Blu-Ray MUST Keep the Cartridge - Page 2 - Blu-ray Forum

thunderhawk · 06-17-2005, 05:13 PM

well, you still can have backwards compatibility... Look @ Panasonics DVD recorders that support DVD-RAM recording...

And if the coating is as superior as they say, then theres no need for a cartridge

zombie · 06-18-2005, 12:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thunderhawk

And if the coating is as superior as they say, then theres no need for a cartridge

Yeah "if" - Seeing is believing, I guess we'll have to wait till we can check out a BD-ROM ourselves. I really hope the coating is better than what is used for CDs & DVDs. I'm admittedly skeptical about TDK's coating. I loved the idea of a cartridge but it's easy to understand why the cartridge idea wasn't practical, especially in PCs.

th3archiv3 · 06-18-2005, 03:12 AM

ya and it is bigger in physical size and will cost more for players to do what panasonic did but with blu-ray catridge was a kinda a good idea for keeping those scratches away

momo1988 · 08-26-2005, 02:35 AM

blu ray doesnt need a cartridge!!!!!!

its coating is more scratch resistant that a dvd coating!!!!!!!!

zombie · 08-26-2005, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by momo1988

blu ray doesnt need a cartridge!!!!!!

its coating is more scratch resistant that a dvd coating!!!!!!!!

Before you post in a new forum it would be a good idea if you actually read the thread first. We all have known this for quite some time. Some people simply liked the idea of a cartridge as "extra" protection.

CathodeRayTube · 10-09-2005, 05:03 AM

dear whoever cairs...i would just like to let everyone know that IMO cartridges are a MUST , even if the coating is scratch proof, that dosent do sh!t for dirt fingerprints etc and i dont want to have to be cleaning my discs all the time, and cartridges are ezer to handle than bare discs....and theyr more of a value because when you pay $20 for a movie on a cartridge (eg VHS) it makes the consumer feel like he/she actualy bought somthing that you can hold in your hand and has some mass to it....unlike the p!ssy little plastic discs that have been our exuse for a storage media for the last 5 - 10 years...

and i would like everyone to know (especialey the bigwigs at hollywood and the record dompanies) that i wont buy ANY of these things unless they are in a strong durable cartridge and can be copied/backed up without any limitations or PITAs...

in my entire life i have onley bought maybe 12 CDs and NO DVDs for just these reasons.

and as for the gung ho copy protection on everything ...its redickulus...its peopls rights to be able to copy there stuff and keep a copy for the den ,car , ripped to computer etc...if i cant copy it and manipulate it the way i want...i wont spend a single penny on these things. however WATERMARKs (as long as they dont fu*k up the sound/picture qualety ,as is allredy the case with dvd-audio/dualdisc) would be acceptable in my book ...so people can still make as many copies as they want/ share with small groups of friends /convert to another format /backup etc, but so that they would be detured from shareing/brodcasting it on the internet...

not onley do i think that the BDs should be in a cartridge, but (for home theter/HD video aplications anyway)they should be TWICE as large as they are curentley, say about 6.5 inches diameter, the larger disc would yeald more storage space and thus you would need less compression for a movie thus making the picture qualety better .a raw compleatley un-compressed 2hr 1080 movie is roughtley 1.8 TB so the less compression the better the picture. allsow a cartridge would make it more practical and ezer to use both sides of the disc and to put larger/more detailed art on the outside of the cartridge.

and once again if its not in a cartridge and has too much copy protection , i simpley wont buy any of it. thers my 2 cents...and if you dont like it you can just suck .....(use your imagination).

>

CRT

zombie · 10-09-2005, 05:22 AM

Thanks for the rant.

Seriously though, it looks like you won't be buying any BDs then. There most certainly will not be a cartridge. In the beginning I had hoped for them as well but if this hard-coating lives up to its hype I believe the discs will be okay in the end.

