|This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.|
|Archive 2||Archive 3||Archive 4|
- 1 Data transfer rate
- 2 kiB or kB?
- 3 Another technology competitor
- 4 Problems with DVD manufacture
- 5 The DVD consumer phenomenon
- 6 First High Selling DVD?
- 7 DVD Data structure
- 8 Care and cleaning of DVD
- 9 Video ts merge
- 10 Copy protections in adition it css
- 11 DVD logo
- 12 Prices
- 13 The format in Video Game Consoles
- 14 DVD-9
- 15 Cleanup Request Added
- 16 First released DVD
- 17 Dual Layer Recordable Discs and Video players
- 18 Video_ts
- 19 dual layers
- 20 Security section
- 21 Merge
- 22 Don't understand "Size" section
- 23 Original research?
- 24 SACD
- 25 All DVDs are DVD-ROM? Oh Really?
- 26 DVD sizes
- 27 Need section or new article on read/write speeds
- 28 make "history of the dvd' a separate article?
- 29 Region Code Bypassing
- 30 DVD-Video
- 31 There is no information about how DVD's are read and how the image is carried to the screen
- 32 DVD size
- 33 Size comparison picture
- 34 Pronunciation of DVD-R in UK?
Data transfer rate
The reference data rate of DVD is 11.08 Mbit/s (million bits per second). The data transfer rate of a DVD drive is often given in multiples of 1352 kB/s, which means that a drive with 16x speed designation allows a data transfer rate of 16 × 1352 = 21640 kB/s (21.13 MB/s).
11.08 Mb/s = 11,080 kb/s = 11,080,000 b/s = 1.385 MB/s = 1,385 kB/s = 1,385,000 B/s ≈ 10.567 Mib/s ≈ 10,820 Kib/s ≈ 1.321 MiB/s ≈ 1,352 KiB/s
1,352 KiB/s = 1,384,448 B/s = 11,075,584 b/s ≈ 11.08 Mb/s
So is it 11.08 Mbit/s = 1385 kB/s or 1352 KiB/s exactly? It would seem odd to use a round “binary unit” here, because the capacity of DVDs as well as data transfer rates are usually given in “decimal units”.
- 4.700 GB ÷ 1,385 kB ≈ 3,393.501
- 4.707 GB ÷ 1,385 kB ≈ 3,398.555
- 4.700 GB ÷ 1,352 kB ≈ 3,476.331
- 4.707 GB ÷ 1,352 kB ≈ 3,481.508
- 4.700 GB ÷ 1,352 KiB ≈ 3,394.854
- 4.707 GB ÷ 1,352 KiB ≈ 3,399.911
- 4.700 GB ÷ 3,400 ≈ 1,382,353 B ≈ 1,349.954 KiB
- 4.707 GB ÷ 3,400 ≈ 1,384,412 B ≈ 1,351.964 KiB
- 4.700 GB ÷ 3,482 ≈ 1,349,799 B ≈ 1,318.163 KiB
- 4.707 GB ÷ 3,482 ≈ 1,351,809 B ≈ 1,320.126 KiB
- 3,400 × 1,385 kB = 4,709,000,000 B
- 3,400 × 1,352 KiB = 4,707,123,200 B
- 3,482 × 1,352 kB = 4,707,664,000 B
- 3,482 × 1,352 KiB = 4,820,647,936 B
- 3,482 × 1,350 kB = 4,700,700,000 B
Further note that, in comparison, the sector sizes of CD-DA and CD-ROM Mode 1 and 2 are 2352, 2048 and 2336 bytes respectively (plus 96 bytes subchannel data, i.e. 2448 bytes raw). Single speed is always 75 sectors per second (because the CD-ROM sector uses the difference of 304 (or 16) bytes for synchronisation, an ID and error detection/correction), resulting in speeds of
- 176.4 kB/s ≈ 172.3 KiB/s (CD-DA),
- 153.6 kB/s = 150 KiB/s (CD-ROM Mode 1),
- 175.2 kB/s ≈ 171.1 (CD-ROM Mode 2),
- 183.6 kB/s ≈ 179.3 KiB/s (raw data).
Christoph Päper 14:14, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
- 11.08 Mbps is the exact data rate. It comes from the 22.16 Mbps channel data rate. So translating gives you 1385 kB/s exactly or 1352.5391... KiB/s. --JimTheFrog 07:50, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
A section/table with DVD read/write speeds (1x - 24x) and the respective transfer rates needs to be implemented in the article (see the "CD-ROM drives" section of the CD-ROM article) Smithbrenon 05:59, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
kiB or kB?
In the article one finds the equation "16 × 1352 = 21640 kB/s (21.13 MB/s)". This doesn't make much sense:
- 1352 is without units. So, please either add "kB/s" or "kiB/s" (I don't know which one is correct).
