify a move to the new product so the cycle never stops.
    You can never have enough (Fill in the blank), be it bandwidth, storage space, power, etc.
    ramble ramble...*sigh
    • shortarabguy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Stop rambling, I'm trying to figure out if I want to buy my 750 GB hard drive now or wait a little while for the 1 TB drive.
  • Dracusis, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5The problem with these newer optical formats is that they don't offer anything new apart from being "bigger". CD's changed the way we could access media by reading from any part at any time, a large and necessary leap from cassette tapes, but it's still restricted. BD and HDDVD add quality through size, but there's only so far we can extend that kind of thinking.

    I'm sensing a shift towards reliable and embedded solid state storage in our media access points be it cell phones, laptops, workstations or TVs, and the media itself will simply be downloadable or transferred from access point to access point (weather information is avaliable on demand or synced or some combination of both will depend on the evolution of our usage habits and current social networking trends). The convenience of removing the reliance on "physical media" as a medium for our information will be the next evolution in our increasingly complex media-saturated lives. 1TB discs may sounds nice, but I can't foresee widespread use in anything except cheap data archiving.
    • latpack, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2hell no. its going to be difficult to convince the public to accept an intangible item as "theirs". I want my movies and music in their cases, on my shelf for all to see. Not stored on some server that grants me "permission" to access whenever need be.

      movie rentals? sure, but purchasing? no way.
    • dansmeek, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2if I had no idea what any of this technology "stuff" means, I'd say, excellent comment.
      Unfortunately I do. And there is some pretty bad logic going on here :(
    • electricKnuckle, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0that's funny, I'm on the same page with you about a shift towards intangible media. If you can download music online you can get on board with the idea and let go of the need for tangible THINGS cluttering up your world for you to claim ownership. I like that you used the word evolution in describing our usage habits. For as in any evolutionary process, some individuals get there faster than others. I'm not surprised by the two comments above, hell I know people who still play RECORDS! Remember those? Fossils!
  • arcooke, on 10/10/2007, -0/+25Here's an idea. The article says the discs are comprised of 200 5GB layers. Why not just manufacture the discs in "reasonable" sizes by using less layers. Right now, there isn't really a HUGE need for 1TB optical discs, and you know damn well they'd be extremely expensive. But if they released 50 or 100GB discs, that would be fantastic. Then a few years down the road they could add additional layers and release larger discs, and plan for forwards/backwards compatibility within the drives way ahead of time. Hell they could still even sell the 1TB discs if there was demand for them, but to keep cost down for both consumers AND companies, they could just offer smaller versions.
    • LucianSolaris, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5I'm sick of industry letting things slowly leak out to maximize profits.

      For once I want some company with the stones to make something 1000x killer than the current stuff and just release it, no planned obsolence or any of that profit squeezing crud!
      • shortarabguy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1It's hard not to squeeze consumers out of every last penny when they keep coming back...
      • Tiak, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1...You realize that the companies that're coming up with these (like Mempile) aren't actually making profit to begin with... Right?...

        It isn't about balls, it's about technology, InPhase currently has a 300GB version of optical storage out, which, unlike this, could actually be accessed at a reasonable rate... But they cost $180 a disk and $18,000 a drive...
        http://www.inphase-technologies.com/wheretobuy/default.asp?tnn=4
    • latpack, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1good luck with that dream of yours. It doesn't matter how good a new format is, if the requisite number of movie studios aren't on board, then you're SOL.

      expect blu-ray / hd-dvd to be milked another five, six years. they WILL make either one, "the standard" whether you like it or not.
    • TnTBass, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I have a huge demand for 1TB disc's. Mainly because backing up 3 TB of data is not practical using DVD's, and only gets somewhat practical if I could use 50 GB Blue-Ray discs. I don't give a ***** if they can hold HD movie content... I want the capacity! I can't really afford a LTO 2/3/4 solution, which is the only other practical means of backing up this amount of data (I have a huge collection of OS's)

      Actually, I'd prefer the HVD disc one poster already pointed out. The more capacity, the better. (Actually, by the time they come out, I'll have need for 50 TB discs...)
      • dandonia, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I know this one guy, lets call him bob who has nearly 2TB of TV shows across his hard drives but it bugs him that if one of his drives broke he would lose so much. With a couple of TB disks he could easily back up his gear

