You know, doing my job is nothing short of sitting around and doing nothing until the sky begins to fall. And, its times like this, while waiting for anything to fall, that I get some crazy thoughts to go through my head.
Of course, this happens when I'm asleep, too, but thats another story. I just re-read the WSR May issue article on D-VHS D-Theater. I also spent the last couple of weeks looking at the market condition for JVC's DH30000 D-VHS unit.
I see politics at play with JVC entertaining the studios with the 'safe' concept of using magnetic tape as the medium of choice, because the studios like any storage medium that can be pushed onto consumers that have an knack for deteriorating over [a very short] time.
Of course, the decision to use a digital VHS storage/playback path is clouded in a couple of simple facts, and as true as they appear, they only serve to deviate the public's attention from other, more creative solutions for recording and playing back HD materials.
True, the current DVD standard is wholy insufficient for storing HD-DVD when using bit-rates above 10 Mbps. And yes, tape provides sufficient storage capacities for four (4) hours of HS-mode recording (at 28.2 Mbps). These are facts, but these facts are used against out creativity.
Thus, when it came time to decide on a physical format for delivering HD prerecorded materials to the consumers, JVC thought magnetic tape was the only way to go. Blue-Ray is still, admittedly, some time away and MPEG-4 DVD is the DVD Forum's way of showing their desperation.
It is with this in mind that my little geek-of-a-mind wandered to the early days of storage technology. I remember hauling some old computer components (I'm not that old!), including some 8-inch floppy disk drives. My mind (or what was left of it) continued to wander to the laserdisc history and how its physical footprint did not stop the consumers from buying.
Now, I really started to wonder why not simply continue with the DVD transport system, but a slightly different disc footprint? We are use to seeing the 120-mm disc when they were introduced for music compact discs. So, I now wonder why JVC, or anyone else, could not simply [offer to] adopt something like a 200-mm disc?
Since recordable DVD undoubtedly will reach a market-forced standard within the next 12-18 months (look what happened to betamax), a re-writable 200-mm DVD disc for recording HD seems plausable. So why not?
Well, the studios are why not. The last thing the studios want is to release into the wild are HD copies of their products that could be used for ease of replication (i.e. bootlegging). I cannot blame them as I would take the same position if I were in their shoes, but I'm in the consumer's shoes.
Hence, a tray-based 200-mm (that about 8 inches) could conceivably provide the storage capacities in the same ballpark as Blue-Ray, and the same player would be backwards compatible with traditional DVDs. And, because the market is crossing the threshold of recordable DVD dyes, the ability to 'have our cake and eat it too' covers all bases.
No, I am not suggesting that we return back to the laserdisc footprint, but only part of the way. What do you'all think? She we poll the forum's interest in such a product?
Of course, this happens when I'm asleep, too, but thats another story. I just re-read the WSR May issue article on D-VHS D-Theater. I also spent the last couple of weeks looking at the market condition for JVC's DH30000 D-VHS unit.
I see politics at play with JVC entertaining the studios with the 'safe' concept of using magnetic tape as the medium of choice, because the studios like any storage medium that can be pushed onto consumers that have an knack for deteriorating over [a very short] time.
Of course, the decision to use a digital VHS storage/playback path is clouded in a couple of simple facts, and as true as they appear, they only serve to deviate the public's attention from other, more creative solutions for recording and playing back HD materials.
True, the current DVD standard is wholy insufficient for storing HD-DVD when using bit-rates above 10 Mbps. And yes, tape provides sufficient storage capacities for four (4) hours of HS-mode recording (at 28.2 Mbps). These are facts, but these facts are used against out creativity.
Thus, when it came time to decide on a physical format for delivering HD prerecorded materials to the consumers, JVC thought magnetic tape was the only way to go. Blue-Ray is still, admittedly, some time away and MPEG-4 DVD is the DVD Forum's way of showing their desperation.
It is with this in mind that my little geek-of-a-mind wandered to the early days of storage technology. I remember hauling some old computer components (I'm not that old!), including some 8-inch floppy disk drives. My mind (or what was left of it) continued to wander to the laserdisc history and how its physical footprint did not stop the consumers from buying.
Now, I really started to wonder why not simply continue with the DVD transport system, but a slightly different disc footprint? We are use to seeing the 120-mm disc when they were introduced for music compact discs. So, I now wonder why JVC, or anyone else, could not simply [offer to] adopt something like a 200-mm disc?
Since recordable DVD undoubtedly will reach a market-forced standard within the next 12-18 months (look what happened to betamax), a re-writable 200-mm DVD disc for recording HD seems plausable. So why not?
Well, the studios are why not. The last thing the studios want is to release into the wild are HD copies of their products that could be used for ease of replication (i.e. bootlegging). I cannot blame them as I would take the same position if I were in their shoes, but I'm in the consumer's shoes.
Hence, a tray-based 200-mm (that about 8 inches) could conceivably provide the storage capacities in the same ballpark as Blue-Ray, and the same player would be backwards compatible with traditional DVDs. And, because the market is crossing the threshold of recordable DVD dyes, the ability to 'have our cake and eat it too' covers all bases.
No, I am not suggesting that we return back to the laserdisc footprint, but only part of the way. What do you'all think? She we poll the forum's interest in such a product?
