http://www.n4g.com/industrynews/News-121938.aspx
(I put this here because it concerns blu-ray and HDi)

The full story is blocked here at work, so all I could read was the recap.

Why would Pannasonic support this?
Is this the future of HDi?
What does this mean for Blu-ray...which still does not have these features?

Does this mean CE makers are beginning to doubt if Blu-ray can replace DVD?

What about shelf space...DVD, DVD 2.0, Blu-ray?

It will be a long time before that comes out. The real questions should be
1) will it work with the thousands of different DVD players currently in households?
2) how much will players cost
3) how long before signifigant amount of titles have this functionality
4) why would people buy a new player for this... when they already have 5 SD-DVD players in their house.

These are all questions for another forum - here is the link

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?s=&daysprune=&f=18

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?s=&daysprune=&f=18

I was trying to limit the discussion to as it relates to Blu-ray and HDM.

...and yes this will effect HDM if it happens.

It would be helpful to members responding to this thread to read the actual resolution that was voted on in the 11/15/07 Steering Committee Meeting that approved WG-12. Lots of questions raised.

Pages 3 and 4:

http://www.dvdforum.org/images/40thConfirmedminSCMeeting_071115.pdf

It would be helpful to members responding to this thread to read the actual resolution that was voted on in the 11/15/07 Steering Committee Meeting that approved WG-12. Lots of questions raised.

Pages 3 and 4:

http://www.dvdforum.org/images/40thConfirmedminSCMeeting_071115.pdf

Didnt the DVD forum also approve TL51 3 times.... yet I have never seen an actual TL51 disc.

Didnt the DVD forum also approve TL51 3 times.... yet I have never seen an actual TL51 disc.

Time ran out for the TL51. The final approval came with the 11/15/07 meeting.

Then in December, MPEG-LA published a "last call" for those who believed they had a patent issue with the TL51.

Then January 4th came and the game ended.

DVD 2.0 Format Specification

1. Video encoded in MPEG2 SD
2. HD available via Super Upconversion to 960p
3. HDi interactivity
4. Networking
5. Managed Copy
6. Fully backward compatible with existing DVD players.

Basically, Toshiba and Microsoft are trying to recreate HD-DVD experience on DVD via extensions.

I am trying to figure out what the point of doing this would be. HD available via Super Upconversion to 960p?? Sigh. Just another spec to cause unwanted, nor desired confusion with consumers. Lets just recreate the experience on Blu Ray now.

...and yes this will effect HDM if it happens.

Why?

I am trying to figure out what the point of doing this would be. HD available via Super Upconversion to 960p?? Sigh. Just another spec to cause unwanted, nor desired confusion with consumers. Lets just recreate the experience on Blu Ray now.

:confused:

Only one point . . . MONEY!

The DVD Forum has nothing to do with BD. They get their royalties from DVD. Progress on the improvement of DVD is not going to stand still and let BD walk away with the prize. (well over $1 billion per year)

The PS3's and 360's have an Ethernet connection. That is all you need for WE/IF. As do all the HD DVD players.

IMO - the next round of UP DVD players may include an Ethernet connection.

4) why would people buy a new player for this... when they already have 5 SD-DVD players in their house.


Would not this same logic would hold true for the adoption of HDM?:)

Why?

Along with the better resolution, HDM has always touted better extras. Remember the Sony ads claiming that that BD has better extras than HD DVD?
Remember all the HD DVD fans touting Internet connectivity?

Now, if this happens, SD DVD pulls closer to even. It would be just another thing to hinder someone from fully adopting HDM.

:confused:

Only one point . . . MONEY!

The DVD Forum has nothing to do with BD. They get their royalties from DVD. Progress on the improvement of DVD is not going to stand still and let BD walk away with the prize. (well over $1 billion per year)

The PS3's and 360's have an Ethernet connection. That is all you need for WE/IF. As do all the HD DVD players.

IMO - the next round of UP DVD players may include an Ethernet connection.

I understand the money aspect of it, Lee. It just seems a bit too late in the DVD game to be releasing specs like this. Why would a consumer want to pay more for an upconvert (that isn't even 1080p for that matter) with internet connectivity? This only makes expensive machines that in essence, only play DVD's. If Blu Ray is going to be a niche (like some prognosticate), this bird is doomed to stay on the ground. IMO, of course.

:confused:

Only one point . . . MONEY!

The DVD Forum has nothing to do with BD. They get their royalties from DVD. Progress on the improvement of DVD is not going to stand still and let BD walk away with the prize. (well over $1 billion per year)

The PS3's and 360's have an Ethernet connection. That is all you need for WE/IF. As do all the HD DVD players.

IMO - the next round of UP DVD players may include an Ethernet connection.

