|
First Hybrid Blu-ray Planned for Release
|
|
Posted December 19, 2008 11:49 AM by Josh Dreuth
|
|
|
|
 Japanese optical disc manufacturer Infinity has announced the first Blu-ray release which makes use of a hybrid Blu-ray/DVD release. Due to hit store shelves on February 18th, 'Code Blue' will feature four hybrid discs, which feature a single Blu-ray layer (25GB) and two DVD layers (9GB) on the same side of the disc.
The disc has been approved by the Blu-ray Disc Association (BDA), but has not been certified by the DVD Forum due to compatibility issues with some DVD players. The company tested the disc on 64 different players - including PC drives as well as standalone DVD and Blu-ray Disc players - and saw 100% compatibility, so the issue seems to be rare.
Infinity has also developed a 50GB version which they are now in the process of getting certified by the BDA. It will be interesting to see if the technology gets adopted for any major Hollywood releases in the future.
|
Source: Electronista |
Permalink |
|
|
|
nicholas01
Dec 19, 2008
|
Wow, if this catches on, it seems like it would only help increase the rate of blu-ray adoption! I would think some people who want the 'dvd' version, but are anticipating on buying a blu-ray player in the near future would pick up a disc like this. |
|
|
RustyK94
Dec 19, 2008
|
I will buy one of these if they come out in the west. Just for laughs like. |
|
|
coolmilo
Dec 19, 2008
|
I hope this never sees the light of day. My friends who were HD DVD owners said the HD DVD/DVD disks were horrible...and more expensive. Studios need to focus on increasing quality and forget about gimmicks like hybrid disks, digibooks, etc. |
|
|
DrinkMore
Dec 19, 2008
This is terrible. Why would you continue to support a dying format? Can you imagine where we would be if we were STILL including a VHS copy now? Lol.
Hopefully this fails. |
|
 Top reviewer Top HT gallery Top contributor |
Blu Titan
Dec 19, 2008
|
Sorry but this report reads like a lot of GARBAGE. No need for this "invention". Thumbs way down. |
|
Top reviewer Top contributor |
dobyblue
Dec 19, 2008
|
Ha, ha - I knew this was only a matter of time...and only Blu-ray was going to be able to do it as a hybrid instead of a stupid flipper disc. |
|
|
desmond
Dec 19, 2008
|
Digital copy is cheaper w/o any reliability issues. |
|
Top reviewer Top HT gallery Top contributor |
Blu Titan
Dec 19, 2008
|
Does anyone remember all of the problems with the HD DUD combo discs?...this "new" disc is doomed to bring unecessary problems. EPIC FAIL! |
|
Top reviewer Top contributor |
Rhoq
Dec 19, 2008
|
These are different than the HD DVD combo discs (which had HD DVD on one side and SD DVD on the other). These are like the HD DVD "Twin Format" discs, which were single sided and contained both HD and SD DVD layers. Only a handful were released for HD DVD and they were reportedly to be much more reliable than combo discs. The downside was the Twin Format HD DVD could only handle 3 layers which usually meant a single (15GB) layer for HD and dual layers for DVD (9GB). |
|
|
Sonny
Dec 19, 2008
|
ALL FLIPPER/HYBRID DISC'S ARE TRASH!!!!! This is a crappy idea..... |
|
|
RedIsNotBlue
Dec 19, 2008
|
Ummm are people not reading this?? It isn't a flipper disc its all on one side. |
|
|
|
Sonny
Dec 19, 2008
|
"Blu" should know better.... |
|
|
CptGreedle
Dec 19, 2008
This has the potential to help boost Blu-ray sales, or hurt them.
Just like with HD DVD, people will not want to just go out and buy a hybrid disc for more money if they only want DVD.
And if it does have compatibility issues with one format or the other, it is less likely people will want to spend ore money on it.
Another issue is, right now we need the movie prices to drop. But I am sure this new technology will raise them instead.
