An Optical-based replacement
for DVD is pointless
21-June-2008
The Technology Argument against BluRay
When we consider why Digital Versatile Disk (DVD) was created, we must understand our technological capabilities at the time. The world standard, VHS, was a sequential, analog-magnetic format that suffered from degradation and mechanical complexity. Because we lacked the solid state storage and speed capabilities we now enjoy, optical discs were the best solution to provide us with digital, relative-access playback of feature films. Compared to VHS, DVD was compact, had better video quality and much longer life. At the incept of BluRay and HDDVD research, transportable solid state storage was still in its infancy and so the industry looked to optical media again. However, by the time BluRay begins to make any real market penetration, a solid state media (SSM) alternative in the form of SDHC will be available which is better, much more compact and already compatible with many different types of devices. Unlike BluRay, SSM does not require 'burning' or require specialised coatings. Unlike BluRay, SSM does not have an exposed data surface that is vulnerable to scratches and is much more robust. Unlike BluRay, SSM is also unrestricted in terms of its capacity; in the case of SDHC, one card could theoretically hold up to 2048 gigabytes of data: over 40 times the capacity of a conventional BluRay disc! The tiny and convenient SSM format is already a widely-accepted standard with many tangible benefits that consumers can appreciate. Widespread SSM adoption is in motion (even some Sony devices carry SSM compatibility) and will easily outpace BluRay in market penetration as the format of choice for media.
The Logistics Argument against BluRay
In this world of rapidly increasing fuel and tranport costs, unit weight and size now has a very signifigant effect on the profitability of manufacturers and publishers. The notion of vastly decreasing the weight-per-unit while increasing the capacity of units-per-shipment is a basic, fundamental path to immensely enhanced profit through reduced overhead costs. While individual unit cost is still relatively high, the return on investment is realised quickly through reduced operating costs until mass adoption brings the unit cost under control. The smaller unit size also implies much less storage space is needed on unit-by-unit basis further reducing property overhead and related costs. In the fullness of time, SSM will provide maximum profitability at a fraction of the cost required for BluRay and this profitability will be realised by manufacturers, publishers and retailers alike.
The Green Argument against BluRay
The world's number one selling BluRay player, the Playstation 3, is reported to consume approximately 125 watts per hour during playback. (15 times the power required by an average DVD player!) While standalone players shall likely consume less, it is of great concern that this new technology is adding more pressure to our already-outstretched energy needs. The achilles heel of BluRay technology is its reliance on powering a laser and a motorized spindle. For the first time in the history of home media, BluRay will be less efficient than its predessor with respect to energy use. Comparatively, SSM requires no moving parts or laser thus consuming much less power than a DVD or BluRay player. The relative simplicity of a SSM device also means that it requires less raw materials to manufacture and shall be easier to recycle or even reuse. The small size and weight of SSM cards require much less space and therefore less energy to manufacturer, store and transport meaning that one full-length articulated transport can hold the same number of SSM units compared to the ten transports required for an equivalent number of BluRay units.
Conclusion
While there are many who have already crowned BluRay as the future king of home cinema and data transport, its adoption makes little sense when we consider that only SSM can deliver the highest capacity, the greatest diversity in application, support our goals to reduce energy and resources and provide tangible incentives to upgrade from DVD. Solid State Media is the inevitable future standard for all data storage including home cinema. Why delay that future at the cost of our space, our energy, our choice? Why sacrifice our convenience and our resources? Do we delay the future to satisify a consortium's investment into obsolete technology? Or do we put our best foot forward and embrace our future, enjoy the benefits and save our planet? The choice is yours.