- 21640 kB/s is not 21.13 MB/s. Rather 21640 kB/s is 21.13 MiB/s.
- The rate 21640 kB/s could be wrong: Please check whether it's 21640 kiB/s instead.
184.108.40.206 16:19, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
Another technology competitor
Fluorescent_multilayer_disc has the potential to have much higher capacity than either HD-DVD or Blu-Ray, but has been ignored because the devloper, Constellation 3D and the current patent holder, D Data, were and are not members of either the DVD Forum or DVD+RW Alliance. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.127.116.11 (talk • contribs) 21:40, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Problems with DVD manufacture
Perhaps someone more knowledgeable than me could add a section on why we get so many problems with commercial DVDs. Often I have to go back to the shop to get a replacement because a disk will not work. Is it because they cut corners in the manufacturing process or something about the format itself? Eiler7 16:38, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
- Are you talking about new discs or rentals? There may be something wrong with your player, such that discs which are borderline playable on other machines are unplayable on yours. Kaleja 07:40, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
The DVD consumer phenomenon
This article should include some discussion of how/why DVD retail prices have averaged far below videotape, in absolute or constant dollars, at similar times in their respective lifespans.
Pricing of videotapes was aimed primarily at milking the rental market, while DVDs have been priced for mass consumption. It is worthy of discussion whether the DVD strategy has proven to be superior (by driving consumer adoption of DVD) and whether Hollywood left money on the table by not going mass market with videotape until late in its lifecycle.
In addition, it would be interesting to find some informed analysis of why people buy $20-30 DVDs even though they may watch them 1-2 times.Rreece@kc.rr.com 19:31, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
First High Selling DVD?
Just out of curiosity, does anyone know what the first DVD to sell 1 million copies was? I started wondering after hearing how fast the first UMD Movie reached 1 million(of coarse since then the UMD format has started to fail as a movie device). Spyke 00:01, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
- It appears that the original "Matrix" DVD was the first to hit a million copies:
- The Matrix was the first DVD to sell more than 1 million copies and remains "a must-have," says Judith McCourt, market research director for Video Store magazine. Source
- --DavePretty 20:14, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
DVD Data structure
Care and cleaning of DVD
I think there needs to be a section on accepted ways of cleaning DVDs (and perhaps how to fix scratched discs). I have nothing to do with Meguiar's but I had great luck this evening buffing out a DVD scratch with Meguiar's Deep Crystal Polish (found in Auto Zone in car wax section), and it worked after everything else failed. I'd write something about it, but my own experience would probably be too anecdotal. -Rolypolyman 01:56, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
Video ts merge
this article was tagged for merge almost a month ago, will someone please take care of this? - Adolphus79 05:27, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
Copy protections in adition it css
Other measures such as RipGuard, as well as US and international copyright law, may be used to prevent making unauthorized copies of DVDs. Meanwhile in the past few years a large amount of software has been created to make copies, such as DVD Shrink and DVD Decrypter.
Needs to be expanded perhaps info on the three tools that rip dvds that are still under devlopment dvdfab/dvdfab decrypter anydvd and dvd43 and how these tools are able to remove the "protection". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 18.104.22.168 (talk • contribs) 00:48, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
i assume it varible in which case it doesnt matter does it
btw i never have seen a €25 player Owwmykneecap 02:50, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
The format in Video Game Consoles
I Have Added, Updated and Corected info in this section Owwmykneecap 02:36, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
All the Info in this is correct, if you are going to edit stuff out or change, prove it wrong first and then change. The release dates were correct for Europe(remember Wiki is Intl) so add the us by all means but dont delete the European, Jap dates on box and cube would be good.
The Free Dvd player with the dreamcast was on offer in some regions including europe and Japan, The Us? fucked if i know. It was favoured over a redesign.