I am sure there is a place for this if it is used right. People who own one Blu-ray player but several DVD players might be willing to get this, but it can not cost more than the standard Blu-ray.
In contrast, I think the digital copy is a better choice.
Sonny, this is on one side, not 2. It does not flip. |
|
Top contributor |
neo_reloaded
Dec 19, 2008
dobyblue: In response to your "I knew this was only a matter of time...and only Blu-ray was going to be able to do it as a hybrid instead of a stupid flipper disc."
There were HD DVD hybrid discs as well - both HD DVD and DVD on the same side, with artwork on the other side like a normal disc. They were used for the Freedom discs in the US, and I believe other discs in Japan as well. There were no reported problems with these. All the problems were with the flipper "combo" discs - flipper discs are always trouble, all the way back to DVD-18s.
I'm not particularly enthused by these new hybrid discs just because I don't see the need - but I'm not worried because a) I doubt any major studios will use them, or really any non-anime companies, and b) at least they're not flippers. |
|
|
|
RustyK94
Dec 19, 2008
Having a DVD copy on the Blu-Ray disc has it's advantages. For example if you want to put a movie on for the kids in the car you can still take your Blu-Ray disc and have the DVD copy which is on the disc play in the DVD player.
I think maybe in the future a DVD copy on a Blu-Ray disc will be come common and will just be another handy feature. |
|
|
Meeklo
Dec 19, 2008
If you want to incorporate a DVD, then it should be packaged like how Disney did the BD of Sleeping Beauty, with the SD attached to the cover.
And the price was still the same as a new BD. |
|
|
Beta-guy
Dec 19, 2008
|
I hope this goes away FAST, didn't we learn from the mistakes of HD DVD? |
|
|
|
RustyK94
Dec 19, 2008
|
Does it not seem more convenient to have a DVD copy on the Blu-Ray disc. By 2012 there will be 100GB and larger Blu-Ray discs on the market. How difficult can it be to have a DVD copy of a movie on the same disc plus you get the added bonus of not having the DVD disc which is far more easily scratched. |
|
|
aramis109
Dec 19, 2008
The problem with this is the potential to take up room that could better be used on a higher bitrate encode for the audio and video. There's also the question of compatibility.
Personally... I don't like it. |
|
|
|
Sonny
Dec 19, 2008
|
I don't think it's a good idea to inject somthing new that could cause playback issues... |
|
|
|
nicholas01
Dec 19, 2008
+1 SNPX.
I have blockbuster online, but I can't take my blu-rays to my sister's house to watch which kind of sucks. I can only play it at my house on the PS3. |
|
Top contributor |
neo_reloaded
Dec 19, 2008
Re: aramis109 - "The problem with this is the potential to take up room that could better be used on a higher bitrate encode for the audio and video. There's also the question of compatibility."
This would be a separate layer on the disc, totally removed from the Blu-ray Disc-format layer(s). So for the current 25 GB model, all 25 GB are available for Blu-ray use. The DVD portion would be on the 9 GB DVD-format layers. If they ever make a 50 GB model, again all 50 GB would be available for Blu-ray use. |
|
Top contributor |
Dynamo of Eternia
Dec 19, 2008
Well, this could be a good thing, but only if it goes off without a hitch.
Having to different standards combined together on one disc could potentially have problems.
At some point there will likely be a Blu-Ray player or DVD player that this thing doesn't work with.
I hope they at least give us an option of just a stright Blu-Ray release as well for any titles that come out on ths combo format.
And as another person said earlier, why not just include a separate DVD like Disney did with Sleeping Beauty? Heck, more people would probably get use out of that than they do with the 'digital copies' that will expire sooner or later. Between the people who don't even bother with the digital copies and those who might not discover the until after they've expired, it would make more sense to just include a regular DVD version instead.
