Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

A Triple-Standard Disk 210

On the heels of the news of Toshiba's proposed double-standard disk comes word that Warner Brothers engineers have applied for a patent on a triple-standard disk. The new disk would offer HD-DVD and Blu-Ray on one side and standard DVD on the other. From the article: "Warner's plan is to create a disk with a Blu-ray top layer that works like a two-way mirror. This should reflect just enough blue light for a Blu-ray player to read it okay. But it should also let enough light through for HD-DVD players to ignore the Blu-ray recording and find a second HD-DVD layer beneath." See the patent application, filed last month.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

A Triple-Standard Disk

Comments Filter:
  • Not so. (Score:5, Informative)

    by rackhamh ( 217889 ) on Monday September 18, 2006 @06:13PM (#16134120)
    Once again Slashdot shows its abyssmal understanding of patents.

    This patent was not FILED August 10, 2006. It was PUBLISHED August 10, 2006. The actual filing date, shown later in the publication, is December 22, 2005.

    It may seem a trivial, but in the digital media market, eight months can make the difference between being a leader and a follower.
  • by LotsOfPhil ( 982823 ) on Monday September 18, 2006 @06:21PM (#16134179)
    It seems like 2 markets were formed when the companies couldn't agree on one HD disk standard. Some of the same companies that couldn't agree are now going to step in with disks that work in both markets. Kind of lame.
    I guess what I am saying is that if there was only BluRay, there would be no need for a disk that had BluRay, HDdvd and DVD. Convenient.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 18, 2006 @06:31PM (#16134251)
    HD has failed in the marketplace.

    You're kidding right? HDTV capable set sales are increasing. Less than 10% of the market, of course, you're looking at an item that has massive market penetration, even 10% of that market is HUGE and it keeps getting bigger. Pay more attention at your local Walmart (which is an excellent indicator of what the "regular" folk are buying). More and more sq footage is being taken over by flat panel sets, most of them are HD capable (barring a few of the smaller lcd's or cheaper ED plasmas). It might be form factor that's driving that market, but the fact is more and more HD sets are making their way into households. Anyone can see that that's where the market is moving, it may take several more years to really start hitting critical mass, but anyone who wants to be a player needs to get their ducks lined up now. Why do you think Sony is so hot to push PS3 and BluRay anyway, they know this and this is their plan (whether they can implement it is another story). Your statement is like saying that portable music players had "failed in the market place" the year before the ipod came out. It's where the industry is going, and it _will_ get there.
  • Re:Should? (Score:5, Informative)

    by kansas1051 ( 720008 ) on Monday September 18, 2006 @06:33PM (#16134265)
    definition: "Should" - a work that should never be allowed in describing a patent.

    Agreed, but its only the submitter who used the word "should" in relation to the benefit of the disclosed technology. The actual application is very clear that the technology produces a layered DVD and only uses the word should once:

    "It should be understood that the discs in the drawings have been simplified for the sake of clarity and that various layers, including glue and resin layers well known to those skilled in the art have been omitted. "

    Patent attorneys rarely use "should" in applications because an invention which only has a prophetic utility does not satisfy the utility requirement of 35 U.S.C. 101.

  • by be-fan ( 61476 ) on Monday September 18, 2006 @06:45PM (#16134341)
    You're on crack. HD penetration has been growing tremendously quickly, to the point where the 10% number, which was accurate just a couple of years ago, has long since become obsolete. By the end of 2005, 17% of TV-owning households owned an HDTV. At this rate, by 2010, 57% of TV-watching US households will have an HDTV. That's less than four years from now.

    As of June, 41% of all TV sales in the US were HDTVs. Moreover, HDTVs accounted for 81% of TV sales by revenue. At a point when a cheap SDTV can be had for $150, and even a cheap HDTV is several times that, 41% numerically is a huge figure.

    There is no definition of "failure" by which you can judge HDTV as having failed in the marketplace. Not when its market penetration growth is over 20-30% year over year!

An elephant is a mouse with an operating system.