Talk:DVD-D

Untitled

Sony has a connection on the back of their latest LCD monitors that is labeled as DVD-D, and is a digital connection to a PC graphics card. This does not appear to agree with the definition of DVD-D as a self destructing "Disposable DVD format ?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.32.152.160 (talk • contribs) 22:38, 9 February 2005

• No it does not and DVD-D limited time play disc is not a SONY product. DVD-D belongs to a Swiss based company: FDD Technologies AG. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.127.68.44 (talk • contribs) 14:08, 26 May 2006

• You're thinking of DVI-D, DVI Dual link. --87.68.220.114 (talk) 15:32, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Use for top secret information

Would it be safe to use this type of disc for distributing top-secret information (Like the self-igniting tapes in spy movies) or could the data be recovered by advanced methods? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.188.253.13 (talk) 01:51, 8 February 2007 (UTC).

Depends on how long they take to disintegrate.... I still think the best way to make sure no one finds out whats on the dvd/cd is to break it or shatter it with a screwdriver or something... Ilikefood 21:43, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

I know that recordable DVD-D exist. One category is playable only once. So it makes data more secure! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.215.182.199 (talk) 13:07, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

How does it work

How exactly does a DVD-D go about destroying itself? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.236.30.253 (talk) 04:26, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

lol —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.110.101.211 (talk) 19:22, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

It's probably made of some material that begins to naturally disintegrate after several hours. Seeing as you have to open the cardboard box for it to begin this process, it's probably sensitive to oxygen, CO2 or even light. --87.68.220.114 (talk) 15:34, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

The page linked in the arcticle does NOT indicate how the destruction works. Please remove the link. According to http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Video-DVD-mit-Selbstzerstoerungsmechanismus--/meldung/106665 it is NOT a chemical process ("[it] can be kept even in its opened package indefinitely."). The German version of the DVD-D website makes it seem more likely that the destruction mechanism has to do with the rotation in the player, as they mention that explicitely. 99.250.59.104 (talk) 14:00, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Dating??

This article does not mention any years... is this product recent, as in 2008, or older, as in 2000, etc. When is this product?? --Smumdax (talk) 19:50, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

DVD?

Isn't DVD an acronym for Digital VERSATILE Disc?

Centrisian (talk) 23:08, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

NO! Some marketing types decided to try to push that idea on people because it would make it easier to market DVD for other things, but the fact of the matter is that it originally stood for "Video". Additionally, considering these things destroy themselves, they are most certainly NOT versatile anyways, LOL. Almost nobody would want DVD-D as a format for software or anything else they intended to keep. Zaphraud (talk) 19:03, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

---YOU=== are way off on this, as the original charter documents by the consortium cleary state that the disc is to be named the "Digital Versatile Disc" or "DVD". 98.24.47.175 (talk) 19:23, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Indeed it is Digital Versatile Disc - that's why the logo found on DVD-players reads DVD Video, while it reads DVD Audio on the rare high-end hifi machines which play DVD Audios only. There are also some machines which play back both, and their logo reads DVD Audio/Video. Whereas computer drives got a logo which reads DVD ROM or DVD-RW or DVD+/-RW ... it would make no sense at all if DVD stood for Digital Video Disc. -- Alexey Topol (talk) 15:23, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Environmental Impact

There should be a section on what the environmental impact would be if these things actually catch on. It seems to me that adding a disc created primarily out of polymerized bisphenol-A to the environment every single time someone views a movie might eventually pose a problem.Zaphraud (talk) 19:05, 15 July 2009 (UTC) This has been questioned... but a disc is only 18 grams of polycarbonate..; It can be recycled, and if incinerated, it is not more CO2 emission than an average car running 200 yards.. and most people in America use their cars to go to the rental shop... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.215.182.199 (talk) 13:15, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

To recycle CDs you'll have to ship them to a special recycling center - a normal recycling facility cannot process this type of waste. In a properly sealed landfill (where nothing biodegrades, ever), they might be OK, but evidence exists for the biologically accelerated decomposition of polycarbonate into BPA at room temperature and pressure: Bisphenol A is released from used polycarbonate animal cages into water at room temperature. The problem is easily minimized with the current use of the DVD and CD formats, however the transition to a disposable format will encourage users to throw the things literally everywhere the instant they are done using them - they make great frisbees after all - perhaps leading to a significant increase in localized BPA releases from environmentally accelerated decomposition of DVD-D trash. It is not hard at all to imagine a DVD-D disposed of in the bin of a public park after a family picnic, where it may fester under the heat of the sun with trapped moisture released from disposed food - and thats a scenario where the user actually may have thought they were properly disposing of the product! Zaphraud (talk) 04:43, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

don't understand

"However, if a movie or audio production is in progress, the media may be played until the conclusion even if the 48 hours have expired.[citation needed] The DVD-D becomes void directly after if a production was paused or stopped then is played to the end post-48 hour expiration window."
"Production"? What production? Also I can't parse the second sentence. Please clarify so stupid readers like me can understand this. 84.134.165.184 (talk) 22:03, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

I suggest deleting the quoted sentences, unless a source for the statements surfaces. This page seems to be low-traffic, so I won't do anything about it for a while at least. Eroen (talk) 10:49, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm assuming that "production" refers to the disc spinning. This is pure speculation, but if the disc were to destroy its index, it's technically possible to keep playing the rest of the disc undisturbed - given that it wasn't stopped at any point. (Production => producing audio/video from disc's data, hence the audio/video would be a product and the conversion process would be production?) --109.246.243.174 (talk) 18:51, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

This makes no sense at all and the phrase should be deleted. -- Alexey Topol (talk) 15:25, 5 October 2013 (UTC)