For anyone who has adopted Blu-Ray, it's far more likely that they have Blu-Ray in only one or very few rooms of the house, with DVD in the rest. A separate DVD copy will make more sense than a digital copy. |
|
|
|
aramis109
Dec 19, 2008
|
Neo- didn't realize that. Makes sense now that I think of it. |
|
|
|
RedIsNotBlue
Dec 19, 2008
|
I also find it kind of interesting that people are worried about compatibility issues with this as well. I mean you people do realize that there is already plenty of those issues with Blu-ray's and certain players already. Of course there is going to be a few of those issues but from what it sounds like they tested enough and saw a high success rate which is great. |
|
|
jk1138
Dec 19, 2008
This is a waste of BDs to add DVD to it. This would be like getting a lobster stuffed with Jack in to box tacos. Why make something great so lame?
I will NOT buy any movie that comes out with this, no matter how badly I want the movie. |
|
|
X-Ninja
Dec 19, 2008
|
No, No, No. Please God, don't let this happen... |
|
|
AaronSCH
Dec 19, 2008
|
This idea is DOA. It only serves to illustrate a lack of confidence in the format. Blu-ray DOES NOT need this to advance adoption. Reasonable hardware and software pricing will increase consumer interest. If this was such a great idea why didn't it save HD DVD? |
|
Top contributor |
Dynamo of Eternia
Dec 19, 2008
"I also find it kind of interesting that people are worried about compatibility issues with this as well. I mean you people do realize that there is already plenty of those issues with Blu-ray's and certain players already..."
Which is why we don't need more. Typically, if someone falls and accidentally brakes one of their legs, they don't go out of their way to brake the other one so they both match. I don't think we should start doing essentially the same thing by applying that same principle to these Blu-Ray compatibility issues.
There are already enough compatibility issues as it is, particularly with certain players that need the firmware updated frequently and are often slow on making those updates available, that we don't need to add to them. |
|
Top reviewer |
andyman1970
Dec 19, 2008
|
I think Disney had a better idea when they included a standard DVD copy in with the Blu-ray version of Sleeping Beauty. I think people who haven't adapted Blu yet may see that as more value since they get 2 discs, one for each format and might persuade them to Blu more then this will. |
|
|
Galley
Dec 19, 2008
These should work similar to Hybrid SACDs, which give the best of both worlds, and compatibility with
nearly any player. |
|
Top reviewer Top contributor |
dobyblue
Dec 19, 2008
Hybrid discs have been used for SACD since 2000 with no problems - what problems do those of you see as obviously you must work in the replication industry and know things we don't know?
JVC had a working DVD9/BD25 hybrid disc in 2005 at IFA!! |
|
|
dominic*
Dec 19, 2008
|
terrible idea , please don't do it !! |
|
|
|
RedIsNotBlue
Dec 19, 2008
"Which is why we don't need more. Typically, if someone falls and accidentally brakes one of their legs, they don't go out of their way to brake the other one so they both match. I don't think we should start doing essentially the same thing by applying that same principle to these Blu-Ray compatibility issues.
There are already enough compatibility issues as it is, particularly with certain players that need the firmware updated frequently and are often slow on making those updates available, that we don't need to add to them."
Yes but its sort of flawed logic because every new format or variation is going to have some problems at least on a small scale and I am saying just going by what is said in the article it sounds like the problems would be on a small scale. As long as it doesn't interfere with the Blu-ray transfers or jack up the price of films then why not go for it and see how it works out. |
|
Top contributor |
un4gvn94538
Dec 19, 2008
|
as long as there isnt any compatability issues like the hd dvd discs, this would be more valuable to me than digital copy. and dvd isnt a dying format, not even close, yet. |
|
|
GreatWhite83
Dec 19, 2008
this Hybrid idea is a crap one to say the least.