360s, PS3s, PCs, laptops, etc. We already have hundreds of millions of DVD players with Ethernet ports. A few FW updates, and their you go.

My bet is a DVD player with a network connection would sell for about $29.

Can we get a sticky for all the reasons BD will fail?

Well-HD DVD sputtered out in the market, so were going to introduce a watered down version of it as DVD Redux? Seems like a lame brained idea, but stranger things have happened.

What ever happened to VMD?

I understand the money aspect of it, Lee. It just seems a bit too late in the DVD game to be releasing specs like this. Why would a consumer want to pay more for an upconvert (that isn't even 1080p for that matter) with internet connectivity? This only makes expensive machines that in essence, only play DVD's. If Blu Ray is going to be a niche (like some prognosticate), this bird is doomed to stay on the ground. IMO, of course.

You are ignoring the cost difference between BD movies and DVD movies.

Everyone knows that the player is the least expensive part of owning a format. It is your library of movies that you own. And the average DVD owner has 80 movies in their collection - about $1000 spent.

The previous formats (VHS and LD) lasted over 20 years. Why shouldn't DVD last at least as long? It is only 11 years young.

And WG12 is strictly about WE/IF for DVD. There is nothing else mentioned in that 11/15 SCM. Where the other specs came from I have no idea. Not from the SCM's. There is nothing in the 41st meeting about it.

Resolutions approved at the 2/27/08 SCM:

http://www.dvdforum.org/41scmtg-resolution.htm

I wouldn't get too worked up over this. HDi is only going to be used if the studios support it. I have a feeling they are going to concentrate more on the Blu Ray side of things now. I doubt they are going to want to do Java and HDi for two separate platforms. I kind of take this as a sore loser's shot in the dark.

Well-HD DVD sputtered out in the market, so were going to introduce a watered down version of it as DVD Redux? Seems like a lame brained idea, but stranger things have happened.

What ever happened to VMD?

Guess you are not in favor of adding Deep Color to HDTV.:rolleyes:

Why would Pannasonic support this?
Is this the future of HDi?


I am still surprised that Panasonic would back this. Anyone else?

I would be glad to see some of the cool interactive features that were planned for HDM, show up on DVD. Current trailers instead of old ones, is a good example.

I should also add that I too will be surprised if this ever happens.

(trying to get away from the format cheerleader talk)

"HD available via Super Upconversion to 960p"

What does that even mean? Is it somehow upconverting the standard video to 960p, when upconverters already do it to 1080p? Or is this some newer high-def video encode on the disc? I don't get it.

I think the one advantage this has is as follows: If they can improve video quality of DVD movies across the board, while making all the movies still playable on legacy players on the SAME SIDE OF THE DISC (something HD-DVD couldn't even accomplish), that could be a huge obstacle for bluray.

Even if the PQ isn't as good as bluray, having a slightly-higher-def DVD playable in all your machines while only making a single player purchase would be a huge selling point. One that bluray apparently will never be able to compete against.

I wouldn't get too worked up over this. HDi is only going to be used if the studios support it. I have a feeling they are going to concentrate more on the Blu Ray side of things now. I doubt they are going to want to do Java and HDi for two separate platforms. I kind of take this as a sore loser's shot in the dark.

WB and Paramount did it.

"sore loser's shot in the dark" - that's funny! You agree you understand the issue is money . . . then you make this comment?:confused:

Guess Toshiba will never learn, partnering with MS (previous lackluster HD DVD support and now blu ray supporters) and Panasonic, a member of the BDA (conflict of interest or just stringing them along like Fox did). And yes, if they couldnt do it with HD DVD what makes this any more attractive? By the time the new players and new discs are ready will anyone want to settle for 960p?

You are ignoring the cost difference between BD movies and DVD movies.

Everyone knows that the player is the least expensive part of owning a format. It is your library of movies that you own. And the average DVD owner has 80 movies in their collection - about $1000 spent.

It's a good thing ALL BD players will play DVDs then...

I am still surprised that Panasonic would back this. Anyone else?

I would be glad to see some of the cool interactive features that were planned for HDM, show up on DVD. Current trailers instead of old ones, is a good example.

I should also add that I too will be surprised if this ever happens.

(trying to get away from the format cheerleader talk)

Let's see if we can set aside the format war issues and concentrate on the making of money.

10's of millions of DVD player capable machines with Ethernet connections.

Studios make BILLIONS selling movie merchandise to consumers. WE/IF presents them the opportunity to do so.

Why limit yourself to 5% of the market when you can add this feature to 95% of the market?:confused:

WB and Paramount did it.

