Sony Developing 300GB Blu-Ray Successor

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Sony Developing 300GB Blu-Ray Successor

Blu-Ray Disc

Sony has signed an agreement with Panasonic to develop high capacity optical discs for 2015.

One of the saving graces of the PlayStation 3, especially during its early days, was the Blu-Ray format. The PS3 was, at its release, one of the cheapest and best Blu-Ray players on the market. The Blu-Ray in turn, especially after it defeated the competing HD-DVD format, has remained a draw for the PS3 in the years to follow thanks to its high storage capacity and prevalent presence in HD entertainment. Now, Sony has revealed that the future could see the introduction of a new wave of optical discs with a storage capacity well beyond current standards.

According to a press release put out by Sony, the company, which created the Blu-Ray format, has signed an agreement with Panasonic with the intent of "developing a next-generation standard for professional-use optical discs." These new discs will be developed with a recording capacity of around 300GB, three times that of the Blu-Ray's100GB upper limit. The discs will fulfill "[the] increasing need for archive capabilities, not only from video production industries, such as motion pictures and broadcasting, but also from cloud data centers that handle increasingly large volumes of data following the evolution in network services." If all goes to plan this new high capacity format will become available in 2015.

While the press release doesn't explicitly discuss videogames, it's not much of stretch to surmise that more storage capacity could mean bigger games. Likewise, a high capacity disc would probably be helpful in furthering the proliferation of 4K and Ultra HD, video formats that provide extreme high definition at the cost of enormous file sizes. This being said, if the new discs aren't compatible with current Blu-Ray drives (a significant possibility), it could limit their usefulness on hardware like the PS4 which will employ a Blu-Ray disc drive.

Source: Sony

Permalink

StewShearer:
These new discs will be developed with a recording capacity of around 300GB, three times that of the Blu-Ray's

image

sweet jesus, most SSD's don't even hold that much, fuckin christ.

still, technology making more jumps is all the better.

StewShearer:
This being said, if the new discs aren't compatible with current Blu-Ray drives (a significant possibility), it could limit their usefulness on hardware like the PS4 which will employ a Blu-Ray disc drive.

My thoughts exactly. While it's a neat idea, Blu-Ray itself has barely been adopted yet - most people still stick to DVDs. Also, 3x the storage is not nearly a big enough leap for people to really care about. Floppies, disc, DVD, blu-ray; these have all had a leap of several magnitudes (~100x boost). The next major format will only change when people start sharing terabytes if we follow Moore's Law, otherwise this will go the way of laserdisc, betamax, and HD-DVD.

On the otherhand, if they can manage to get Blu-Ray players to read them as well, they'll simply become BluRay+, just like Sony did with the original compression updates. Originally ~14GB, they somehow got the same discs to hold ~33GB, then ~100GB.

What the fuck? This isn't good news. We were supposed to be moving away from disc technology!

*wets pants*
I think I just wet myself. See this is what I love about technology, you think it's at its peak, but then it just shoots up again. Really it's thanks to Sony and Panasonic that we have these huge leaps, although I'd wait to release the stuff for it and have Bluray catch on a bit more.

This again raises my question I have about the Wii U though, why in the hell did they design it with only a 25GB limit with the drive when they worked with Panasonic? Makes no sense really.

I'm glad the Xbox One and Wii U both have higher capacity discs. The PS3's greatest weakness was that cross-platform games were often gimped on PS3 because the 360 drive only read DVDs. And cruddy online. But mostly the disc thing.

P.S. Thanks

So did they finalize a definite 4K standard?
Because without compression 300GB won't last very long with 4k...

Considering that the cheapest 4K TVs are currently around 5000$ I would not worry too much about a new player...

Covarr:
he PS3's greatest weakness was that cross-platform games were often gimped on PS3 because the 360 drive only read DVDs. And cruddy online. But mostly the disc thing.

BS propaganda at its best.

Well, as they said, this is for professional use. I don't expect this to be used commercially for a long while. At least not until the next console generation. These are likely only going to be used on the business side of things for a long while.