Patrick · 10-09-2005, 03:42 PM

Sorry to tell yall there will be no cartridges, Cartridges is what kept Sony from getting so much support in the beginning. Yeah it would be nice to have a protected case but then you wouldnt have hybrids compatable with current players. Cartridges would kill the blu-ray format and this war would have been over for Blu-ray already. TDK's durabis coating will be plenty of protection, I mean I never have to worry about scratches now with dvd, because I just take the care and time to put them back in their cases and they stay perfect. But I have rented games and movies and it irratates me when I find one that looks like someone played frisbie with it. Just take care of it and all will be fine. No cartridges, that would be bad.

Patrick · 10-09-2005, 03:48 PM

Oh and as far as the Copy protection, I dont blame studios at all for wanting it. It is NOT your right to share copies with friends, if they want it, they need to buy it. You only have the right to make a backup copy and thats it. You have no right to manipulate it. They give you the right to buy and enjoy what they have spent time and money producing as is. Thats why there are copy rights. There are to many people selling movies and music illegally and it has to stop, If I was making movies I wouldnt want people cheating me out of my money and neither would anyone else. So bring on the protection, as long as you dont try and break the law you will be fine. Oh and why would you be handling a disc with dirty fingers, man, just wipe your hands off and use the edges to handle the disc, its not rocket science.

CathodeRayTube · 10-09-2005, 06:14 PM

ok maybe i was being a bit critical about the cartridges....if this "durabris" is as good as there saying it is , it will have my support... but il have to get ahold of one and see it befor il truley beleve it.

and as for the copy protection...i beleve it IS INDEED your right to share with small groups of friends eg your grandmother , best friend and your nebor etc...if memory serves , there is a loop hole in copyright law that sez you are allowed to share with small groups of friends , this loop hole is what the origanal napster tride to take advantage of, but sence people were sharing with large groups of strangers and not small groups of friends , they got busted. ever since the first wax cylinder was created and sold,people have shared/loned things with other people, it should not stop now. and thats why i sed watermarks would be ok so the average joe can rip>compress and watch a movie on his ipod or give it to a friend who has never seen it or keep a copy in the car for long trips or copy it to his media PC , but so that if it was shared on the internet or if it was being re sold by a large pirate groupe , that thay can track down and prosocute whoever was doing it. allsow its NOT THERE right(the movie studios) to try to create a super copy protection and then raise the proces of videos thru the roof , there trying to extort money from people.

but im shure that my littel rants wont change anything and that the new discs will be highley priced and inconveniant to try to copy ,but eventualy ALL copyprotection is cracked/broken/circumvented ....so kudos to whoever dose it with this one first :|

Patrick · 10-10-2005, 12:39 AM

To loan your disc is fine, but to create a copy to give or sell to someone else is illegal and not your right and there is no such loop hole, if there ever was its gone now. And the thing about the price is untrue, do you know we actually pay more for movies and cd's due to piracy. Studios dont like losing money and have and will pass the cost to us because of it.

CathodeRayTube · 10-10-2005, 01:04 AM

i think you sir, are ether working for the movie studios or just have your head up your ass(basecley the same thing).

"And the thing about the price is untrue, do you know we actually pay more for movies and cd's due to piracy."

the movie studeos and record companies have been playing that up to the hilt since the invention of cassette and video tapes as an excuse to raise prices . when all of the redused sales are actualy from all the crappy and downright stupid movies theyv been churning out every other day , EG the grudge, march of the penguines, and all of the starwars remakes AND all of the recent remakes of 60s and 70s comic books ...spider man, superman, batman,the hulk....what next...corn-cob man and captain underpants...

and if they would get it thru there thick heads that if they would sell movies verry cheep eg $5 for a new relese...people would buy many more movies and would have no need to pirate them. thus making the studios more money than they are now.

Patrick · 10-10-2005, 01:20 AM

No, I am just a person that believes you should buy movies and not steal them which is what piracy is no matter what form, as far a selling new movies for $5, your out of your mind since that wouldnt be enough revenue for them to even make the movie in the first place. I dont think $20 for a new movie is high nor would I mind paying less, I am just reasonable and know that $5 movies will never happen. And I firmly believe we all pay a price for theft no matter what form it is. I have worked for businesses that charge more for products to make up for the theft they incure through the year, its a fact and a fault of people like you who think its legal and fine to do so.

zombie · 10-10-2005, 02:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CathodeRayTube

i think you sir, are ether working for the movie studios or just have your head up your ass(basecley the same thing).