"sore loser's shot in the dark" - that's funny! You agree you understand the issue is money . . . then you make this comment?:confused:

What part of it makes it confusing? Yes they can make money, but at the same time try to hinder their old rival making money. WB and Paramount are also now on the Blu Ray side of things as HD DVD surrendered. Why would they want to go back to making pieces of a format work when they can put 100% behind a possible genuine successor? I just want HDM to succeed now, and doing something like this won't help it.

It's a fancy upconvert that will only confuse people. Lets wait and see if prices on Blu Ray come down to mainstream levels. It has all of those nifty features.

"HD available via Super Upconversion to 960p"

What does that even mean? Is it somehow upconverting the standard video to 960p, when upconverters already do it to 1080p? Or is this some newer high-def video encode on the disc? I don't get it.

I think the one advantage this has is as follows: If they can improve video quality of DVD movies across the board, while making all the movies still playable on legacy players on the SAME SIDE OF THE DISC (something HD-DVD couldn't even accomplish), that could be a huge obstacle for bluray.

Even if the PQ isn't as good as bluray, having a slightly-higher-def DVD playable in all your machines while only making a single player purchase would be a huge selling point. One that bluray apparently will never be able to compete against.

Do a search for "Super Resolution"

I have a couple other questions about this:

Since all HD-DVD players are equipped to handle HDi, and Toshiba is behind this move, will they release a patch upgrading their HD-DVD players to DVD 2.0 spec?

Also, will it be possible for bluray players, which do not have HDi capability as far as I'm aware, to be patched to be compatible with 2.0 capabilities?

If it is fully backward compatible with existing players it's basically marketing with a few minor extras. You're using doubling to get an apparent higher resolution, adding on some extras that will work only on enhanced players, and having the same copy protection that studios hate. They are trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

What part of it makes it confusing? Yes they can make money, but at the same time try to hinder their old rival making money. WB and Paramount are also now on the Blu Ray side of things as HD DVD surrendered. Why would they want to go back to making pieces of a format work when they can put 100% behind a possible genuine successor? I just want HDM to succeed now, and doing something like this won't help it.

It's a fancy upconvert that will only confuse people. Lets wait and see if prices on Blu Ray come down to mainstream levels. It has all of those nifty features.

Toshiba . . . .

Plan A - HD DVD

Plan B - Super Resolution

WB, Paramount, Disney and Universal all have experience working with HDi.

BD's future is an unknow. DVD's future is much more clairfied. It is a mature format. Yes it went down last year - but only about 4%.

BD is NOT a natural progression because of the BDA - who competes with the DVD Forum.

What you and I want has nothing to do with what these corporations want. THAT is obvious.

I wouldn't get too worked up over this. HDi is only going to be used if the studios support it. I have a feeling they are going to concentrate more on the Blu Ray side of things now. I doubt they are going to want to do Java and HDi for two separate platforms. I kind of take this as a sore loser's shot in the dark.

Don't know what their real motives are, but if your royalties center around DVD, then trying to improve or sustain upon that would be looked at as a good business decision. Again you don't have to buy one of their products if you have no desire too so caring if they do this or not should have no effect on you.

As for VMD, if they pick up some studio support which last I heard is what their working on, then it might come into play in the HDM market but until they do it's a non story. I myself would like to see competition again.

this is the type of thing i was asking about in my "what is the status of red laser hd" thread.

if they are going to put HDi in then they can also put in avc or vc1 decoding and use the part of the HD DVD specs that define HD on dvd.

basically, this stuff already exists. they will probably just delete the blu laser parts of hd dvd and rename the hd dvd specs... instant dvd 2.0

as i pointed out in my thread, they do not need studio support for this product. they can target it as supporting technology for camcorders and downloads.

in those applications they can use existing/cheap dvd recordable media.

this technology would be cool as hell to allow people to own downloaded content by burring to standard dvd media.

also cool as hell for authoring your own hd content as many people have been doing for hd dvd players.

Where is THIS coming from? Not the DVD Forum that is for sure!

DVD 2.0 Format Specification

1. Video encoded in MPEG2 SD
2. HD available via Super Upconversion to 960p
3. HDi interactivity
4. Networking
5. Managed Copy
6. Fully backward compatible with existing DVD players.

If you read the "article" you will see that it is tied into a forum. IMO - this "list" is nothing more than a forum member making his own list and giving it a moniker . . . DVD 2.0

Where is THIS coming from? Not the DVD Forum that is for sure!

DVD 2.0 Format Specification



If you read the "article" you will see that it is tied into a forum. IMO - this "list" is nothing more than a forum member making his own list and giving it a moniker . . . DVD 2.0

whether it really exists in the dvd forum or not doesn't matter to me. the idea is interesting.

whether it really exists in the dvd forum or not doesn't matter to me. the idea is interesting.

The idea of WE/IF?