Adam Jensen:
What the fuck? This isn't good news. We were supposed to be moving away from disc technology!

Its the same thing with HDD and SSD.

The former is still around purely because its way ahead in sheer capacity.

I can't see this lasting very long. At this point, if you need offline access to stuff, it's easier to just download it ahead of time. Reminds me of the guys working on perfecting the turntable. They started using vibration isolation and laser styluses, only to have the CD come out and render all their work moot.

What in the bloody hell takes up 300 gigs that you would want to put on an optical disc?

c'mon, put the money into making SSD's cheaper per GB. not more optical tech

bringer of illumination:
What in the bloody hell takes up 300 gigs that you would want to put on an optical disc?

4K movies? They need something for those new TVs. along with a new format in which to play them on. If anything it'll be expensive like the Blu-ray was at launch, if not more so.

Adam Jensen:
What the fuck? This isn't good news. We were supposed to be moving away from disc technology!

That would mean downloading 300gb.

Good christ even saying that puts a chill down my spine. And a chill down my ~70kb/s connection.

There were diminishing returns when films went from DVD to blu-ray. Though I think blu-rays look absolutely fantastic in comparison and much prefer them, it's nothing like the leap from VHS to DVD. A lot of people are more than willing to stick with DVDs and so the blu-ray adoption rate has been slow. By the time this new technology comes out, the average consumer will have only just upgraded to a 1080p TV in the past five years and started buying blu ray discs in the last two, if they've even bothered. 4K TVs only really show benefit at a certain size and distance, so they aren't going to be commonplace enough even for enthusiasts.

I think blu-ray is absolutely fantastic and it's the best home media has ever been, especially in regards to communicating the original look and feel of a film that DVDs sometimes fail to replicate. But this new technology serves little benefit beyond 4K and 4K simply isn't that viable in a consumer environment.

Adam Jensen:
What the fuck? This isn't good news. We were supposed to be moving away from disc technology!

3D TV and internet enabled TV failed to increase TV sales so the TV manufacturies are moving to 4K and then 8K (the UK government is talking about going straight to 8K starting 2016) as the new marketing term.

So film's will need to be released in 4K and 8K and that is going to need lots of storage as 2 hours of 4K TV/Film could need 150GB of date (2 hours a day = 4.5TB a month several orders of magnitude beyond what someone watching 2 hours of 1080P netflix currently uses)and the ISP's who already hate 1080P streaming already really hate the new formats.

Here
(http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/07/why-youtube-buffers-the-secret-deals-that-make-and-break-online-video/)

It explains how ISP's cripple high bandwidth sites and how greedy they are.

For example it used to be you pay Cox for the internet and Netflix pays Cogent, with Cox and Cogent having a "peering" agreement to transfer there data for free but now Cox wants both Netflix and Cogent to pay them for receiving the Netflix data as there's alot of it even though you have already payed Cox and it's why so many people get laggy youtube in the USA now.

So as the internet infrastructure upgrades at a much slower pace a new disc based media will be needed while memory cards are an option it is still cheaper to mass produce high capacity disc's than cards.

Irridium:

Adam Jensen:
What the fuck? This isn't good news. We were supposed to be moving away from disc technology!

That would mean downloading 300gb.

Good christ even saying that puts a chill down my spine. And a chill down my ~70kb/s connection.

And thus publishers defeated the pirates by making the movies files too big to download for anything but shitty cinema-cam.

maybe its just me but i cant even begin to imagine the game that needs for its initial playthrough anyhtingnear 300GB. I mean, I get its not really for videogame use and its moer for the higher up stuff that the average person isnt doing. But there is a point here you have to ask how much is too much.

But we can already fit 300's Gerard Butler on a disk.
image

Not sure why there would be even a demand for this aside from super-high quality movies. But I suppose all technological advances are good.

Ishigami:
So did they finalize a definite 4K standard?
Because without compression 300GB won't last very long with 4k...

Considering that the cheapest 4K TVs are currently around 5000$ I would not worry too much about a new player...