Please do not turn a disagreement ugly. Those kinds of comments are unnecessary.

Quote:

and if they would get it thru there thick heads that if they would sell movies verry cheep eg $5 for a new relese...people would buy many more movies and would have no need to pirate them. thus making the studios more money than they are now.

It's one thing to desire cheaper movies and another to condone piracy. Like Patrick, I am fully supportive of the studios wanting to protect their movies. Hopefully they won't go overboard with things like getting permission to play a disc via the internet though. Even though copyright laws entitle you to make a backup of a prerecorded disc, I simply don't see the need to do so if you're not doing something illegal. Taking care of the discs you own should be enough to protect your investment. I guess I can understand making a backup of an out of print disc makes sense but not for the vast majority of titles. Should an accident happen where a disc you buy gets damaged, wouldn't it be less expensive to just re-buy that particular disc rather than to spend all the money required to backup every disc you own?

CathodeRayTube · 10-10-2005, 03:11 AM

ok im sorry for being a bit aggressive in my last comment towrds patric.

and dont put words in my mouth...i dont pirate anything myself , i tride downloading about 5 songs once and i was not inpressed with the horrible sound qualety of MP3s so i have never tride it again. and i have never downloaded any videos. and im neautral on the subject of piracey...i dont reely condone it and i dont do it and i have better things to spend time on ,but i see why other people do it (many of my friends do and kudos to them).

i have never downloaded any videos nor do i intend to start, and i havent ever bought any videos on dvd nor do i intend to. and at this rate i dont think i will be buying any on BD eather.

and if they sold movies for $5 they would sell so many of them that they would make way more than if they would sell them for $20. thats my reasoning.
:|

Alex Pallas · 10-10-2005, 03:15 AM

n2blu you have to understand many people travel and cannot worry about discs; i myself am a music man and before i started storing my cds on my harddrive i used to back up some hundreds of them so i could bring them in my car with me and all around, i actually pulled about thirty cdrs from my car (of which i own the originals) and threw them away because they were scratched up. some people buy cds or movies and let them sit on the shelf after watching them twice, but i'm one of those people who will watch a great movie 100 times before i die, i would like to have a definate library that i can assure will be backed up if something bad were to happen. actually i find myself playing the duplicates more so the originals stay in mint condition. but if i didn't have a good reason that certainly wouldn't mean the next person wouldn't, we should have certain rights to the stuff we buy, including being able to copy the media wherever we want it
*cough*as long as it is not distributed*cough*

CathodeRayTube · 10-10-2005, 03:40 AM

finaley sombody on my side...

i think this whole website is linked to the movie indistry , thats why there accusing me of being insane when i say copying/sharing is ok and needed.

"*cough*as long as it is not distributed*cough*"

once again...watermarks would make it so you can copy and manipulate it as much as you want and share with a friend but so you cant distribute it on the net or re sell it.

but if durabris lives up to the hype and the protection gets cracked , i probobley will start buying movies again...

but if i do ,and i pay $20+ for each one ,beleve me there will be atlest 1 backup for every movie i own.

and if you spend the money to backup your movies insted of just re buying it when it breaks , your money gos to people other than the greedy movie companies.

zombie · 10-10-2005, 04:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CathodeRayTube

and dont put words in my mouth...i dont pirate anything myself , i tride downloading about 5 songs once and i was not inpressed with the horrible sound qualety of MP3s so i have never tride it again. and i have never downloaded any videos. and im neautral on the subject of piracey...i dont reely condone it and i dont do it and i have better things to spend time on ,but i see why other people do it (many of my friends do and kudos to them).

Those are your words. So in fact, yes you are condoning illegal behavior.