Because the 960P Super Resolution has nothing to do with not only the DVD Forum but DVD itself. It is a "machine" that upconverts SD to near HD PQ. Excellent chance the first use will be in HDTV's . . . NOT a DVD player.

And at the speed at which the DVD Forum moves with approving new features - it will take well over a year before the first WE/IF enabled DVD ever shows up.

A Working Group is the very first step in the process of approving something at the DVD Forum. We have a looooong way to go before it hits retailers shelves.

If it is fully backward compatible with existing players it's basically marketing with a few minor extras. You're using doubling to get an apparent higher resolution, adding on some extras that will work only on enhanced players, and having the same copy protection that studios hate. They are trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

I agree. I'm a A/V geek, not as bad as some, but a geek nonetheless. My excitement level for this product on a scale of 1-10? 1. If I wouldn't bother with it, I can't imagine that the general public would be either. Granted, that is my opinion. Perhaps Toshiba should stick to memory sticks for a new format...that gets me excited.

I doubt this product will spark interest with consumers. The only thing this offers is some interactivity. I can't see that as a reason for a person to justify the cost over a regular upconvert, even if it's only a few more dollars.

....from a -hardware- point of view this is equally interesting. We'd need an ethernet capable player that's FW upgradeable and can handle HDi in order to play "super dvd".

If it truly is added like 20-bit was added to 16bit CD (in a way that's invisible to the user, using another bit of MS-owned tech, and accessible to those with the right player) then this actually could work. Garbage in/garbage out still applies, naturally, but it's nice to see they're at least thinking about improvements to SD. Lord knows I've pretty much stopped buying them (last title was King of Kong - fabulous movie, classic example of something not -required- to be on HDM)

I agree. I'm a A/V geek, not as bad as some, but a geek nonetheless. My excitement level for this product on a scale of 1-10? 1. If I wouldn't bother with it, I can't imagine that the general public would be either. Granted, that is my opinion. Perhaps Toshiba should stick to memory sticks for a new format...that gets me excited.

I doubt this product will spark interest with consumers. The only thing this offers is some interactivity. I can't see that as a reason for a person to justify the cost over a regular upconvert, even if it's only a few more dollars.

So how are they going to justify a BD player which is hundreds of dollars more with more expensive software?:confused:

....from a -hardware- point of view this is equally interesting. We'd need an ethernet capable player that's FW upgradeable and can handle HDi in order to play "super dvd".

If it truly is added like 20-bit was added to 16bit CD (in a way that's invisible to the user, using another bit of MS-owned tech, and accessible to those with the right player) then this actually could work. Garbage in/garbage out still applies, naturally, but it's nice to see they're at least thinking about improvements to SD. Lord knows I've pretty much stopped buying them (last title was King of Kong - fabulous movie, classic example of something not -required- to be on HDM)

No you don't. What you will need is a brand new player that has a SpursEngine in it and enough memory to be able to accomplish Super Resolution. SR is based on chip sets and an Algorthum to make SD look like HD.

For all intents and purposes, the PS3 could be made into a Super Resolution player with just a FW UP because it has the Cell BE which is more powerful than the SpursEngine - which is a co-processor only. It still needs a CPU - The Cell is all that rolled into one chip.

So how are they going to justify a BD player which is hundreds of dollars more with more expensive software?:confused:


Come on now, Lee. With Blu Ray you are paying for REAL high definition, lossless sound, and all of those other extras. Not to mention a medium with much higher storage capacity. Lets just say that is worth the upgrade...to me. We can try and ring everything we can from DVD, or get stared with Blu Ray where we've just scratched the surface.

How did this thread get moved to concert discussion and reviews?

But I need an HDTV to take advantage of BD. I don't need an HDTV to take advantage of a DVD with a WE/IF feature in it. 2/3's of USA households do not have an HDTV and 85% of all TV's are not HDTV's.

The war has just begun . . . DVD versus BD.

You would still need an HDTV to take advantage of the upconversion. I certainly wouldn't bother hooking that up to my Sony Trinitron. HDTV penetration seems to be doing very well, so that point will be solved in the future. As for the war part, you are correct. It is my hope that HDM prevails. I feel this will be easier with one format. I am waiting for those new Blu Ray players this spring.

And WG12 is strictly about WE/IF for DVD. There is nothing else mentioned in that 11/15 SCM. Where the other specs came from I have no idea. Not from the SCM's. There is nothing in the 41st meeting about it.The original information came from this opinion piece (http://www.contentagenda.com/article/CA6539511.html) while the list was made up by Dead-meat [and apparently the guy is still posting against Blu-ray. For anyone curious he used to post on AVS Forum before getting banned for making racist comments and his name is now blocked from even being shown. Seriously if you combine the words "Dead" and "meat" the forum will show "********". Also besides the guy being a racist he was a compulsive liar and would regularly make things up and later on in that thread he posted this:

If a Blu ray add on for XBOX 360 is in the future

There is no Blu-Ray drive for Xbox 360 or Xbox 3. Toshiba has shown an willingness to extend DVD format with this DVD2 initiative. This means quad-layer high-density 24 GB DVD based on red-laser should be coming, readable by $15 drives.

