33 GB single and 66 GB dual layer disks?

[AAM]

Since TDK tested a 6 layer 200 GB disk, I'm wondering when we might see 33 GB single and 66 GB dual layer disks.

I'd bet reader problems would be primarily related to reading additional layers beyond the first two; however, the expansion to 33 GB per layer could be a standard progression just as we saw with CD-R and other formats. I know the additional layering results in more expensive disks. The single layer BDs don't even require any lamination - the data layer and protective layers are applied rather than laminated reducing production cost (unlike single layer DVD which does require lamination).

I know that Sony was originally talking about lower production costs with the single layer tech back in 2004. I wonder if it will come to be that single layer BDs will be cheaper to produce than DVDs.

[56@Yamamoto]

Unfortunately, 33G/layer is BD-RW disk technology, not for BD-ROM.

[AAM]

Originally Posted by 56@Yamamoto

Unfortunately, 33G/layer is BD-RW disk technology, not for BD-ROM.

Well then, if your player can read BD-RW, I guess you are gtg! (is that 2.1?)

[Blu Titan]

The Blu-ray insiders have posted that the 100GB and 200 GB disks are not going to be used for Blu-ray movies.

[AAM]

Originally Posted by BlueNeon

The Blu-ray insiders have posted that the 100GB and 200 GB disks are not going to be used for Blu-ray movies.

How about 33 GB single layer and 66 GB dual layer?

[iNCREDiPiNOY]

Originally Posted by BlueNeon

The Blu-ray insiders have posted that the 100GB and 200 GB disks are not going to be used for Blu-ray movies.

I hope Ultra-HD might happen to release on 100GB/200GB BD for the next 25 years.