CathodeRayTube · 10-10-2005, 04:46 AM

ok ...so i do condone it. but i dont do it myself so im not breaking any laws.

zombie · 10-10-2005, 04:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CathodeRayTube

finaley sombody on my side...

i think this whole website is linked to the movie indistry , thats why there accusing me of being insane when i say copying/sharing is ok and needed.

I think it's wrong to share copyrighted material because I have morals, not because I'm linked to the movie industry.

Quote:

once again...watermarks would make it so you can copy and manipulate it as much as you want and share with a friend but so you cant distribute it on the net or re sell it.

Copyright laws do not allow you to share with a friend. That's how the law is set up. If you are unhappy about it write your congressman. The studios have every legal right to try and prevent this behavior.

Quote:

and if you spend the money to backup your movies insted of just re buying it when it breaks , your money gos to people other than the greedy movie companies.

Unless you buy blank Sony discs.

Seriously though, you have the right to make backups. I personally don't have the need to but as Alex mentioned, someone that travels may in fact benefit from backups. I don't have a problem with your desire to make backups but rather your desire to share them.

Similar Threads
thread	Forum	Thread Starter	Replies	Last Post
Cartridge for Xpression III	Vinyl and Old School Music	bigred7078	28	01-06-2010 05:29 PM
Cartridge Upgrade Help MMF-2.2	Vinyl and Old School Music	TeresofBlood	8	06-30-2009 12:08 AM
Turntable- New Cartridge Question	Audio Theory and Discussion	joe1515	8	10-12-2008 10:53 PM
Blu-ray will not need a cartridge!!!!!!!!	Blu-ray PCs, Laptops, Drives, Media and Software	momo1988	2	08-26-2005 03:57 PM
Will recorders be cartridge-less	Blu-ray Technology and Future Technology	vper	1	04-15-2005 06:04 PM

06-17-2005, 05:13 PM	#21
thunderhawk Moderator Member since:Jul 2004 Location:Belgium	well, you still can have backwards compatibility... Look @ Panasonics DVD recorders that support DVD-RAM recording... And if the coating is as superior as they say, then theres no need for a cartridge

06-18-2005, 03:12 AM	#23
th3archiv3 Member Member since:Jun 2005	ya and it is bigger in physical size and will cost more for players to do what panasonic did but with blu-ray catridge was a kinda a good idea for keeping those scratches away

08-26-2005, 02:35 AM	#24
momo1988 New Member Member since:Aug 2005	blu ray doesnt need a cartridge!!!!!! its coating is more scratch resistant that a dvd coating!!!!!!!!

10-09-2005, 05:03 AM	#26
CathodeRayTube Junior Member Member since:Oct 2005 Location:my chair	dear whoever cairs...i would just like to let everyone know that IMO cartridges are a MUST , even if the coating is scratch proof, that dosent do sh!t for dirt fingerprints etc and i dont want to have to be cleaning my discs all the time, and cartridges are ezer to handle than bare discs....and theyr more of a value because when you pay $20 for a movie on a cartridge (eg VHS) it makes the consumer feel like he/she actualy bought somthing that you can hold in your hand and has some mass to it....unlike the p!ssy little plastic discs that have been our exuse for a storage media for the last 5 - 10 years... and i would like everyone to know (especialey the bigwigs at hollywood and the record dompanies) that i wont buy ANY of these things unless they are in a strong durable cartridge and can be copied/backed up without any limitations or PITAs... in my entire life i have onley bought maybe 12 CDs and NO DVDs for just these reasons. and as for the gung ho copy protection on everything ...its redickulus...its peopls rights to be able to copy there stuff and keep a copy for the den ,car , ripped to computer etc...if i cant copy it and manipulate it the way i want...i wont spend a single penny on these things. however WATERMARKs (as long as they dont fu*k up the sound/picture qualety ,as is allredy the case with dvd-audio/dualdisc) would be acceptable in my book ...so people can still make as many copies as they want/ share with small groups of friends /convert to another format /backup etc, but so that they would be detured from shareing/brodcasting it on the internet... not onley do i think that the BDs should be in a cartridge, but (for home theter/HD video aplications anyway)they should be TWICE as large as they are curentley, say about 6.5 inches diameter, the larger disc would yeald more storage space and thus you would need less compression for a movie thus making the picture qualety better .a raw compleatley un-compressed 2hr 1080 movie is roughtley 1.8 TB so the less compression the better the picture. allsow a cartridge would make it more practical and ezer to use both sides of the disc and to put larger/more detailed art on the outside of the cartridge. and once again if its not in a cartridge and has too much copy protection , i simpley wont buy any of it. thers my 2 cents...and if you dont like it you can just suck .....(use your imagination). > CRT