The original information came from this opinion piece (http://www.contentagenda.com/article/CA6539511.html) while the list was made up by Dead-meat and apparently the guy is still posting against Blu-ray. For anyone curious he used to post on AVS Forum before getting banned for making racist comments and his name is now blocked from even being shown. Seriously if you combine the words "Dead" and "meat" the forum will show "********". Also besides the guy being a racist he was a compulsive liar and would regularly make things up and later on in that thread he posted this:

As I suspected:

Originally posted by Lee Stewart
If you read the "article" you will see that it is tied into a forum. IMO - this "list" is nothing more than a forum member making his own list and giving it a moniker . . . DVD 2.0

"HD available via Super Upconversion to 960p"

What does that even mean? Is it somehow upconverting the standard video to 960p, when upconverters already do it to 1080p? Or is this some newer high-def video encode on the disc? I don't get it.

I think the one advantage this has is as follows: If they can improve video quality of DVD movies across the board, while making all the movies still playable on legacy players on the SAME SIDE OF THE DISC (something HD-DVD couldn't even accomplish), that could be a huge obstacle for bluray.

Even if the PQ isn't as good as bluray, having a slightly-higher-def DVD playable in all your machines while only making a single player purchase would be a huge selling point. One that bluray apparently will never be able to compete against.

SD DVD will NEVER come close to Blu-ray....even if SD DVD does improve. The difference between the two formats is just too large. Period. Anyone who thinks otherwise is living in a fantasy land. You are talking roughly 300,000 pixels of source information versus two million which is NOT going to change - and that's not the entire story. DVDs are riddled with far more and greater compression problems, excessive edge enhancement, less chroma resolution, etc. the list goes on and on. Furthermore, improved upscaling is really not the issue for DVD. It's DEINTERLACING - something the snake oil salesmen aren't telling you. There are video processors with top notch deinterlacers which cost thousands of dollars and they will not produce a SD DVD image anywhere near what's capable with Blu-ray. If you think a $200 "Toshiba SUC" is going to even compare to a several thousand dollar video processor with top-notch deinterlacing for SD DVD, then I don't what I say.

In addition, it says nothing about the audio differences between the format. The improvements with lossless audio much surpass your regular DD and DTS tracks.

The original information came from this opinion piece (http://www.contentagenda.com/article/CA6539511.html) while the list was made up by Dead-meat [and apparently the guy is still posting against Blu-ray. For anyone curious he used to post on AVS Forum before getting banned for making racist comments and his name is now blocked from even being shown. Seriously if you combine the words "Dead" and "meat" the forum will show "********". Also besides the guy being a racist he was a compulsive liar and would regularly make things up and later on in that thread he posted this:

Yep, sure enough there is our friend Defunctflesh:

http://www.dvdtown.com/messageboard/topic/6725/6/0

I would venture a guess that any new DVD spec would use AACS instead of CSS...and anything they do could easily be added to a BD player.

Or they could just slap the HDi etc features onto a normal DVD as another folder in the filesystem and compatible players execute that rather than load the ordinary menu.

It'll be just like those PC enabled features, only for 2.0 players. DVD/DVD 2.0 combo, single sided, shared A/V data, but separate menu systems plus bonus content for HDi powered DVD 2.0 ...

I would venture a guess that any new DVD spec would use AACS instead of CSS...and anything they do could easily be added to a BD player.

Right. CSS is basically dead as an effective form of DRM. Getting something new and stronger into DVD has to be a very attractive proposition to the studios.

So Toshiba and Microsoft or going to keep trying to ride the dead horse?

So Toshiba and Microsoft or going to keep trying to ride the dead horse?

:D - better add another 15 names of companies to the list. Only Pioneer said no to the idea.

DVD is a "dead horse?"

Let's see if we can set aside the format war issues and concentrate on the making of money.

10's of millions of DVD player capable machines with Ethernet connections.

Studios make BILLIONS selling movie merchandise to consumers. WE/IF presents them the opportunity to do so.

Why limit yourself to 5% of the market when you can add this feature to 95% of the market?:confused:

I don't see 10 of millions of consumers wanting to connect their DVD players (or BD players) to the internet. Most people I know really do not care about that at all. Being that, most average people I know wouldn't go out to replace their DVD player for this function, most I know spend about $50 on their players these days.

