What about, as they call it, themselves: DisneyDVD?
Actually, the one that really bugs me is when people refer to them as DVD discs. How redundant redundant can you get get?
hazel-rah, will you marry me?
Oh, you can get a lot more redundant:
ATM machine.
PIN number.
And the one I always get from my students: “The reason is because…”
Yeah, Manatee, I know. I was just trying to stay on topic. 
It’s not nice to scratch your BVDs in public.
I’m thinking Revtim is plain wrong and KneadtoKnow is right. This is the definition of “video” from American Heritage via dictionary.com:[ol][li]The visual portion of a televised broadcast. [/li][li]Television: a star of stage, screen, and video. [/li][li]A videocassette or videotape, especially one containing a recording of a movie, music performance, or television program. [/li][li]A music video. [/li]Computer Science. The appearance of text and graphics on a video display.[/ol]“Video” in this sense does not mean definition #1, i.e., video as opposed to audio. It could mean #2, but that definition is too broad - it could refer to any showing of the movie on TV. In this context, “video” clearly refers to #3.
(To make a spectacularly lame rant even lamer)
Dammit, they’re not just videotapes, they’re audio and video tapes. “Video” referring to the part you can see, “audio” referring to the part you can hear. If I went out and rented me a “video” and it didn’t have any sound, I would be indignant.
Geeze, and I though I had given this way too much thought… You people scare me.
Well, they are BINARY (depending on how you look at it), but they are also DIGITAL. The two terms are not mutually exclusive. Binary is the number base in which the data is stored. Digital is the opposite of analog, meaning that the signals are stored as discrete samples rather than as continuous measurements. Anything that stores signals in a binary form is necessarily digital, but digital signals could be stored in any base. Furthermore, the fact that the disk is binary, as opposed to encoded in hex, makes absolutely no difference to the viewer. There is, however, a difference to the viewer between digital and analog.
The reason that the base can be a matter of perspective is that you could argue that each pit on a DVD (do they use pits like on CDs?) is either there or not, a 0 or a 1. But if the laser reads in bursts of, say, 4 bits, then isn’t that really hexadecimal, rather than binary. When you start dealing with multi-layer DVDs, the line is blurred even more.
I’m going to steal this line and use it as soon and as often as possible. And I say that with the greatest respect.
Too much thought? What a strange concept… you’ll never get marriage proposals or be immortalized with that attitude.
-fh
Technically, it’s not redundant since the acronym DVD doesn’t actually stand for anything. It originally stood for “Digital Video Disc,” but then decided to put data and audio and whatnot onto them, so they switched the acronym to mean Digital Versatile Disc… except that that was a copyrighted term, so in the end it just became “DVD” with the letters not standing for anything, like the “S” in “Harry S Truman.”
Kirk
There’s a DVD player/recorder that bills itself as the Digital DVD.
Mumble.
It’s actually not Digital Video Disc, as most people think.
It’s Digital Versatile Disc. You see, the manufacturers didn’t want people thinking DVD was entertainment media only.*
Oh, and I think UPC Code is the commercial redundancy that drives me nuttiest.
*Yes, I know far too much about this subject. I work for a DVD magazine. We just ran a series on DVD history. Shoot me now.
Kirkland, don’t you hate it when someone makes the same point you did a couple posts later?
What’s very odd is that Kirkland’s post was NOT there when I made my post, or I would not have made it.
This thread is giving me a headache. I need an aspirin.
I mean some acetylsalicylic acid.
Digital Versatile Disc is a copyrighted term, and so the DVD Consortium could not use that as the name of their format. But since Digital Video Disc was already scrapped, they ended up with an acronym that meant nothing at all. Most people still use the term “Digital Versatile Disc,” but that cannot be official, because it would infringe upon a copyright. Unless the DVD Forum has purchased the rights to that term.
I’m kicking myself now. I used to know the name of the company that owned the copyright on the term “Digital Versatile Disc,” back in the fun fun days of the Divx Wars, but I’ve since forgotten. It was some two-bit operation that made multimedia CD-ROMs for computers. Damn it all.
The DVD Consortium (now the DVD Forum) may use the term Digital Versatile Dics, but that is not legally what the acronym stands for, unless they have bought the copyright. Ah well, it doesn’t really matter at this point. DVD is DVD. Accept no substitutes (ESPECIALLY D-VHS!)
Kirk