10-09-2005, 05:22 AM	#27
zombie Blu-ray Guru Top contributor Member since:May 2004 Trading Score:864	Thanks for the rant. Seriously though, it looks like you won't be buying any BDs then. There most certainly will not be a cartridge. In the beginning I had hoped for them as well but if this hard-coating lives up to its hype I believe the discs will be okay in the end.

10-09-2005, 03:42 PM	#28
Patrick Member Member since:Sep 2005	Sorry to tell yall there will be no cartridges, Cartridges is what kept Sony from getting so much support in the beginning. Yeah it would be nice to have a protected case but then you wouldnt have hybrids compatable with current players. Cartridges would kill the blu-ray format and this war would have been over for Blu-ray already. TDK's durabis coating will be plenty of protection, I mean I never have to worry about scratches now with dvd, because I just take the care and time to put them back in their cases and they stay perfect. But I have rented games and movies and it irratates me when I find one that looks like someone played frisbie with it. Just take care of it and all will be fine. No cartridges, that would be bad.

10-09-2005, 03:48 PM	#29
Patrick Member Member since:Sep 2005	Oh and as far as the Copy protection, I dont blame studios at all for wanting it. It is NOT your right to share copies with friends, if they want it, they need to buy it. You only have the right to make a backup copy and thats it. You have no right to manipulate it. They give you the right to buy and enjoy what they have spent time and money producing as is. Thats why there are copy rights. There are to many people selling movies and music illegally and it has to stop, If I was making movies I wouldnt want people cheating me out of my money and neither would anyone else. So bring on the protection, as long as you dont try and break the law you will be fine. Oh and why would you be handling a disc with dirty fingers, man, just wipe your hands off and use the edges to handle the disc, its not rocket science.

10-09-2005, 06:14 PM	#30
CathodeRayTube Junior Member Member since:Oct 2005 Location:my chair	ok maybe i was being a bit critical about the cartridges....if this "durabris" is as good as there saying it is , it will have my support... but il have to get ahold of one and see it befor il truley beleve it. and as for the copy protection...i beleve it IS INDEED your right to share with small groups of friends eg your grandmother , best friend and your nebor etc...if memory serves , there is a loop hole in copyright law that sez you are allowed to share with small groups of friends , this loop hole is what the origanal napster tride to take advantage of, but sence people were sharing with large groups of strangers and not small groups of friends , they got busted. ever since the first wax cylinder was created and sold,people have shared/loned things with other people, it should not stop now. and thats why i sed watermarks would be ok so the average joe can rip>compress and watch a movie on his ipod or give it to a friend who has never seen it or keep a copy in the car for long trips or copy it to his media PC , but so that if it was shared on the internet or if it was being re sold by a large pirate groupe , that thay can track down and prosocute whoever was doing it. allsow its NOT THERE right(the movie studios) to try to create a super copy protection and then raise the proces of videos thru the roof , there trying to extort money from people. but im shure that my littel rants wont change anything and that the new discs will be highley priced and inconveniant to try to copy ,but eventualy ALL copyprotection is cracked/broken/circumvented ....so kudos to whoever dose it with this one first :\|

10-10-2005, 12:39 AM	#31
Patrick Member Member since:Sep 2005	To loan your disc is fine, but to create a copy to give or sell to someone else is illegal and not your right and there is no such loop hole, if there ever was its gone now. And the thing about the price is untrue, do you know we actually pay more for movies and cd's due to piracy. Studios dont like losing money and have and will pass the cost to us because of it.