Please only use "cite" on things which may not be public or common Knowledge, problems with blu ray and drm tech was the reason(according to Kutaragi harzai etc) the ps3 was put back, which was widely annouced reported.(wether you believe them or not is a different story, you'll need an inside man for that) Edge Magazine Games™ Cvg Games Master and Digitiser would support all my claims. i believe the piece is very non bias(i loath fanboyism) Owwmykneecap 03:02, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
I second this. I was looking up Xbox 360 Media and I found out about its external HD-DVD player. "whhhaa". Then I find out that xbox 360 does not use DVD but DVD-9. WTF? From What I have hard its Microsoft HD-DVD vs Blueray not DVD-9 vs Blue ray. Does this means that PS3 is doing the same thing?--Doom Child 07:13, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
- DVD-9 is a dual layer DVD --Can Not 03:52, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Cleanup Request Added
While reading this article, I noticed a few unreferenced sources... and then a few more. I added specific requests for a few of these, but on further consideration, the article lacks sources for many alleged facts. While I understand that DVD is a large topic requiring an article somewhat longer than other topics, it's also a bit wordy and verbose. It needs a general tidy. -- 22.214.171.124 02:27, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
well i did most of the vgames section, the are no citations as the facts come from many years of videogames mags and also on on teletext news services i.e. i read inumerous reports of the green screen, which sonly implemented to stop piracy of taping dvd to video...but my with ps2 i did not experience this, i believe that it may have something to with which cables you use??? a quick web search will prove them to be correct. Owwmykneecap 02:49, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
First released DVD
The article states "Twister" but I was under the impression the first DVD release was "Evita". Am I wrong? PatrickJ83 17:22, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Dual Layer Recordable Discs and Video players
The article asks for a citation. Just try playing one on a handful of DVD video players, is all the citation you need. It is a fact. The majority of players older than about mid 2004 will not play DVD+R9 disks at all. About half of those players will play DVD-R9 disks, but only the first layer. Playback will stop once the player tries to change layer. 126.96.36.199 18:38, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
- That's a pretty crappy citition. Firstly what booktype are the +R9s? Secondly, how many players have you actually tested that you can claim half of the players. There are A LOT of players out there and the prevalance of brand and type can vary, especially by country. Also, what media were you testing? Only one media code or several? What kind of burn quality were the DVDs? Not to mention there is the question whether we should be looking for diversity or product penetration. For example if 10% of households have player X and only 1% have player Y, shouldn't we consider compatability with X more important to Y? With all these and more considerations, claims like half of players are unlikely to have any degree of accuracy. Nil Einne 19:02, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Video_ts has been redirected here, its contents was:
- Video Ts (VIDEO_TS) is the folder where all information of typical DVDs is stored. This folder includes the video, audio and subtitle menu and other interactive futures such as games, images or texts. Although all information of a DVD is stored in the Video TS folder there is a folder named Audio Ts (AUDIO_TS); this folder is used for special DVDs or DVD Audio discs.
The article starts talking about dual layer recording without every having mentioned the concept of layers. It should first be explained how that technology works and whether standard DVD players and DVD-ROM drives can read dual layer disks or not. AxelBoldt 19:39, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
The information in the audio security section says that the protection has not been cracked, but then links to a Wikipedia entry for the scheme which says that it was cracked early and is now practically useless. Which is correct>? --Thenickdude 00:05, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
- A merge or deletion of what, exactly? -- Y|yukichigai 21:20, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Don't understand "Size" section
" A common misconception is that a single-layer DVD can store 4.7 gigabytes. DVDs, like hard disks and newer flash memory devices, have their capacity specified in gigabytes (109 bytes) "
- It is possible that neither Blu-ray, HD DVD, nor a next-generation optical recording products will succeed. The storage capacities of hard disk drives and solid-state memory have grown faster than those of optical discs (since CD's introduction year, 1983, storage capacity of HDDs grew by a factor of about 100,000, from 5 MB to 500 GB, while the capacity of Blu-ray is only 90 times larger than CD), and all three are much more capable of storing general consumer content —such as photos, music, and video— than in the past. Hard disk drives having a few terabytes of storage capacity will be on the market before 2008. A terabyte is equivalent to about 2000 CD-ROMs, 130 DVD-9s, or 20 dual-layer BDs. However, hard disk drives and memory cards are at the moment hundreds of times more expensive than optical discs (US$50 or more compared to $0.50). The price per gigabyte of a hard disk drive, $0.40 ($200/500 GB), is growing closer to that of a DVD-ROM, $0.06 ($0.50/8.5 GB); BD-ROM, $0.03 ($1.50/50 GB); recordable DVD-5, $0.10 ($0.50/4.7 GB); or recordable DVD-9, $0.30 ($2.50/8.5 GB); and is lower than the cost of a BD-RE25, $1.20 ($30/25 GB). Direct access to large amounts of information is much more convenient with a hard disk drive. As broadband becomes fast enough (40 Mbit/s and higher) and more widely available, physical media will become less important as a distribution format.
The above section has absolutely NO references and looks like it might be idle speculation based on original research. Note that I'm not saying it's necessarily false, just that it's not suitable for wikipedia unless we can get a reliable reference. I'll leave it for now, but if someone can't come up with a reference I recommend it be removed. Nil Einne 18:47, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
I agree. I took this part out. It's unnecessary and more idle speculation, than anything. Current day talks about Internet multi-tier limits would very easily counter-argue the future of "using broadband to download data onto hard drives", which is only an opinion.188.8.131.52 13:27, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
I removed this bit
- as the low initial take up of Super Audio CD has shown
which suggested the low take up of SACD was due to it's copy prevention systems. While I agree it sucks and it is a major deterrent to me (although I would never be interested in a format so early on anyway) the fact of the matter is that SACD's low take up could be due to any number of reasons. I personally strongly suspect it has just as much to do with the fact that most people would barely notice the difference and even if they do, it may not be immedietly obvious. In any case, the point is that we don't know so we shouldn't speculate. Nil Einne 18:58, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
All DVDs are DVD-ROM? Oh Really?
