128GB BDXL Blu-ray Disc Specification Finalized

[annymmo]

[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]Let me fix that for yaThat's better.If all people do is pop down the shops and buy a movie, they don't really care what the capacity is they just want to put it in and watch it. So as far as once-only recordable media is concerned, 128gb is simply laughable. In an age where recordable media is being outstripped in every area by flashdrives, SSDs and SD cards we should dump rotating disks to the history bin. I have already said in previous posts that BluRay will be the last optical disk format and I stand by the statement. Eventually someone will make a decision to manufacture a player with a simple memory card reader, like SD, and movies will be distibuted on the same format. It wouldn't be rocket science, lower production, packaging, warehousing and shipping costs. Smaller footprint at point of sale and no issues with compatability - backwards or forwards - and even better they don't scratch.Movies on memory cards - FTW.[/citation]

Ho there, flash cards do have compatibility issues.
It's not about the card themselves, but the file system used.
Right now optical disks have a specified file system.
This makes it possible to exchange them and be able to play every disk on every player. Unfortunately for flash cards, Microsoft has corrupted most standards by pushing substandard, crappy, fat-derived file systems. This causes great incompatibilities. It's also not designed to last a long time. New SD-card specifications are coming really fast after another lately because the limits gets reached over and over again.

Second point, the multilayer concerns me. Because doing something multilayer is very complicated to make. Thus more room for errors.
I don't thrust all that multilayer stuff. I'll rather do single layer when I can.

All this stuff about optical drives. The future is 3d optical memory that can be read and written to without mechanical moving parts.

 

[kinggraves]

The fact a new device is needed is no different from DVDDL. The current laser can't handle it. This really isn't much more packing though when you do the math.
A 2 layer holds 50GB, 25GB per layer.
A 3 layer holds 100GB, 33GB per layer.
A 4 layer holds 128GB, 32GB per layer.
It seems to me the new device should increase single and dual layer capacities as well.

What catapulted DVDDL was the fact that DL was being used in commercial releases, so they were needed to bootleg without shrinking and degrading quality. Until these new discs are used commercially, they aren't necessary to the public.
People don't use optical discs for actual backup. As far as giving to your friends, if you really need to give them 100GB worth of data, 2 discs will probably work as well.

The bright side here is that new tech will push the current tech down in price.

 

[dark_lord69]

"current laser hardware aren't compatible with the newer media."

For this reason. You will NOT see this new standard take off.

 

[spidey180]

128GB of porn that mom will never find!

 

[RADIO_ACTIVE]

I am dreaming of a game that large... lol then maybe it wouldnt be finished in 5 hours lol

 

[Guest]

Meh, flash-based storage is more reliable, universal, and more damage resistant. If you really wanted to backup 100+ gigs of data, you would be better off saving it in the cloud or in an external HDD

 

[adipose]

[citation][nom]tokenz[/nom]But this is a new spec. So new writers. More capacity and higher cost. I just wish they would complete the spec, or that bluray would die off completely. For instance the 3d crap. So now I have to buy another bluray player when I just spend 200 on the one I have now. Its total bs. I know the 128 is used for managed backups, but its the same thing. I think I will just stick with hard drives. (they're cheaper in the long run to)[/citation]

You don't have to buy a new BR player because of 3D. You only have to do it if you want 3D. Since you never had 3D before, what exactly is the problem? You don't like it if new technology comes out that you didn't have before?

All videos will be available in 2D format. Not everyone cares about 3D. But apparently you do. So go buy a 3D capable blu-ray player (or use a PS3) if you want it so bad. And if you don't want it...do nothing.

As for 128GB, it's not targeted at consumer market. They are not going to require upgraded blu-ray readers at this time in the movie market. This is for corporate clients who still are using optical for data storage (why, I do not know).

Every time there's an upgrade to a product, people start to bitch that they have to upgrade. Well, you don't have to upgrade. And in this case, you will not miss out on anything by not upgrading. So chill.

 

[eloplayspolo]

The idea of being able to put a entire television Series or A collection of movies onto 1 disc doesnt excite anyone?
I would love to being able to pop in the entire Lord of the Rings Series on Blu-ray and not have to change a disc, You could now have all of the Bond Series' on prob 2 or 3 discs, pretty cool if you ask me.

