Is Blu-ray a failure? Duh.

“Is Blu-ray a failure?” is an interesting article by Cringely which essentially makes some of the points I made late last year, but fails to really provide a firm answer to the question. Here’s a simple way of looking at it:

When CD-ROM burners first became available to normal people, blank CD media cost around $10 a disk at a time when a 600MB hard disk cost well over $1000 (the Quadra 840AV — a very well-specced and pricey computer of the time — came with a 230MB hard disk). Over the next ten years, CD media got about 10-20x cheaper while hard disks got about 100x cheaper.

Today, a blank BD-R DL disk (50GB capacity) costs about $20, which is more expensive than using 1TB hard disks as a storage medium. A burner will set you back around $150. And it’s slower, and probably less reliable than a hard disk or USB stick. (Consumer hard disks have a MTBF of what … two years of normal use? Anyone ever tried using a CD-R or DVD-R for two years? Any reason to expect BD-R to be better?) So to get your first 100GB of Blu-ray storage will cost you the same amount as a high quality 1TB hard disk, or 200-400GB of USB sticks, but don’t worry it also costs more per extra GB, and — if history is any guide — its competitors go on to get better and cheaper much, much faster.

Blu-ray also lacks all the other ancillary advantages that allowed CD and DVD to succeed in their respective niches. Each was replacing a less reliable, less versatile format which lacked random access (DVD managed to screw this up by forcing us to watch trailers anyway). Blu-ray is competing with hard disks, USB sticks, and cloud repositories, which are actually more reliable, more versatile, and provide better access.

Oh, right. The answer is “yes”.

  • You have to give Blu-ray props for draining Microsoft’s coffers in its attempt to achieve world domination through Win CE on HD DVD players. I think that will remain its greatest success. It was a little like I heard the Ethiopian/Eritrean war described: two bald men fighting over a comb. I think it’s the last “common” disc format before the world enters the post-tangible media era.

    Though, for tangible media a 2.5″ hard disk would almost fit into a shelf-standard size DVD case. In fact, if someone made a DVD case-sized USB/firewire enclosure with a 2.5″ drive full of video inside, it would probably market more favourably than Blu-ray for distribution of HD TV series. Given approximate price parity, I’d go with the 2.5″ drive.

  • If only they had cynically treated it as exactly that — running interference against Microsoft. That said, my original argument was (and remains) that DVD was the last common disc format, and Blu-ray is simply irrelevant.

    You know you can get 64GB SD cards, with transfer rates sufficient for full HD video capture. Meanwhile 2GB SD cards are easily cheap enough to distribute video on.

    And who was it just stuck SD slots in their entire notebook line? (Unfortunately, they stick out when in use.)

  • I noticed this today:

    http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2009/07/disney-puts-toll-on-format-shifting-rolls-out-microsd-films.ars

    Beginning this fall, Disney will sell a line of its films with both a DVD and a microSD card inside the package. According to Reuters, it can be had for the low, low price of ¥4,935 ($53)—a mere ¥1,000 ($11) more than the DVD alone.

    We’re almost there.