[QUOTE=elgario;2761857]Conventional HTL BD-R are not dye-based and they are 10x cheaper than M-Disc. (eg Melody 50 spindle $20, M-Disc 15 spindle $70)
The basic concept behind M-Disc was to backport to DVD an inorganic based phase change layer similar to existing HTL BD-R. Fine. But then to release a BD-R version of M-Disc…lol, it’s pretty much an ordinary BD-R without the reflective layer. For me, not worth the 10x price difference.
If you want to spend more than Melody, get some nice Panasonics that are rated for 50 years. They probably could have rated them something dumb like 1000 years if they really wanted. Lets be real, in 1000 years the polycarbonate of M-Disc will be rotted, the adhesive will have failed and the disc will be a pile of mush.[/QUOTE]
From my understanding, HTL BD-R are indeed dye based; it’s only the reflectivity schema that changes:
I don’t think that the M-Disc technology actually writes discs the way we’ve thought. They claim that in fact they physically etch the disc with higher powered lasers that leave behind actual depressions in the substrate â€“ no dyes ever involved. And, while we think there’s no reflective layer to these M-Discs, they use the contrast between the physically burned pits and unburned substrate to make these new discs readable in all legacy DVD/BD readers. I find that pretty remarkable.
I agree that the “1,000 years” stuff is all marketing hype, but having switched to Phthalocyanine based DVDs years ago â€“just for doubling the expected life of my archival disksâ€“ every bit of added assurance helps. Cheaper is not always better when it comes to this stuff, and I like to sleep at night. The funny thing is that my Mistsui Phthalocyanine DVD-Rs cost about $0.11/GB, and these M-Disc 25GB ones look like they cost about $0.10/GB, so for me it would be a wash in total archiving costs.
I just ordered an M-Disc burner and some discs. While I don’t have anyway of testing their true archival qualities vs. other common DVD/BD media, I will see what I can find out.