If BD were to become the standard (or if it had been HD-DVD), I would geuss that the masses would not have connected the players to the internet unless firmware updates were going to be the way of life going forward. Early adopters won't represent what most people are going to do

I don't see 10 of millions of consumers wanting to connect their DVD players (or BD players) to the internet. Most people I know really do not care about that at all. Being that, most average people I know wouldn't go out to replace their DVD player for this function, most I know spend about $50 on their players these days.

If BD were to become the standard (or if it had been HD-DVD), I would geuss that the masses would not have connected the players to the internet unless firmware updates were going to be the way of life going forward. Early adopters won't represent what most people are going to do

I believe the most recent number for people who have broadband service is just over 50 million.

How popular is Xbox Live?

Do a search on the HDSM Forum - Transformers - I believe about 30% used the WE feature according to Paramount.

I believe the most recent number for people who have broadband service is just over 50 million.

How popular is Xbox Live?

Do a search on the HDSM Forum - Transformers - I believe about 30% used the WE feature according to Paramount.

There are universities that have almost as many people on campus as 360 owners who have taken advantage of web enabled features using the HD DVD addon.

I believe XBOX Live has about 5-6 million subscribers.

That is 50 million people in a country that has 300 million.

With all respect Lee, those numbers are minuscule.

There are universities that have almost as many people on campus as 360 owners who have taken advantage of web enabled features using the HD DVD addon.

I believe XBOX Live has about 5-6 million subscribers.

That is 50 million people in a country that has 300 million.

With all respect Lee, those numbers are minuscule.

But the 17 companies that voted for WG-12 don't have the same feelings that you do. They feel that WE for DVD can work or else they would have voted against it . . . like Pioneer did.

Super-resolution is a lie. It is nothing more than upconversion, and even then, it sucks compared to real higher def. It requires camera movement to actually do a decent job on improving resolution, and even then, it will not be the same.
New DVD discs with ethernet and interactivity? What's the point? I am sure the studios want to sell merchandising, but to get any decent installed base of DVD players with the new capabilities, and to sell catalogue titles with the newer features, and to actually convince customers to connect their DVD players to the internet with ethernet???? What are they smoking? If it is hard with a new standard, it would be nearly impossible with an older one...

But the 17 companies that voted for WG-12 don't have the same feelings that you do. They feel that WE for DVD can work or else they would have voted against it . . . like Pioneer did.

Understood, Lee. They see an opportunity to make money, trying to breathe some life back into DVD. Whether or not it is successful, only time will tell. My personal feeling is that it won't. There is really no loss for them to try. Plays DVD's, nothing groundbreaking, add a few interesting features, and only costs them a few dollars more to manufacture. Then they sell at a small premium. In reality, it doesn't even have to be that successful because it's plain ol DVD in the first place. Some units will be sold for sure. Quite a few of those sales will probably come from HD DVD supporters lamenting the outcome of the format war.

P.S.
I'm sure those companies don't agree with me, heck, most people don't:D

Super-resolution is a lie. It is nothing more than upconversion, and even then, it sucks compared to real higher def. It requires camera movement to actually do a decent job on improving resolution, and even then, it will not be the same.
New DVD discs with ethernet and interactivity? What's the point? I am sure the studios want to sell merchandising, but to get any decent installed base of DVD players with the new capabilities, and to sell catalogue titles with the newer features, and to actually convince customers to connect their DVD players to the internet with ethernet???? What are they smoking? If it is hard with a new standard, it would be nearly impossible with an older one...

But that is what they are expecting to happen with HDM - get people to attach their players to the internet. You can't rely on better PQ and AQ to entice the general public . . who has shown to be apathatic towards these improvements.

Understood, Lee. They see an opportunity to make money, trying to breathe some life back into DVD. Whether or not it is successful, only time will tell. My personal feeling is that it won't. There is really no loss for them to try. Plays DVD's, nothing groundbreaking, add a few interesting features, and only costs them a few dollars more to manufacture. Then they sell at a small premium. In reality, it doesn't even have to be that successful because it's plain ol DVD in the first place. Some units will be sold for sure. Quite a few of those sales will probably come from HD DVD supporters lamenting the outcome of the format war.

It may cost them nothing - they may simply use the foundation they build for the BD Live feature on DVD. It is really just a menu addition and the internet connection. Not like DS PIP.

P.S.
I'm sure those companies don't agree with me, heck, most people don't:D

That is what makes horse races!:D

Come on now, Lee. With Blu Ray you are paying for REAL high definition, lossless sound, and all of those other extras. Not to mention a medium with much higher storage capacity. Lets just say that is worth the upgrade...to me. We can try and ring everything we can from DVD, or get stared with Blu Ray where we've just scratched the surface.

you will still pay double the price on new release day for a bluray over a dvd .

