Isn’t it time for blu ray media prices to come down?!?
For the density it has, the price to store such media has not seen any cuts…
Also dual layer media is about 4x the price of single layer media, not even twice the price…
Flash and ssd are set to bring much higher densities to the consumer for lower prices making blu ray
obsolete. Ignoring those innovations may finally kill off optical media.
A 50pk of dual layer is around $75 - $100… while single layer 50 pack is around $20ish…
iirc, the disparities in dvd dl pricing were not as wide when they were in more common use.
Isn’t it time for blu ray media prices to come down?!?
The price may never come down due to less media being sold these days. Cloud storage, low cost of USB/SSD and streaming content versus using disc media will probably keep prices high. I burn a small fraction of the discs I did just 2-3 years ago which is probably the same for many people that used disc media heavily in the past.
I think the whole storage industry is in a strange situation at present. Hard drive prices (especially for larger 8TB+ drives) has increased dramatically. The cloud storage space has seen a number of changes over the past few years, with Microsoft and Amazon discontinuing their unlimited cloud storage offerings. Google has also announced that their previously unlimited cloud storage offering for education is ending next year. Surely all of this puts some amount of pressure on individuals and institutions to find alternate storage means, which probably means even more pressure on the storage industry.
My biggest issue with Blu-Ray isn’t even necessarily the cost, but just the relatively limited storage space. It’s amazing to have 25GB on a single layer disc compared to 4.7GB that DVD had, but it’s just really not that much storage by current standards. If I want to back up even a (by current standards) modest 2TB hard drive, that’s ~80 SL BD-R discs. Even if I pay $1/disc, an $80 one time fee for a nice archival backup isn’t that expensive, but that’s just too damn many discs to store.
Of course, you can cut the number of discs into 1/3 or 1/4 if you use TL or QL media, but then it does get too expensive, and it’s still probably too many discs for many use cases.
Unfortunately, I’m not convinced things will improve. I think optical is probably the optimal archival format that’s available to consumers, but consumers just don’t seem to care.
It’s disappointing that there’s no interest to make e.g. 33 GB single layer and 66 GB dual layer discs, like they did 700 MB and even 800/900 MB CD-Rs. And considering that TL discs are 100 GB (i.e. 33 GB per layer) 33 GB SL, 66 GB DL BD-Rs really shouldn’t be a problem.
Exactly. which is why I usually just use additional hard drives and keep optical media backup (DVD in my case) to strictly higher importance data like family pictures/videos which limits what I got to burn to DVD and still keeps things so I don’t have a boatload of discs to store since it’s not like I routinely have many GB of family pictures/videos to backup.
but I think nowadays, at the minimum, it’s not really worth buying a hard drive any smaller than 2TB at this point in time, maybe even a bit higher. but I guess one good thing about 2TB hard drives is they tend to be priced well and offer ample storage for most people. but using your $80 for optical media archive, while not a bad price, a 4TB hard drive starts to look much more appealing at that point unless one really wants a alternative to storing data on HDD in which case, like you said, optical media is probably the best all-around alternative for a physical copy of ones data.
p.s. recordable 25GB blu-ray discs would be nice to have on some level but the cost of the drives/media is a turn off for me and makes regular hard drives paired with recordable DVD overall better.
I pretty much agree (which is why I still use DVD for limited higher importance data backup like family pictures/videos but my general data backup is on at least a couple of different hard drives).
but I think the problem is lack of convenience and many tend to put off backing up their data. but I think the most obvious thing when it comes to general data backup is… it’s just less time consuming to use the two hard drive backup method which is a simple/quick way to have reasonable protection against data loss. I realize one could go into possible optical media or having external hard drives that are mostly offline to further lower risk, but at the least, two copies of data on two different hard drives seems like a good balance of convenience and offers reasonable protection against data loss. but naturally, anything of higher importance, even assuming one does not want to use optical media, a third hard drive that’s generally offline would be very wise. but I guess one could get into more detail like if there is a house fire, that it would be best to have at least one copy in another physical location etc etc.
but I figure as a general rule, at the minimum, two different copies of ones data on two different devices (I don’t recommend a USB stick, but even that’s still much better than only having one copy of ones important data) is good very basic protection against data loss.
Yeah, price alone makes that not really practical even assuming the media is reliable long term.
but even price aside for a moment… I wonder about the stability of the data in the long term since I would imagine the more data one packs onto a standard sized disc we have had for a long time now (CD to DVD to BluRay etc) the more likely small flaws will make it unreadable that much faster as in this regard I feel a bit better about recordable DVD tech as I feel confident all of the decent quality DVD media will still be reliable 10-20+ years into the future. but like I have said before, even if this media is reliable, whether drives that read them will eventually be hard to come by, which would be a problem. because I don’t see DVD drives and computers that work with them being a problem finding say 10+ years from now, but in 20+ years, who knows. but I guess it just depends on how long one needs the backups to last. because I just see DVD recordable media being good enough to buy us at least another 10+ years of peace-of-mind, maybe 20. but after that who knows. but depending on how old someone is, 20 years might be about all they need.
I guess there is a bunch of ways at looking at this stuff. but in the end hard drive backups seem the most practical in general short of a small amount of higher importance data in which case I use DVD as additional protection for peace-of-mind which should buy a person at least 10-20 years.