1. There will be less space to put lossless audio and special features onto the disc
2. If I want a dvd I'll buy a dvd, or buy the 3 disc version of blu ray.
Blu ray should be on its own and they should stick with including a dvd separately, there is no need to include a dvd onto a blu ray disc. I bet Warner will be all over this an excuse not to include lossless audio. |
|
|
|
RedIsNotBlue
Dec 19, 2008
GreatWhite83,
If you read neo's post above this would not affect the space for the Blu-ray. |
|
|
|
ranma
Dec 19, 2008
|
I wonder if HD DVD had the same technology to put both HD and SD content on same side, why would they choose another way as flip-side solution? That doesn't make sense. |
|
|
|
onumb
Dec 19, 2008
|
This would be a nice feature for individuals who only have one blu-ray player, but watch movies in multiple rooms. It reduces the need for parents to buy multiple copies of a disc. Including a second DVD is nice, but having to keep track of multiple discs is a bonus. |
|
Top reviewer Top contributor |
Rhylliam
Dec 19, 2008
This is interesting news. A disc thats not a flipper, nice. I doubt it will catch on, but still interesting nonetheless.
All HD DVD combo discs worked fine for me, and luckily I was able to get most of them for under $10. Too bad some folks paid $40 for 'em. |
|
|
CosmoNut
Dec 19, 2008
|
Our family would love a hybrid disk. Then we could play it in the PS3 as a blu-ray and the minivan as a DVD (if it reads the disk, fingers crossed). |
|
|
|
Sonny
Dec 19, 2008
|
@ dobyblue, SACD is not Blu-ray ... |
|
Top contributor |
Mobe1969
Dec 19, 2008
|
What stupidity even thinking of this. They are unnecessarily overcomplicating for no benefit. |
|
Top reviewer Top contributor |
davidthenikonuser
Dec 19, 2008
NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
One of the reasons HD-DVD died was because of the HD/DVD combo discs. I had nothing but problems with those dumb discs.
Who needs a DVD version of the movie on the same disc as a BD version. What is the point???? |
|
|
BLURAYSONYES
Dec 19, 2008
|
Maybe...just maybe...a VCR/BD player??? lol |
|
|
Minimejer05
Dec 19, 2008
|
I hope this doesnt happen i am fine with reg bd discs. Better not be flip discs |
|
|
I'm the Dude
Dec 19, 2008
|
Does this limit the potential for quality? If so (and I think it is so), then I sure hope they don't do this on any of the titles I would be interested in. |
|
|
|
Bravoxena
Dec 19, 2008
If they work well, it's not a bad idea. This way, you can buy a blu-ray free of guilt since you can also play this on a DVD player. Great for people who are anticipating buying a player, and for those who want to play their blu-rays elsewhere on DVD players.
Why not? The risk of malfunction... but I guess we'll see about that! |
|
Top contributor |
fdm
Dec 19, 2008
|
Sounds like yet another way to charge more for something you really didn't even want in the first place. (Just like them HD-DVD/DVD combo disks that usually cost 5 bucks more.) |
|
|
|
aktonin
Dec 19, 2008
Guys please hear me out on this one.
We love feeling superior to those common folk who just watch blurry DVDs and rightly so. Blu-ray is uncomparable to DVD. And we want DVD to die, because that means more Blu-ray releases for us. But please check this out. Even though we are the main Blu-ray customers right now. The decided technophiles.
But here's the thing.
If (big if) there is no reliability issues with their 50GB version. This would be good for us as Blu-ray consumers, why? Because it will grow the Blu-ray market, why? People who only watch DVDs, those people who don't really care that much quality, will suddenly find their collection supporting Blu-ray and that will make them more likely to buy a Blu-ray player, or perhaps a family member will see how many hybrid disks they have and buy them a Blu-ray player as a gift. Which means the studios who don't use this format will release more Blu-ray titles for us because the number of consumers with Blu-ray players has suddenly risen.