Sure you can wait for a bogo and up older movies for cheap but still you have to plan ahead. I can't walk into a bestbuy unless i'm really lucky and stumble on a bogo.


Now I for one would love to get a movie Like king of kong for $15 bucks with really cool hdi features on it than spend $30 on the bluray with normal dvd features which will most likely be in sd anyway . Not to mention that i have about 4 dvd players and onyl 1 bluray player .

Bluray should be smart and see if they can pull off a single side multiformat disc with 2 bd layers and 2 dvd layers. It will make it easier to sell

I would guess the studios could be interested to add PiP to ordinary DVDs so they can resell them again...

Bit it could make sense that the PiP doesnt just gets produced to BDs.


The only downfall is that well they need to sell players in large numbers. Before the studios could be interested in adding stuff like that to DVDs.

I believe the most recent number for people who have broadband service is just over 50 million.

How popular is Xbox Live?

Do a search on the HDSM Forum - Transformers - I believe about 30% used the WE feature according to Paramount.

But I look at my family and ordinary friends with families that make up the majority people that own and rent DVDs that I know of and they don't have any internet connection near their DVD player. They do have broadband but little interest in connecting their home entertainment system to it.

I don't play video games at all, so i do not not anything about xbox live. I do own a PS3 player, purely for a BD player and media extender. Before that I use a Dlink DSM 520 HD media player/extender so I do network my HT theater but I am one of the few.

So yes, maybe 30% of the HD-DVD buyers used interconnectivety of Transformers, but not 30% of the 8 million people that bought the DVD. and if the DVD had the abilty to the same function, that 30% would probably drop to .003% would have used the same function

But I look at my family and ordinary friends with families that make up the majority people that own and rent DVDs that I know of and they don't have any internet connection near their DVD player. They do have broadband but little interest in connecting their home entertainment system to it.

I don't play video games at all, so i do not not anything about xbox live. I do own a PS3 player, purely for a BD player and media extender. Before that I use a Dlink DSM 520 HD media player/extender so I do network my HT theater but I am one of the few.

So yes, maybe 30% of the HD-DVD buyers used interconnectivety of Transformers, but not 30% of the 8 million people that bought the DVD. and if the DVD had the abilty to the same function, that 30% would probably drop to .003% would have used the same function

This is an unknown because DVD players do not have the WE feature in them. You can't make generalties about something that doesn't exist yet;)

Time will tell and it is a slow process . . . getting something approved by the DVD Forum and launched as a sellable product to consumers.

I would guess the studios could be interested to add PiP to ordinary DVDs so they can resell them again...

Bit it could make sense that the PiP doesnt just gets produced to BDs.


The only downfall is that well they need to sell players in large numbers. Before the studios could be interested in adding stuff like that to DVDs.

DS PIP won't work on a DVD player as they exist today because their SoC can't produce Dual Streams. The players will have to be redesigned - slim and none on that one.

But an ethernet connection exists on many DVD playback devices already. The cost to add an EC to a DVD SAL is really not that much.

I have a couple other questions about this:

Since all HD-DVD players are equipped to handle HDi, and Toshiba is behind this move, will they release a patch upgrading their HD-DVD players to DVD 2.0 spec?

Also, will it be possible for bluray players, which do not have HDi capability as far as I'm aware, to be patched to be compatible with 2.0 capabilities?

Perhaps a "new" DVD format would coincidentally also work in those "old" hd dvd players anyway?

IMO the strongest consumer side advantage of hd dvd was that it could offer complete disk compatibility with existing dvd players via twin disks or combo disks. Something I commented on many times is how that feature offered the possibility of simply "upgrading" DVD to include high def capabilities thus transitioning users w/o obsoleting millions of standard dvd players.

Instead of going this way hd dvd supporting companies attempted to compete against blu-ray strictly as an all new disk format. Blu-ray has several advantages when going head to head as an all new format: capacity, bitrate, additional security features and most importantly a more profitable business model for most companies willing to invest support in a new format.
Clearly the result 0f that approach was disastrous for hd dvd supporting companies.

Upgrading DVD however could present a vary different picture both for marketing purposes and in terms of what companies would benefit from the business model. It would seem late in the game on one hand but on the other hand DVD is far from dead.

Although Blu-ray players can certainly match feautures the real issue would be consumers having an ability to get some sort of "HD" without abandoning DVD players. Most importantly, unless it is strictly upconversion, it would still likely require some support from Hollywood studios, as always.

Perhaps they should have taken this approach before the launch of HD DVD - may be a little late now, unless they can be sure all the studios will support it.

It could breathe a little extra life into the DVD life cycle, tho.

DVD 2.0. Sounds interesting. Isn't that what HD-DVD was suppose to be?

This does get me curious. I hope Toshiba does try this. The DVD market is still huge, why not give it another try?

