Is (not) DL already dead media format?

[zagortenej]

As I read that Pioneer just announced their new 109 DVD burner which will support both + and - DL writing I couldn't help but feel: 'What's the point, is (not) DL dead media format anyway?' What I mean by this is the fact that although Pioneer and other manufacturers are putting out dual format/layer burners, the - DL media is, needless to say, nowhere in site (DVD Forum is yet to certify final specs for the format) and + DL, such as it is, is not without its own problems. In the meantime, it seems that the new HD-DVD and Blue-ray DVD formats are much more developed and, it appears, just around the corner, with consumer-level burners/recorders not that far in the offing as well. And if this is indeed the case (as it appears to be) the question that begs an answer is: 'Why bother with DL format at all?' By the time its details and compatibility/reliability issues are worked out and the media widely (and affordably) available, HD-DVD and/or blue-ray (you pick) will be out as well and will offer greater capacity with more ubiquitous presence on the market. And, probably, the media (single-layer, that is) will be cheaper than DL format disc. Even if, initially, it ends up being slightly more expensive, the storage capacity will easily justify price differential.

If the above holds true, the second question that comes to mind is:'What's the point in investing in a DL burner (provided, of course, one already has a pre-DL one)?' After much 'excrutiating hear-searching' I reallised, 'Not much, really.' I have to admit, taking advantage of Future Shop's Boxing Week sale I did, with much entusiasm, invest in a DL burner and retired my still-flawless old Pioneer 105. But since DL is - as it would appear - already dead perhaps it is time to dust off that old Pioneer and bring the DL burner in for a refund. Might as well (eventually) invest that money in a format that will stand a chance of surviving, and lasting.

Just a thought.

[doppletwo]

Can any format "survive"? Please give me one example of a format that has "survived". Won't there always be something better. Or do you mean win a format battle?

[zagortenej]

Can any format "survive"? Please give me one example of a format that has "survived". Won't there always be something better. Or do you mean win a format battle?

By 'surviving' I meant simply 'lasting past its infancy'. You are perhaps right - ultimately no format will survive (in a sense of securing everlasting presence and usability) but some of them will have longer and more successful life-span than others. At the moment, much of it seems to point to DL being stillborn.

[freestyler]

Dead format? Dual layer recordables just came out...

DL is not a format, it follows the DVD spec just like recordables... All it does is offer greater capacity.

Dual layer discs have existed since Terminator 2 was first released on DVD.

How do you measure the success of a format based on it's recordable counterpart?

[TaoTeWingChun]

By 'surviving' I meant simply 'lasting past its infancy'. You are perhaps right - ultimately no format will survive (in a sense of securing everlasting presence and usability) but some of them will have longer and more successful life-span than others. At the moment, much of it seems to point to DL being stillborn.

If history has anything to say, long before +DL can be considered 'stillborn', I think you will see that the advent of HD-DVD and Blue-Ray media will see a dramatic price drop in +/- R/RW and +DL media. The prices of the new HD-DVD and Blue-Ray media will be up where +DL is now, if not higher. This is the logical progression of all things technology-based. By the time Blue-Ray and HD-DVD burners and media are widely available, no doubt the +DL format will be as commonplace as +/- R/RW is today.

As for making the statement that one technology is 'stillborn' versus another, I seem to recall users of MCA (Micro Channel Architecture) PS/2 systems decrying the death of PC clones way back when . . . Just remember that newer doesn't always mean better, as history has shown.

[daamon]

@ zagortenej - To a degree, you're asking the wrong questions - It's not a case of whether + or - DL is going to be superceded soon, it's what the market wants that is the driving factor.

Take a look at the original Betamax vs VHS war - VHS won because it had better marketing (so consumers bought VHS players) even though Betamax was a better format.

Then comes along DVD - soooooo many people had VHS players that VHS, though inferior to DVD, is still a very "alive" format because people still buy movies on VHS.

"Better" formats might come along, but if soooo many people have got DVD players they'll tick with DVDs - it's called "inertia". Sure, some will change, but not many - they'll be happy with what they've got for a while to come, and waiting for the new technology to get cheaper before they splash out (again).

[Cole]

I agree with daamon, but want to add, that moving up from VHS to DVD was a natural thing to do because of (majorly) an increase in picture quality and (minorly) a better storeage media (space, size, less fragility etc).

An average film length will still be about an hour and a half, so Blue-Ray's twently five hours, seems a bit excessive for a film - unless there are twenty three and a half hours of extras. After all, how high can a film's bit rate be before you get a drastic improvement on a DVD picture quality? I don't think that most would notice any.

However, maybe there is an argument for Blue-Ray when releasing whole television series on one disc.

[mats.hogberg]

it's what the market wants that is the driving factor.
Take a look at the original Betamax vs VHS war - VHS won because it had better marketing

Isn't this a contradiction? I read "what the market wants" as "what there is the highest demand for" but I equal "it had better marketing" with "we were made to believe we wanted" - if not a contradiction, it's at least not the same thing!

Just nitpicking
/Mats

[Capmaster]

mats - Doesn't "it had better marketing" usually result in "what the market wants"? Doesn't one follow the other?

[koolaidwa]

my thing is, is the new HD-dvd and blu ray drives are going be very pricy at first and the medi will prob be much more then the DL media is right now

thats my views

[lenti_75]

it's NOT DEAD, it's their way of making money.

vhs>cd>dvd>DL dvd>hd dvd > blue ray > XXXX ray >>>> NO ray...

you want the XXX ray first time ??? NO WAY.

[adam]

An average film length will still be about an hour and a half, so Blue-Ray's twently five hours, seems a bit excessive for a film - unless there are twenty three and a half hours of extras. After all, how high can a film's bit rate be before you get a drastic improvement on a DVD picture quality? I don't think that most would notice any.

Its not the bitrate its the resolution. With 6 times higher resolution, and enough bitrate to accurately represent it, HD really is at least 6 times higher quality than DVD. In my opinion, the jump from DVD to HD is much more dramatic then the jump from VHS to DVD. Blue-Ray does have way more capacity then even HD needs, and in that sense it is a waste right now. But I think they have future formats in mind. One day we really will need all that capacity. In the meantime its still a viable option for Hi-Def footage.

But if HD-DVD and/or blue ray came out today, DVD and DVDr/- and DL recordables would still last for probably another 10 years. All hardware and software is literally obsolete by the time it reaches the consumer, but that doesn't mean its not still marketable. And once a format becomes the standard (first VHS, now DVD, then HD-DVD or blue ray) it takes many years to phase it out.

[jabloomf1230]

There is one factor that has not been mentioned. There was no copy protection with analog TV broadcasts or pre-recorded VHS tapes. DVDs had copy protection, but this protection was eventually cracked. To maintain backwards compatibility with set-top DVD players, the protection scheme could only be tweaked (bad sector tricks).

HDTV broadcasts and both HD DVD and Blue-Ray formats have copy protection, which will take a significant effort to overcome. The market is completely different for these new formats and consumer acceptance will be limited to renting or buying the original or making copies of non-digital versions of the programming.

Although HD DVD and Blue-Ray players will be sought out by people with HDTV displays, the market for the recorders is more cloudy. If I were in the market for a regular DVD burner right now, I wouldn't be worrying about it being outdated in the next year or so.