As long as there are no draw backs for us Blu-ray lovers, and they hurry up and us the 50GB version instead of the horrible 25GB one. I'm down with it! |
|
|
|
Beta-guy
Dec 20, 2008
aktonin: problem is the more layers to put on a disc the yield rates drop. to quote Bill Hunt
"Given our past experiences with spotty DVD-18 discs, and more recent experiences DVD/HD-DVD Combo discs, anytime you start talking about putting more than two layers on ANY format disc, we get a little nervous."
but let's say they do this and it works, no problems 2 things may com into play at this point 1. Price will the price go up if so by how much? 2. say at a later point one of these companies makes 4 layer Blu-ray discs possible for movie discs to max out our movie viewing experience, wouldn't it be more than likely this DVD hybrid technology will hamper this as you'd be talking about 6 layers (4 for BD and 2 for DVD)
agree backwards compatibility is nice, but it comes at a price, and given the choice between reliablity/functionality Vs. compatibility, I'll choose reliability and functionality any day. This has nothing to do with technological pride, it's just history and I hate to repeat history, if we can learn from mistakes made then we should do so. |
|
|
jamesf
Dec 20, 2008
|
I won't be buying this . I already own a BD player and have no intentions of ever going back to SD . Waste of time . Why would someone with a reg sd player even consider buying one of these ? It will cost more to buy than a sd disc and thats the reason alot of people hasn't switched yet , Cost . |
|
|
William H Pratt
Dec 20, 2008
|
NO!!!!!!!!!!! After the 007 disc problems, we don't need any more disc reading problems & this invites one! |
|
Top reviewer |
fburton
Dec 20, 2008
i like the fact that i could take the disc with me and play it at family or friends house who may not have a BD player. also, i could take the disc with me to watch while travelling (portable dvd player while in flight for example, or dvd player in a car).
why are you guys so negative? if you don't want to watch the DVD part of it, don't watch it. no reason to be BD snobs. |
|
Top reviewer |
nazdar
Dec 20, 2008
|
I'm waiting for discs with a chewy carmel center. |
|
|
|
Sonny
Dec 21, 2008
were not being snobs...it's just that we don't need any more playback issues, that's all. And
yes dobyblue "we" are all replicaters here |
|
|
|
AusSkiller
Dec 21, 2008
Ignore the movie side of this, it's rare to want to go back to SD when you have Blu, what I think makes this awesome would be the potential in the games industry.
This could save publishers millions in unsold stock, and also in manafacturing costs, rather than having 2 completely seperate packages for 360 and PS3 games just bundle them together on the same disc in the same package. Compatibillity shouldn't be a problem either since there's a very limited range of models to support. No more deciding which platform to buy the game on just get them on both  |
|
|
the Bass Mechanic
Dec 22, 2008
Wow,... just wow! Yet another example of people going off half-cocked without even reading the article completely! Seriously, I'm not going to single anyone out, that's not the point (lord knows I've made some bone-headed statements in the past, so I'm no genius preaching from a gilded ivory tower here) just going to try to clear some things up. OK?
First off; all 12cm (and 8cm) optical discs are 1.2mm thick, the DVD/CD dual sided discs being one notable exception. Second; all CD's had 1.2mm (usually slightly thinner, but often spec'd at 1.1-12.mm thick) clear subtrate, then the aluminum reflective layer, then an (very thin, usually 0.1mm or less) enamel protective layer, then the (usually) silkscreened label.
Third; DVD's were usually made with two(2) 0.6mm sides (one of them "blank" for all single sided discs) that have 1 (single layer, a.k.a. DVD-5GB) or 2 (double layer, a.k.a. DVD-9GB) clear substrates that are stamped and aluminum deposited (similar to how CD's are made) and then (glued together in the case of dual layer discs, [don't remember the exact thickness between the 2 layers, it's been awhile] and then) glued to the other side of the disc (either blank, or another single or dual layer side) and the either silkscreen labeled (in the case of single side discs, the vast majority of all DVDs) or small ring labels are applied (in the case of dual sided discs).