10-10-2005, 01:04 AM	#32
CathodeRayTube Junior Member Member since:Oct 2005 Location:my chair	i think you sir, are ether working for the movie studios or just have your head up your ass(basecley the same thing). "And the thing about the price is untrue, do you know we actually pay more for movies and cd's due to piracy." the movie studeos and record companies have been playing that up to the hilt since the invention of cassette and video tapes as an excuse to raise prices . when all of the redused sales are actualy from all the crappy and downright stupid movies theyv been churning out every other day , EG the grudge, march of the penguines, and all of the starwars remakes AND all of the recent remakes of 60s and 70s comic books ...spider man, superman, batman,the hulk....what next...corn-cob man and captain underpants... and if they would get it thru there thick heads that if they would sell movies verry cheep eg $5 for a new relese...people would buy many more movies and would have no need to pirate them. thus making the studios more money than they are now.

10-10-2005, 01:20 AM	#33
Patrick Member Member since:Sep 2005	No, I am just a person that believes you should buy movies and not steal them which is what piracy is no matter what form, as far a selling new movies for $5, your out of your mind since that wouldnt be enough revenue for them to even make the movie in the first place. I dont think $20 for a new movie is high nor would I mind paying less, I am just reasonable and know that $5 movies will never happen. And I firmly believe we all pay a price for theft no matter what form it is. I have worked for businesses that charge more for products to make up for the theft they incure through the year, its a fact and a fault of people like you who think its legal and fine to do so.

10-10-2005, 03:11 AM	#35
CathodeRayTube Junior Member Member since:Oct 2005 Location:my chair	ok im sorry for being a bit aggressive in my last comment towrds patric. and dont put words in my mouth...i dont pirate anything myself , i tride downloading about 5 songs once and i was not inpressed with the horrible sound qualety of MP3s so i have never tride it again. and i have never downloaded any videos. and im neautral on the subject of piracey...i dont reely condone it and i dont do it and i have better things to spend time on ,but i see why other people do it (many of my friends do and kudos to them). i have never downloaded any videos nor do i intend to start, and i havent ever bought any videos on dvd nor do i intend to. and at this rate i dont think i will be buying any on BD eather. and if they sold movies for $5 they would sell so many of them that they would make way more than if they would sell them for $20. thats my reasoning. :\|

10-10-2005, 03:15 AM	#36
Alex Pallas Active Member Member since:Sep 2005 Location:The Belly Of The Beast (USA)	n2blu you have to understand many people travel and cannot worry about discs; i myself am a music man and before i started storing my cds on my harddrive i used to back up some hundreds of them so i could bring them in my car with me and all around, i actually pulled about thirty cdrs from my car (of which i own the originals) and threw them away because they were scratched up. some people buy cds or movies and let them sit on the shelf after watching them twice, but i'm one of those people who will watch a great movie 100 times before i die, i would like to have a definate library that i can assure will be backed up if something bad were to happen. actually i find myself playing the duplicates more so the originals stay in mint condition. but if i didn't have a good reason that certainly wouldn't mean the next person wouldn't, we should have certain rights to the stuff we buy, including being able to copy the media wherever we want it coughas long as it is not distributedcough

10-10-2005, 03:40 AM	#37
CathodeRayTube Junior Member Member since:Oct 2005 Location:my chair	finaley sombody on my side... i think this whole website is linked to the movie indistry , thats why there accusing me of being insane when i say copying/sharing is ok and needed. "coughas long as it is not distributedcough" once again...watermarks would make it so you can copy and manipulate it as much as you want and share with a friend but so you cant distribute it on the net or re sell it. but if durabris lives up to the hype and the protection gets cracked , i probobley will start buying movies again... but if i do ,and i pay $20+ for each one ,beleve me there will be atlest 1 backup for every movie i own. and if you spend the money to backup your movies insted of just re buying it when it breaks , your money gos to people other than the greedy movie companies.

10-10-2005, 04:46 AM	#39
CathodeRayTube Junior Member Member since:Oct 2005 Location:my chair	ok ...so i do condone it. but i dont do it myself so im not breaking any laws.

Best Blu-ray Movie Deals