 

[Simple11]

Do some of the posters here think that these are gonna be used for internal storage? I would not want to lug around a HDD that holds my latest hi-def game. Dummies!

 

[jacobdrj]

I hate optical media. Wouldn't be so bad if the physical disk standard were pocket friendly... Standard media size is too big to fit a diskman in your pocket. That is what ultimately made the portable flash/HDD media player so popular so fast...

 

[LazyGarfield]

too little wayyyyy to late

Who would store data on a BD? 128 GB is a joke, even more is the burning speed. Not to mention that noone knows how long the data would last on a BD because of the lack of experience.

This can just fail tbh.

 

[jacobdrj]

Last bit of reliable optical media I used was CD-Rs... DVD-Rs, RVR+Rs, DVD+-RWs, DVD-RAMs all failed me time and time again. Density is just too high, and propensity for scratches is just too great...

 

[TheDuke]

i'm still waiting for a fast 16x blu-ray burner for less than $100
this won't take off for consumers because of the need for new hardware but it can maybe for PC and the next game consoles

 

[lauxenburg]

Ehhh....on a disk? Why? Just through it onto a small flash based module instead....

 

[kronos_cornelius]

I think the Standard Association know the BD's are obsolete for consumers, that is why they are targeting businesses.

Most comments are ignoring that snippet:
"Targeted primarily at commercial segments such as broadcasting, medical and document imaging enterprises with significant archiving needs"

But what do you expect Google or the cloud company to use to backup your information ? I assume BDXL would be better than tape, does somebody know how Tape compares to BDXL ?

What I like best to bakcup info is basically mirrors, having the data on multiple drives, not the actual Raid 0 configuration

 

[loomis86]

[citation][nom]quantum mask[/nom]That won't happen for a while for one simple reason - They're cheap. If your friend wants some files off your computer, are you just going to give him you HDD or your USB drive. I don't think so. You're gonna burn that sucker a 10 cent CD or a 25 cent DVD. Don't forget about music. Even though most cars nowadays have lots of options for playing music (ie. HDD, FM tranmitter, flash drive) a lot of people still use CDs. It'll be a while before they disappear because they're so cheap to manufacture.[/citation]


If my friend wants some of my files he should hand me one of his USB drives.

 

[dEAne]

I see the girl in the picture. Anyway its too early to say that bluray is very promising but is it reliable and for how many years.

 

[Gin Fushicho]

Well crap. guess I won't be able to watch the future "super" HD on my current PS3.

 

[JonnyDough]

[citation][nom]asdf634[/nom]I'm sorry, where's the article? I can only see the girl...Seriously though, not compatible with current players? No thanks....unless it's cheap (or comes with the girl)[/citation]

I'll take the 14 year old girl AND a cheap player. I could really use someone to load the discs for me and get me another beer from the fridge!

 

[KingArcher]

Nah, I'll skip the 128GB BDXL Blu-ray Disc. Can I have the one holding the discs?

 

[rohitbaran]

[citation][nom]rocket_sauce[/nom]I just want them to put entire tv seasons onto one disk[/citation]
Well, buy a 1TB HDD and put 10 seasons on one disk (or drive to be exact).

 

[Guest]

Blu-ray seems to be years from being cost effective, simply because of the price of a blank little round disc that looks like a CD. It means the technology is only good for high definition film, optical watching and optical movie recording, considering the screen resolution it can cope with. But that's the limit of its use, economically, now. (Even now, to burn your home camcorder films onto Blu-ray disc can be ennerving, in case the disc has a burn error - it's not a cheap trial experience. Tapes never did that.)

For the price of an excellent Sony (BD) Blu-ray player itself now, you could buy 3 to 4 of the new BDXL discs. There's nothing worthwhile there probably for some time. If manufacturers get the economics all wrong, the technology is going to be arbitrary, a tiny sideline.

 

[Guest]

This is for commercial applications, not your everyday consumer. They are not expecting people to buy new players or discs. This is for companies that want to permanently store tons of data. Hard drives can become corrupt or fail and they take up a lot more space than discs. This is an option for these companies, NOT consumers. I think most of you missed that part of the article.