I think Mr. Dvorak is jumping the gun. He doesn't really understand what is behind D-VHS (most people don't. the truth is buried deep in the details). The D-VHS format has a few technical problems going against it:
1. MPEG-2 MP@ML encoders or even JVC's purported 14 mbit/sec simple I-frame MPEG-2 encoder are too pricy for late 1998. Blame JVC and the industry for lack of low-cost encoder chips.
2. The current crop of sub $1000 D-VHS machines can only record precompressed bitstreams. So there must be wide-spread digital video transmission. Are cable companies switching or augmenting their spectrum with digital broadcasts en mass in 1998 ?
3. The D-VHS machines only accept bitstreams via 1394 firewire. Few of the cable company settop boxes pass bitstreams through firewire. Check out next week's Western Cable Show in Anaheim to be sure.
4. D-VHS pre-recorded video manufacturing costs are high (>$3 a piece compared to $1.25 for DVD titles). This is because the D-VHS tape formula is based on a rather expensive and dense metal oxide, similar to S-VHS.
5. Well, JVC screwed up S-VHS by keeping prices high for both recorders and blank tapes. Given the technical similarities between D-VHS and S-VHS, why should they get wise this time ?
6. the figure of 44 Gbytes is based on a very thin tape formula (~10 microns) which yields 7 hours record time. If a regular VHS tape were to be 10 microns thick, you would have a record time of 12 hours. Look how much the 10 hour BASF tapes cost today --- and that's with standard density oxide formula.
7. Most people are happy time shifting and saving their programs on regular VHS. Even if the video signal existed as a digital bitstream at some intermediate point.
8. Everything about VHS is against digital bitstream recording (tracking, tape economy, head drum dimensions, etc.). The only reason to use VHS transport is forwards compatibility (can play/record regular VHS tape on D-VHS machine).
For more glossy details on D-VHS, see:
jvc-victor.co.jp
When a format comes along that can adapt to the bitrate of any broadcast, (maintain a constant areal payload bit density with no stuffing bytes), and addresses tape costs, maybe I will take $500 digital VCR seriously.
p.s. In the recent Byte article, I believe the Cube architects were giving a sub-$100 target for the DiVX encoder within 2 years (?).
C-Cube needs to price their encoder below $50 to make it successful in the CE business. There are also about $10 worth of IP royalties attached to any MPEG-2 encoder. The irony is that the longer low cost encoders take, the less need there will be for them (because more and more standard definition programming will be delivered in digital format as time goes on).
Our character profile/dossier on Bullcansay, Delay, and LeGump strongly suggests that they probably will become too complacent with the high end and miss the mark.
CHROMAC
"May your samples return from the fab in the form of camel chips." |
