Cheaper per gigabyte? Let's see... It said the format could hold 100 times the data of a DVD, right? That's 100 * 4.7GB = 470GB (or 100 * 8.5GB = 850GB for dual-layer DVD). Then it said the cost would be less than $0.10 per gigabyte, right? Well good luck buying those discs: $0.10/GB * 470GB = $47, or $0.10/GB * 850GB = $85 for dual-layer. Not exactly cheap. It would have to be more like $0.01/GB to be reasonable ($4.7/$8.5GB per disc). Well, $0.02/GB at max: $9.2/$17 per disc. For comparison, a recordable single-layer Blu-ray disc (25GB) seems to cost 7€ at lowest here. Of course it's cheaper for industry...
That is, unless I made a mistake. Feel free to correct me if there's need for it; by no means I want to spread false information.
Naturally costs of this technology will fall. It's just a matter of time. However, I wouldn't be so sure about this technology being reasonably priced at the start of the next generation. It would have to MUCH cheaper than it now is to be a decent option. Sure, it could make it... But I wouldn't count on it. Besides, Blu-ray will do for a few years just fine. With all those extra layers (hadn't they already reached 200GB with eight layers?), it could possibly make even the next gen.
Anyway, if Blu-ray is viable enough, Sony ought to use it. And that alone will be great for Blu-ray. Besides, we don't need a new format every five to eight years. Hopefully, at least. It'll get pretty expensive for the consumer.
And I must also make it clear that I have nothing against holography. In fact, I believe it could well be the successor of Blu-ray and it seems to be one of the best options right now. It's just that its costs seem too high now.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
