All I can say is Ugggh! We really don't need to solve yesterdays problems with yet another incompatible proprietary codec to try to use yesterdays hardware DVD. There is an open source codec developed by the BBC that is wavelet based. It's being considered for a SMPTE standard. It should be fine for Red media. Dirac is already being developed in silicon, unlike Cineform which seems to want to cripple its market penetration.
My apologies, I was quickly catching up here and misread the dates.
Yes, Apple is also gearing up their games efforts, we suspect a gaming console and computers. All these together could be geared to use it. I did not mention it, because they are not in the market and desperate yet, like some games companies. MS also has more money to spend on something like this, and much bigger user base. MS stands to have a much larger instant user base, if they went ahead with this in a suitable manner (realising how many companies have failed before).
To the contrary, we are talking commercial marketability. These formats are cheap, some burnable (well I could probably get the 100GB one burnable) but the main emphasis in how cheap they are to mass produce, and the 100GB one is compatible with standard stamp presses. You have to start thinking of the UHD 3D market with HDR, and DVD9 will no longer be suitable. The thing is, that there is an opportunity there for emerging markets to compete, and for somebody into disruptive technologies to make money out of it, if they really want. Asia has had a number of locally supported successful items in times past, despite what the west thinks, in this case they could take it to the west (worth a fair bit compared to most information technology companies).
That is not out of line, what insight do you have into them, or into the requirements of such a codec? Do you know there has been so many 1000:1 compression codecs claims over the years, that such claims are often laughed at and thought crackpot (and these are not digital cinema quality ones that require orders more performance). It takes a number of logical leaps, even to 700:1 on SHD, which should be easier and more compressible. Just because these people thought that at the time does not prove that it was, or that it was as enjoyable than uncompressed. You have to move closer to lossless to match the enjoyment of uncompressed. Some people also think that standard definition DVD is perfectly good, and SD TV's as well, but I do not know of one cinema that uses SD DVD or a SD TV to show their movies. Most people out side of compression professionals don't even realise what they are looking at, but it has measurable effect on the audience. If they can do what people (not themselves mind you, I am not claiming that) say, great, but I doubt it, it has defeated countless compression people over many years. They are probably doing something else than what people think, I am just disagreeing with some of the overzealous noise people are making. I do however, believe they could get Blu-ray level quality in SHD into that data-rate, that requires less logical steps, and would fool many people. If aiming it at the consumer level (Apple TV, don't discount MS yet, both together could dominate the market) then that is the level that a business would likely aim down to (through DVD quality is also good at these resolutions).
. In that context, ) unfortunately. Yes, I know amazing quality, but how amazing is the question (the more the better) be good to see eventually.