Covarr:
he PS3's greatest weakness was that cross-platform games were often gimped on PS3 because the 360 drive only read DVDs. And cruddy online. But mostly the disc thing.

BS propaganda at its best.

Not true at all : http://gizmodo.com/5994765/seiki-50+inch-4k-tv-eyes+on-how-the-hell-is-a-tv-this-beautiful-so-cheap

FargoDog:
4K TVs only really show benefit at a certain size and distance, so they aren't going to be commonplace enough even for enthusiasts.

Size thing maybe, but distance not so much according to the reviewer above.

4k will start becoming the norm relatively quickly i would think, i just hope games can utilize it. Was depressing to me as a PS3 owner how very few of games (especially later release games) utilized 1080p. Seems most of the early games on PS3 used it, but it came more infrequent as the years went on. I can only think that the the xbox's cap at 720p played a part in this, but that is pure speculation. Also does not account for the lack of 1080p games within the PS exclusives. Also, seeing as both the Xbone and PS4 appear to have 4k capabilities, i would assume that these new discs will play on regular blu-ray players. Although, that being said, the XB and PS will also have the ability to update their firmware and whatnot if it's required for new optical disc recognition or something, which normal BR players won't be able to do.

Erm, why is this news?

But hey, at least Sony remaining commited to physical media means these kinds of leaps for all of us. Though I wonder exactly what 300GB would mean for media at this point? Would that be enough for uncompressed 4K movies with uncompressed 7.1 channel sound data? Dayum, that's an experience.

Irridium:

Adam Jensen:
What the fuck? This isn't good news. We were supposed to be moving away from disc technology!

That would mean downloading 300gb.

Good christ even saying that puts a chill down my spine. And a chill down my ~70kb/s connection.

Digital download is not the only alternative to discs. Why not a USB based storage device? OK, not necessarily USB, but something like that. Something more durable and faster than a disc.

bringer of illumination:
What in the bloody hell takes up 300 gigs that you would want to put on an optical disc?

How about a TV show? Wouldn't it be nice to watch all 10 seasons of Smallville without having to change disks?

Keep in mind I know very little about how this stuff works.

Well if games and movies end up utilising all that storage capacity then I think physical media may not be going away as quickly as we thought.

Cue all the Sony haters saying that this will fail like all the other Sony formats. Somehow no one remembers Sony's other failed formats like CD and 3.5" floppies. Not like anyone ever used those in the 90s.

/sarcasm

Considering that Blu-Ray has yet to gain the majority marketshare in optical media, and optical media itself is becoming replaced with streaming services, I don't see this becoming the new craze any time soon.

People value convenience over fancy tech porn. Sure, a 300GB Blu Ray disc would be pretty swish. But it's not going to change the fact that more and more people now prefer to simply stream a film through Netflix or Hulu. Sure, Blu-Ray Plus/2/whatever may have a 4K resolution, but most people don't care about that. It's a minority niche which would really, really care about buying 300GB Blu-Ray discs to watch films on a 4K TV. Most people would prefer to just load up a film on a streaming site, and instantly watch it there.

The Betamax offered superior image quality to VHS, but VHS won went it came to usability and convenience (longer recording times, better use in camcorders) so consumers flocked there.

This isn't going to kickstart a mass move for consumers to go out and buy 4K televisions. Most consumers are happy with 1080p HD, and there is no general need or requirement for higher resolutions. You can't kick off a new television standard every 6 or 7 years. It takes a lot longer for the general population to move from one television standard to the next.

OlasDAlmighty:

bringer of illumination:
What in the bloody hell takes up 300 gigs that you would want to put on an optical disc?

How about a TV show? Wouldn't it be nice to watch all 10 seasons of Smallville without having to change disks?

Keep in mind I know very little about how this stuff works.

I suppose

But isn't that a bit niche?

I mean, is it REALLY worth spending what must be thousands upon thousands of dollar in R&D for something like that?

Especially when people will have to buy some new, likely extremely overpriced player to use the damn things.

gigastar:

Adam Jensen:
What the fuck? This isn't good news. We were supposed to be moving away from disc technology!

Its the same thing with HDD and SSD.

