Published on 28th February 2012 by
Originally Posted by supermonkeyThat's the funny thing about the tech world - Mention a particular fruit-themed computer company and the whole place jumps up and down about toys for muggles. "I require all of my computers to be ridiculously complex machines capable of meticulous programming and configuration," they say. Mention Blu-ray drives, and all of a sudden we get a number of comments from people who don't really care about hardware. "Why get a BR drive, or a BR player at all? Simple DVD upscaling works just fine on my monitor."
I recall when the Macbook Air first came out, and one of the biggest complaints was the lack of an optical drive. Now that a lot of people are promoting digital downloads and external storage, perhaps those complaints were just a lack of foresight.
As to the central question of the article, I guess the answer ultimately depends on the users. I have a BR drive for ripping movies to portable formats. I also have a PS3, HDTV, and a good receiver capable of managing my 5.1 surround sound. Of course, I don't like going to the theater anymore (cost and clientele are factors), so my mileage varies.
I don't think Blu-ray is going to replace DVD in the same sense that DVD replaced VHS (for video) and floppies (for data). I see BR as an intermediary format as the tech industry continues to make advancements in digital downloads and cloud storage.
Originally Posted by dark_avengerI have a Blu-ray drive in my main PC just for ripping disks I have bought.
All saved onto my NAS and then the disks get stored away.
Just so much easier having all the content saved on the NAS, no looking for disks, no skipping because of scratches and it's available on all my PC's/XBMC machines.
Originally Posted by GiantKiwi I spent £120 a few weeks back and got 100 TDK 25GB discs, good luck getting that amount of storage cheap in other options ;)
Originally Posted by ArthurBWithout large capacity optical discs like Blu-ray, how exactly do people send large amounts of data (25GB-50GB+) to other people?
* Broadband is out of the question because upload speeds are generally too slow in the UK.
* You can't put a 32GB or 64GB USB flash drive in the post because they are still too expensive to give away to people. I don't know anyone who would send me a £20-£60 flash drive and not expect it back.
* You can't use USB HDDs because they are even more expensive than UFDs and might get dropped/damaged in transit.
Originally Posted by rogerrabbitsI'm guessing that the problem is that consoles can't cope with the huge textures that would be on a blue ray game.
Originally Posted by SlothA good question. But I have to ask: who actually sends such large amounts of data to others? And furthermore, who sends such large amounts of data so often that buying a Blu-ray burner is more effective than simply using multiple DVDs? Someone out there, surely, but the average user? It's like many of Blu-rays advantages: they're great when they're applicable, yet they're unnoticable in a great many other applications.
That's an interesting statement, particularly because the PS3, a console, is the only gaming platform to have adopted Blu-rays.
As a side note, this is a case of Blu-ray's advantages being unnoticable. A cross platform game that ships on both PS3's Blu-ray and 360's DVD obviously isn't using the extra capacity.
Originally Posted by xaser04Quote:Originally Posted by GiantKiwi I spent £120 a few weeks back and got 100 TDK 25GB discs, good luck getting that amount of storage cheap in other options ;)
Erm before the TN/TH issues
Originally Posted by law99I can tell you who does hand out and lend/loan large files on a regular basis...
anyone who lends a movie. Fact is, Blu-ray discs are lent to people. I don't think to myself, oh yeah, I'll let my mates connect via vpn or ftp to watch movies... I don't go around and give them 6gb blu-ray rips either. I'll just give them the sodding blu-ray.
Also, cross platform games have been hampered by storage, because the 360 made it a case of bowing to the lowest common denominator when it came to harnessing said space. Even in the beginning, the ps3 got the delights of better sound and the ability to stream more textures than the 360. Whether or not you thought you saw or needed that is another question. But I do wonder whether a game like Skyrim would have been bigger if they weren't confining it to a single dvd.
You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.
27th February 2015
23rd February 2015
© Copyright bit-tech