Fourth; HD-DVDs were made in a very similar fashion to regular DVD's (primarily to keep costs down), with the same subtrate thicknesses (0.6mm for the first layer, and 0.4 [I think] for the 2nd layer... or maybe it was 0.5mm...) which is why most Combo HD-DVDs were made dual-sided, but HD-DVDs are made with much smaller pits thatn DVD (and read with a much shorter wavelength laser; 405nm fro HD-DVD (and Blu-ray) vs. 650nm for DVD, or 780nm for CD) and store much more data than regular DVD (15GB per layer vs. 4.7GBper layer for DVD) but not as much as Blu-ray (25BG per layer).
Fifth; Blu-ray stores much more data per sq. cm than both DVD and HD-DVD due to the combination of shorter wavelegnth read (and write) lasers, smaller pits, AND shorter focal length (0.1mm subtrate vs. 0.6mm substrate in DVD and HD-DVD) enabling even smaller pit size than even HD-DVD.
Which leads us to #6; since the distance from the read surface to the data layer is so much shorter in Blu-ray than in DVD, it is much easier to have a hybrid disc that has one or more Blu-ray layers (at or near the 0.1mm depth) and 2 DVD layers (at the 0.6mm or "middle" depth) that was possible with HD-DVD (which was limited to 2 DVD layers and 1 HD-DVD layer, OR 1 DVD layer and 2 HD-DVD layers; but NOT 2 DVD and 2 HD-DVD layers). Since the Blu-ray and DVD layers are so far apart in focal depths, it is much easier to make a single sided hybrid disc than was possible with HD-DVD, which is why most HD-DVD "combo" discs were dual sided.
While the above article mainly discusses hybrid dics that are single layer Blu-ray and dual layer DVD, the article does mention that dual layer Blu-ray and DVD discs are possible, but none are coming out comercialy untill the BDA approves them first (very likely to happen given theapparent lack of compatibilty issues with the current BD25/DVD9 discs). While I am not a worker at a disc maufactureing plant, I did use to work with one, asked a lot of questions, and have read everything I could get my hands on about optica; media, how they are made, and how they work. I am mainly going from memory here (did look a few important facts up, to make sure I had them right) and would encourage everyone to look up some of this information for yourselves; it never hurts to learn something new. :~)
Personaly, I do hope this catches on; but only if compatiblity issues are kept below 2%, and disc costs are kept down so that hybrid discs are sold for the same price as BD only releases. I would of course be mainly interested in watching the BD layer(s) but it would be nice to bring the same disc to a friend or relatives house to play on their DVD player, or better yet; bring my BD player along, then do a comparison of the DVD layer(s) on the DVD player vs. the BD layer(s) on my Blu-ray player (assuming of course they have a 720p or better screen or projector). And while I did like having the seperate DVD in the Sleeping Beauty BD, too many people might sell off the seperate DVD on e-Bay (at least that's what some studios might be thinking when they are considering whether to include a seperate DVD, or go for a DVD/BD hybrid disc).
Peace out,
TBM
Eric Busch |
|
|
|
Sonny
Dec 22, 2008
|
^^^^^^^^ thanks for that... |
|
Top reviewer |
xwingsct
Dec 22, 2008
|
Why bother. We're not moving forward here. Why not develop disc with more capacity instead of going backward. I don't think it will catch on. I hope it won't catch on. |
|
Add comment
Please login to post a comment.
|
|
 
|
All countries
Argentina
Austria
Belgium
Brazil
Bulgaria
Chile
China
Colombia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Estonia
Denmark
Finland
Greece
Hong Kong
Hungary
Iceland
Indonesia
Ireland
Israel
India
Latvia
Lithuania
Malaysia
New Zealand
Norway
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Singapore
South Africa
South Korea
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
Thailand
Turkey
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
flag icon to the right of the quick search at the top-middle.
[hide this message]
