Re: [OT] To****ba climbs on 'HD DVD exit'

In article <5cqdnRJySuhjhF7anZ2dnUVZ_sWdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Ned Ludd
<andy.block@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

> POD {Ò¿Ó} wrote:
> 
> > Bottom line...I've been following this since 1999, when I was briefed
by
> > someone at HP over blue laser technology, and it makes sense, you want
> > to keep the same size media, you need a finer laser, and for that you
> > need blue, it is a natural progression in the technology, however
> > To****ba wanted to look at a cheapskate alternative by staying red.  If
I
> > want a S****ts car, I buy one, yes it's expensive, but if that's what I
> > need, that what I have to buy.  What I don't want is to buy an old
> > banger and stick on alloys, a spoiler and drill holes in the tail
pipe. 
> > That is what To****ba offered me, and I was just not interested. 
> 
> HD DVD uses a blue laser, not a red one.
> 
> Staying with a red laser was one of the early ideas, but it was 
> abandoned as you suggest.  It was possible, by using 3 or more layers, 
> just not practical.

It was abandoned because Blu-Ray announced it would be using a blue
laser.  Likewise, Blu-Ray was originally going to use MPEG2 compression
rather than one of the newer, more efficient codecs.  No matter what
you might think about either format, the format war had the effect of
forcing each side to improve their product.

> 
> The big difference is that most of the authoring and production 
> standards are refinements from DVD, and much of the DVD pressing gear 
> can be used to press HD DVDs, while Blu-Ray basically needs a new
factory.

Why should this be im****tant to you?  Are you a stockholder?