The former is still around purely because its way ahead in sheer capacity.

It's ahead in sheer capacity and longevity. SSDs have terrible shelf lives. Additionally high rpm hdd approach the speeds of SSD easily.

And here I thought that cartridges would make a comeback. :(

Pretty neat, though. It would be nice to have entire series on single discs and whatnot.

crepesack :
SSDs have terrible shelf lives.

It's a bit silly to pull statistics from the times when consumer SSD tech was still new. In more recent times SSD's from Samsung, Intel, and Crucial have far lower failure rates than HDD's from Western Digital, Samsung and Seagate.

crepesack :
Additionally high rpm hdd approach the speeds of SSD easily.

Ishigami:
So did they finalize a definite 4K standard?
Because without compression 300GB won't last very long with 4k...

Considering that the cheapest 4K TVs are currently around 5000$ I would not worry too much about a new player...

Covarr:
he PS3's greatest weakness was that cross-platform games were often gimped on PS3 because the 360 drive only read DVDs. And cruddy online. But mostly the disc thing.

BS propaganda at its best.

Uncompressed video takes up a huge amount of data anyway -- 300 gigs wouldn't hold much uncompressed standard def video, let alone HD or 4K. There isn't a digital video standard on the market (At least for consumers) that uses uncompressed video. DVD uses MPEG 2, and Blu-Ray uses MPEG 4.

OT: I'm more curious about how they did it than anything else. There has been talk for years about an optical format that would use holograms, so that the data would be stored in three dimensions instead of two, greatly increasing the amount of available storage space. I wonder if Sony is finally going to follow through on what various fly by night operations have been promising for the last decade?

bringer of illumination:

OlasDAlmighty:

bringer of illumination:
What in the bloody hell takes up 300 gigs that you would want to put on an optical disc?

How about a TV show? Wouldn't it be nice to watch all 10 seasons of Smallville without having to change disks?

Keep in mind I know very little about how this stuff works.

I suppose

But isn't that a bit niche?

I mean, is it REALLY worth spending what must be thousands upon thousands of dollar in R&D for something like that?

Especially when people will have to buy some new, likely extremely overpriced player to use the damn things.

It wouldn't happen anyway. Like I said on the facebook comments, if only the companies who owned these things would allow that to happen. There was a lot of talk when Blu-Ray was announced of putting an entire TV series on one disc in standard def (which if it's old and shot on video, that's all it exists as anyway), but it never happened because season boxed sets of DVDs made more money.

I mean it kind of makes sense, why sell the series as one (presumably between $20 and $100) purchase when you could sell multiple seasons, each in that price range?

Yuuki:

crepesack :
SSDs have terrible shelf lives.

It's a bit silly to pull statistics from the times when consumer SSD tech was still new. In more recent times SSD's from Samsung, Intel, and Crucial have far lower failure rates than HDD's from Western Digital, Samsung and Seagate.

crepesack :
Additionally high rpm hdd approach the speeds of SSD easily.

Uhm shelf life isn't the same as failure rate. HDDs hold data pretty much indefinitely. SSDs will die with time. Additionally data recovery form HDDs is significantly easier than with SSD.

And as for the seek times/speed I was told the wrong information. There's no need to be rude on this board.

crepesack :

Yuuki:

crepesack :
SSDs have terrible shelf lives.

It's a bit silly to pull statistics from the times when consumer SSD tech was still new. In more recent times SSD's from Samsung, Intel, and Crucial have far lower failure rates than HDD's from Western Digital, Samsung and Seagate.

crepesack :
Additionally high rpm hdd approach the speeds of SSD easily.

Uhm shelf life isn't the same as failure rate. HDDs hold data pretty much indefinitely. SSDs will die with time. Additionally data recovery form HDDs is significantly easier than with SSD.

And as for the seek times/speed I was told the wrong information. There's no need to be rude on this board.

From what I understand as long as the drive is powered up and used once every five years or so it should be fine, data loss generally occurs after about 7 years of inactivity, if used regularly they can easily last decades.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Posting on this forum is disabled.