Originally Posted by Lee Stewart
OK - 50GB - fits on a DL BD. No new physical media needed
As some pointed out. But what of 60fps and (God willing)120fps native recordings?
Besides I was mostly referring to your comment here:
2. A brand new - never been done replication technology and either an existing video compression codec or a new one
Do we know for a fact that current BD ROM replication lines can easily (READ: Cheaply) be modified to replicate 4 layer BDs?
where you refer to 4 layer. The race to cheap 4 layer might be fundamentally difficult; the race to cheaper memory sticks might overtake it.
So you are saying they manufacturer the stick and load the movie in the same manufacturing process - at the same time? Not two seperate manfacturing processes?
Well actually yes I was talking about a mask ROM, but I see your point in that they're currently not quick to make from pre-fab to fab. Not yet
anyway. In any case, the sum of all the steps required would certainly shorten over time, even in the case of various EEPROM technology, no?
The point here is twofold:
- The 4K technology is not the end of the line. Nothing ever is. Neither have we reached anywhere near what many would love to see the max frames per second. There might be a fundamental physics problem with adding ever more layers to BD technology cheaply that causes the per-bit curve to start rising badly in a hard to move way. This may or may not be the case with memory.
- Despite the acronym, ROMs are random access. There are things about having control over the entirety of a movie that are superior to a spinning disk. Perhaps the per-bit cost need not *beat* the disk technology per se, but just descend low enough to make it enough of a noise in comparison to the cost of a movie.
I'm not sure where the confusion lies.