        THe other bonus for him would be the ability to back up many Hi Def movies at ones on the same disk. All of his TV Shows are in standard def which sucks on his huge screen tv. If he had a spindle of TB disks he could have all his media in Hi Def and not worry about space.
      • Maczek, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Ever heard of external hard drive?
  • TypeEE, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2There are a lot more than just size before a format become standardize. The title is just inaccurrate.
  • noctum17, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Blog spam (when will it end?) - Direct link from manufacturer. http://www.mempile.com/news.html
  • therealknewman, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9alrite thats enough of these silly optical mediums... lets roll out with the solid state already
    • awhiteflame, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1An HD video player ... with NES-like cartridges. Hm.
    • duerra, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2HERE HERE! I would definitely rather have companies focus more on making solid state drives cheaper to develop than to keep coming out with more discs all the time. Discs are too easily scratched or otherwise vulnerable to everyday handling. There is also vulnerability in all the mechanical parts that come along with a laser drive. Solid state is the future, and it should be complete with reliable and durable components to it, too.
  • brooklynboy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6#1 - There is absolutely NO reference to the type of technology that will be used for this alleged Tera-Disc.
    #2 - This is what we call VAPORware.

    This doesn't exist and is merely in the planning phase. No way is this going to come out even in the next 5 years. Blu-Ray and HD-DVD discs still have alot of capacity increase to undergo (blu-ray can theoretically hold 100 gigabytes or more of storage, HD-DVD can theoretically hold just below that) and this Tera-Disc is being hyped up with no specs? Buried as inaccurate.
    • hinmanj, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0HD-DVD can theoretically hold 60 GB.. so its not 'just below' Blu-Ray's 100.
  • narcosis219, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2If size was the determining factor, BluRay would have won already.

    And since this is in the gaming section... BluRay has more capacity than DVD, so it's instant win, according to this article.
    • dandonia, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2It has already one we just havnt seen the full fade out yet, companies like paramount signing a deal with HD-DVD will just prolong the agony. Between major pc manafacturers and the ps3's growing popularity BluRay cant lose. We just need for all the companies to get behind it now.

      the extra storage space offered by the HD DVD from the DVD is just like upgrading you computer with a 256mb of ram, you know it will run fine for the time been and the extra will help you out but you know that a bit further down the road your gonna have to upgrade again.

      I hope this TBDisk catches on thats a big upgrade from the standards we have now
      • latpack, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1storage space ain't everything. HD-DVD uses better compression and does more with less. Also, thanks to the dual-disc thing they're doing, you can buy a HD-DVD with DVD on the other side to use in your older player. This probably has more mainstream appeal than BR's "more space!" marketing ploy.
        • dandonia, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2The thing is Bluray is packed with the ps3 which might not be the most popular at the moment but its still selling consistantly and over the next 10 years it will be. Thats 10 years of people buying their games with movies attatched and they are not going to rush out to buy a HD DVD player when they already have a Hi Def player. If it sells anything like the PS2 it will give bluray 115 Million people the drive. They are not going to worry about DVD's which are already starting the fall out trend. I went to Tesco the other day and they had DVD's like the newest DVD's for a 5er that was cool for me but thats what happened with video.

          Its not just that, anybody that buys a tv now gets a HDTV and when that becomes the standard for television subscription services like Satalitte, Cable, PPV then people are not going to want to watch a standard DVD quality it will look blured and just plain not as good. So the HD-DVD appeal has gone.

          The mass market wouldn't understand compression at all! They know what size is though and thats what matters.

          So you see bluray has already won we just havnt seen the end result yet


  • Cherubim, on 10/10/2007, -5/+41TB porn archive lol!

  • dandonia, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Bring on the storage!

    I feel it for the guy that scratches the disk though or the dog that chews it!

  • prisoner24601, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8I just want to see any one of these "next generation" discs be released as 8cm standard size and see them finally kill off the 12cm discs we've been living with for 25 years now. It's beyond stupid that we still can't get a copy of standard software or a movie on a disc that fits in your shirt pocket. I'm really tired of the marketing drones trying to make people think "you're getting more and that's why our product price is so high" by sticking with the absurdly oversized 12cm discs. We should have converted years ago to pocket-sized optical ROM media.
    • minigamer1896, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The Sony HandyCam already uses the 8cm. It is getting there, albeit slowly.
  • Crazysah, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2The Price and the space left over will not make any Studio wanna go for this.
  • jlebrech, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4The problem is that hollywood will never support it as they are already plowing money into Bluray or HD-DVD.

