HD DVD about to fight back...

[deacongreg]

You two are still at it. Well, I`ve stated my case. I`ll leave it up to our administrator. Fish breath, that is not why this forum was started.

[kkozma]

Wow.. I'm sorry, I thought that my "fishbreath" comment would be taken lightly as it was something my father used to say to me when I was a kid.

Sorry if anyone took it any other way than humor. It was totally meant in jest...

[DaViD Boulet]

Lotus,

the BDA also approved 100GB Blu-ray Disc specs.

I suppose by your own logic you'll accept that all current BD hardware can play such discs without any real-world evidence of interoperability? I appreciate your even-handed treatement of BD50. However, BD50 discs were available for initial testing and design of first-generation BD hardware, so naturally the hardware manufacturers had designed their product in accord with BD50 software support. This statement is not intended as proof that TL51 discs cannot be played in current HD DVD hardware, only that the situation from a hardware side is slightly more challenging.

I'm not challenging white-paper specs and you know it. I couldn't be more clear regardless of your accusations. You continually ignore the basic query to document/confirm that TL51GB discs are actually ready for production. White-paper specs have nothing to do with whether a product has been bought to market in a production-ready form. I forgot, I'm disgusting. I suppose that adjective tossed my way magically produces marketable TL51GB production yields?

[akbungle]

Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet

Lotus,

the BDA also approved 100GB Blu-ray Disc specs.

I suppose by your own logic you'll accept that all current BD hardware can play such discs without any real-world evidence of interoperability? I appreciate your even-handed treatement of BD50. However, BD50 discs were available for initial testing and design of first-generation BD hardware, so naturally the hardware manufacturers had designed their product in accord with BD50 software support. This statement is not intended as proof that TL51 discs cannot be played in current HD DVD hardware, only that the situation from a hardware side is slightly more challenging.

I'm not challenging white-paper specs and you know it. I couldn't be more clear regardless of your accusations. You continually ignore the basic query to document/confirm that TL51GB discs are actually ready for production. White-paper specs have nothing to do with whether a product has been bought to market in a production-ready form. I forgot, I'm disgusting. I suppose that adjective tossed my way magically produces marketable TL51GB production yields?

Alright David this was an excellent post(could have been slightly less pointed) but previous posts made by you were more of a badgering manner ("disgusting" may have been a bit harsh). Provided you stay at a level of this quality and stop bringing up "disgusting" then I think a good quality discussion can ensue. Understand this is coming from a strong Blu backer that thought it was great the enthusiasm you showed on blu-ray.com to push us to buy Warner over the holiday season but we need to show respect on these forums even if we are pushed once and a while, remember in the end we (Blu) are doing swimmingly right now and as it looks, at the moment, several people here made the "wrong choice" so it's OK for them to be a bit salty, if it tipped the other way you know you would be.
So David lets you and I have a Coke and a smile and relax a bit!

[kkozma]

Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet

You continually ignore the basic query to document/confirm that TL51GB discs are actually ready for production. White-paper specs have nothing to do with whether a product has been bought to market in a production-ready form. I forgot, I'm disgusting. I suppose that adjective tossed my way magically produces marketable TL51GB production yields?

Much to the same that you and the collective rest of the blu camp continually ignore the basic query to provide proof that they are not.

No one outside of Toshiba, Microsoft, Universal, Paramount, or any other member of the HD DVD PRG can comment as to the readiness of these discs.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet

Lotus,

the BDA also approved 100GB Blu-ray Disc specs.

I suppose by your own logic you'll accept that all current BD hardware can play such discs without any real-world evidence of interoperability?

Since I have EE degree: YES. I know how the BD player works. It would be as easy as a firmware upgrade. It's actually really simple. These units were designed to read multiple layers.

I appreciate your even-handed treatement of BD50. However, BD50 discs were available for initial testing and design of first-generation BD hardware

No they weren't. Since I was there helping with the design I can flat out tell you we had no BD50 discs. We had Dual Layer test discs that were incapable of holding 50GBs. BD50 was being designed at roughly the same time. It was always planned for multiple layers. By the time I had left they may have had BD50s to play with but the units were designed without BD50s and definately not in initial testings.

so naturally the hardware manufacturers had designed their product in accord with BD50 software support. This statement is not intended as proof that TL51 discs cannot be played in current HD DVD hardware, only that the situation from a hardware side is slightly more challenging.

I'm rather positive that Toshiba designers tested triple layer and quadruple layer test discs in their R&D. Were they TL51s? No. Just as BD was testing TL and QL BDs that weren't 75GB and 100GB. Also it isn't really all that challenging. Once you've made it so the laser can read multiple layers at all the rest is pretty simple.

[QUOTE]I'm not challenging white-paper specs and you know it. [/QOUTE]

Yes you are. You're saying TL discs won't work in the player unless proven otherwise. The proof is there for you to read ad nauseum. You just don't want to.

I couldn't be more clear regardless of your accusations. You continually ignore the basic query to document/confirm that TL51GB discs are actually ready for production.

The DVD Forum approved TL51 and were given yield rates, cycle times, etc. They are "ready," for production. They just aren't in production. That is easily proven.

White-paper specs have nothing to do with whether a product has been bought to market in a production-ready form. I forgot, I'm disgusting. I suppose that adjective tossed my way magically produces marketable TL51GB production yields?

No but you're saying they won't work. White paper has everything to do with that. You're changing your stance which is further twisting by you. First you claimed they wouldn't work on older players. Now you're saying it's about "if they're ready for replication," and you just never quit twisting do you?

As for marketable production yields... the information the DVD Forum was given was MUCH lower than SL and DL discs but still higher than BD50s. So I'd say that is "marketable," but still higher costs.

Is it marketable? Right now I'd say No. Because HD DVD is dead in the water.