The 2nd paragraph of the article says "All DVDs — ... — are DVD-ROM discs". This sounds wrong to me. What about DVD-RAM and DVD-RW (both of which have been approved by the DVD Forum, not to mention DVD+RW which has not)? Are those DVD-ROM discs? (I think not.) Note that the DVD-RAM article links to this one to define the term "DVD", but here there is a definition that is so narrow that it precludes the existence of DVD-RAM. —Pangolin 15:50, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
I agree. Technically only pressed discs are ROM, +r and -r are WORM. DVD-ROM, DVD±R, DVD±RW and so on are all technical terms for the capability of the drive, not the media.
ElKeeed 09:35, 2 April 2007 (GMT)
There is nothing explaining DVD sizes or their names. The "DVD disc capacity" section has a little info but it does not mention the sizes' names, instead it just says single/double sided & single/dual layers. It should have a list of them and explain how much they can hold (DVD-5,9,10,14 & 18.) Daveoh 19:01, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Need section or new article on read/write speeds
I didn't really find any explanation in this article about speeds (8x, 16x, etc.), nor a link to an article that does.184.108.40.206 06:15, 16 October 2006 (UTC)Kurt
make "history of the dvd' a separate article?
The DVD article is fairly lengthy. The history section could be copied to a different article, like this...
Main article: History of DVD
(short summery here)
J.delanoy 15:10, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Region Code Bypassing
"A huge percentage of players outside of North America can be easily modified (and are even sold pre-modified by mainstream stores such as Amazon.co.uk) to ignore the regional codes on a disc."
It's not that difficult to find such players within North America either. There's plenty of websites listing region-free hacks for all manner of players.
BTW, is bypassing region codes legal, since they're not technically copy protection? 220.127.116.11 06:14, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- Oops, looks like there was a previous discussion and consensus on this in the archive, seems like it's a simple issue of no one taking the time to do it yet ;) -- Sirius81 | Talk 16:26, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
- Done! Just a straight copy/paste from the main article. Hopefully it can become a good article in it's own right. Lugnuts 11:58, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
There is no information about how DVD's are read and how the image is carried to the screen
Why is this? Is there no one who knows? Unless it's on another article it's crazy not to have this explained in this article.
Shouldn't there be a small article explaining why a dual layer DVD contains only 8.5 GB, not 9.4 (2*4.7) Dont know Ip 9:23 December 3 2006
Size comparison picture
I think this picture should be replaced by one that provides a better object to compare the size of a DVD to. A pencil is a bit random, and since pencils vary in size you would have to know that exact brand and model for it to be any use.
I suggest either coins or perhaps an iPod, or AA batteries, a credit card or perhaps a floppy disk. Or some combination. I can take the picture, however note that I only have access to British, Japanese and Euro currency for coins. Mojo-chan 19:13, 5 December 2006 (UTC)']] == ==]]
Pronunciation of DVD-R in UK?
The article states that in the UK it is pronounced "DVD minus R", while everywhere else it is "DVD dash R". I don't know about other people in the US, but I have never in my life heard it called "DVD dash R". It seemed to me that "DVD minus R" (in contrast to plus R) was the de facto pronounciation. Does anyone else agree? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 04:08, 18 December 2006 (UTC).
- Here in the US numerous tech shows and product advertisements pronounce it "DVD dash R". It's not as common anymore, as the format war is more or less at a standstill, but the few times I have seen it come up on a television program or similar in recent years I have only heard "DVD dash R", not "DVD minus R". -- Y|yukichigai 18:53, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- I am in the US and I have never heard "dash" anywhere.22.214.171.124 16:58, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Personal experience does not meet verifiability requirements for Wikipedia. What does, however, are external sources, such as this. Unfortunately the DVD Forum is not very vocal about how they want the format name to be pronounced, but at the very least the above source (and numerous other google-able ones) back up the fact that both pronunciations are used. -- Y|yukichigai 18:22, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- I am in the US and I have never heard "dash" anywhere.126.96.36.199 16:58, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- For what it's worth, my personal experience (in the U.S.) is that DVD-R is "DVD R", and DVD+R is "DVD plus R". I don't recall hearing "DVD dash R" or "DVD minus R" anywhere outside of spoken media (radio, TV) where the speaker is actively trying to draw a distinction between DVD-R and DVD+R. But casual, mainstream usage... "DVD R" is what I hear the most.
- -- Fishbert 17:25, 24 January 2007 (UTC)