    That Israeli company should be marketing it for corporate backup, as why would 10x movies be put on one disc.
    It should be too difficult to aim the price at the tco of conventional backup prices, and maybe at write-once. It could be a whole month backup or even some incremental diff system, that if it supports multiple sessions.

    But I think what hollywood needs is a media that can only be writen within a factory and read in the home. (i.e imposibble to copy)
  • InfamousGreggyG, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0flarging snit?! indeed.
  • shortarabguy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2The article said that it would be a fraction of the cost of other solutions. The last 1 TB station that I saw was 500 dollars. Assuming that he meant fractional and not "just a little less," it will actually be affordable...
  • shavenlunatic, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2unless read/write speeds are magically sped up..this will be useful as a backup tool imo
  • ikillpeoplexx, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2I love news articles that end in "HOLY CRAP!!"
  • carl25, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3cool, now just to see the price of the writers and readers and how much one disc costs
  • XaeroVincent, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4Totally useless.

    Some company can immediately claim to have developed a 1 Yottabyte optical disc and it would mean next to nothing.

    It costs *a lot* of money to establish a format and get a backing being it. BluRay and HD-DVD is already confusing enough.

    The existing BluRay and HD-DVD have huge potential in that they can be multi-layered like DVDs. I believe I read that TDK has finished developing a prototype player capable of reading 200 GB, 8-layer BluRay discs.
  • XBSHX, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1And it also costs a ***** of money, its never going to catch on.
    • Cyberen, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2so was every other new technology. Now you can get a stack of CDs cheap.
  • psykiv, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Bah. Wake me up when I'm actually IN the movie.
  • JonahNYC, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Well, the disc could permanently be in a caddy so human hands or other objects never touch the surface.
  • Rodman930, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9"On a 1TB disc, you could store 212 DVD-quality movies, 250,000 MP3 files or 1,000,000 large Word documents."
    But the real question is, how many Libraries of Congess can it hold?
  • tault, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4For all you nay sayers did you ever think you can now hold the entire series of voltron on one dvd. I think it just paid for itself hah.
  • yow1, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1altogether now: 50GB is enough for anyone.
  • ShinGouki, on 10/10/2007, -0/+150 GB enough? I disagree strongly...
    I would like to make a back up of my date with ONE DISK. And if i feel unsafe i can copy THAT disk to antother so TB oder 3.9 Holo disk seem fine.
    What most people here dont get ist that a DATA Storage standard does NOT have to be a movie PlayBack standard. Movies WILL be streamed in future. If u Save it on HD or back it up on other media ( TB or Holo disk) its ur choice...
  • d3c4y, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4thats really gonna ***** up my ratio! :
  • Cole2026, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Tera-Discs would be totally useless to media conglomerates. It would cost a fortune, and they would have a ton of space left over. Bear in mind that 1080p is still the highest resolution; it is not even mainstream yet.
    • Lehawk, on 10/10/2007, -1/+01080p = 1920×1080 ; at 32 bit color that's 8294400 bytes per frame. 30hz is 248832000 bytes per second. or 14929920000 bytes per minute. or 895795200000 bytes per hour. or 874800000 kilobytes per hour. or 854296.875 megabytes per hour. or 834.2742919921875 gigabytes per hour.

      Which means, that ~83% of this disc will be taken up with one hour of uncompressed video. LOTR RotK, is just over 4 hours long, so you still lose ~70% of the video due to compression. We haven't counted audio (uncompressed would be nice too) and DVD specials yet. I doubt any movie would waste space willingly, when the compression can be tuned down to fit available space.
  • 5Twelve, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2If you think about it, it's not actually big enough. They come out with what seems like a ridiculously large size disk but by the time it actually comes to market multiple terabytes of HD storage should be pretty commonplace. Hell I already have ~2 Terabytes of space now just for my media server who knows what I will have 3 years from now when this finally shows up. Oh and I still wouldn't backup, gotta live life on the edge....
    • Rhythmicidea, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0But what realistically is going to take up that much space other than extremely high end movies and games? Oh and your an idiot.
  • Bahimiron, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1This actually isn't all that new.

    HD-DVD and BluRay were both obsolete out of the gate.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 89 of 89 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.