I see this becoming successful only if....
-All DVD's going forward are 2.0 (when/if the format launches)
-All DVD 2.0 discs work on every existing DVD player and DVD 2.0 players
-Massive advertising upon release. Not the pathetic Toshiba marketing team
-Multiple manufacturers producing units and priced very competetively. $150 max. By the time this comes out, Blu-Ray could cost considerably less than it does today
-Emphasize Super Conversion technology for Hi-Def picture
-Software needs to be priced very close to DVD prices

If this technology uses red lasers, it could be cheap! Although, I fear if DVD 2.0 is using the Cell processor, that could jack the price up a bit? Maybe Cell processors will be alot cheaper in a year?

Would HD-DVD players be firmware upgradeable to DVD 2.0? If these machines use cell processors, maybe no? If HD-DVD players are upgradable, there is close to 1 million consumer base!

Thoughts?

DVD 2.0. Sounds interesting. Isn't that what HD-DVD was suppose to be?

This does get me curious. I hope Toshiba does try this. The DVD market is still huge, why not give it another try?

I see this becoming successful only if....
-All DVD's going forward are 2.0 (when/if the format launches)
-All DVD 2.0 discs work on every existing DVD player and DVD 2.0 players
-Massive advertising upon release. Not the pathetic Toshiba marketing team
-Multiple manufacturers producing units and priced very competetively. $150 max. By the time this comes out, Blu-Ray could cost considerably less than it does today
-Emphasize Super Conversion technology for Hi-Def picture
-Software needs to be priced very close to DVD prices

If this technology uses red lasers, it could be cheap! Although, I fear if DVD 2.0 is using the Cell processor, that could jack the price up a bit? Maybe Cell processors will be alot cheaper in a year?

Would HD-DVD players be firmware upgradeable to DVD 2.0? If these machines use cell processors, maybe no? If HD-DVD players are upgradable, there is close to 1 million consumer base!

Thoughts?

1. There is no such thing as DVD 2.0

2. Toshiba will have to be totally crazy to introduce a new 'format" that would require the help of the studios OTHER than adding WE which they are in favor of.

3. SR technology will probably show up in the place that it is desperately needed first . . . HDTV's which also happen to be high ticket items - to deal with SD programming content.

I have a couple other questions about this:

Since all HD-DVD players are equipped to handle HDi, and Toshiba is behind this move, will they release a patch upgrading their HD-DVD players to DVD 2.0 spec?

Also, will it be possible for bluray players, which do not have HDi capability as far as I'm aware, to be patched to be compatible with 2.0 capabilities?


It's possible HD DVD players support this already,if not a FW update could enable it.
As for BD players:HDi probably wouldn't work on older players but it's possible they could add it to future players since it isn't a finished spec.
If DVD 2.0 is backward compatible with older SD players then it's a win-win situation.

Why don't DVD 2.0 use efficient VC-1 codec?

If I worked on DVD 2.0 spec myself, it would be like..:
1. New DVD 2.0 player should support VC-1 codec.
2. DVD 2.0 disc should be dual-layer combo disc.
upper layer is exactly same as normal DVD (Mpeg-2 @480p)
lower layer is real 2.0 disc (VC-1 @720p)
So it is fully compatible to existing DVD playe
-OR-
Both of dual layer is used for DVD 2.0 disc
This disc is not compatible to existing player. (future provision)

3. HDi and ethernet port is optional
4. DVD 2.0 layer supports managed copy.
5. player /disc price should be within 130% of current DVD player/disc.

With VC-1 codec, DVDP can play real HD picture, not upconverted picture. Due to limited data space available for DVD 2.0 (4.3 GB, same as single layer DVD) and to limit cost of HD VC-1 codec chip, the picture resolution should be limited somehow like 720p. It can be upconverted to 1080p without much difficulty.

Or they could just slap the HDi etc features onto a normal DVD as another folder in the filesystem and compatible players execute that rather than load the ordinary menu.

It'll be just like those PC enabled features, only for 2.0 players. DVD/DVD 2.0 combo, single sided, shared A/V data, but separate menu systems plus bonus content for HDi powered DVD 2.0 ...


That would be the logical solution,sort of like the JACKET_P folder on some DVD's that only works on disc changer players.
Honestly I would prefer a "Super DVD" that has high bitrate video,DTS audio and no extras...like Sony's "Superbit".

"HD available via Super Upconversion to 960p" What does that even mean? Nothing -- no player will output 960p since no TV will accept it. That should indicate to take the other bullet points with a grain of salt. Network applications is related to download and burn to DVD.

DVD 2.0. Sounds interesting. Isn't that what HD-DVD was suppose to be?

This does get me curious. I hope Toshiba does try this. The DVD market is still huge, why not give it another try?

I see this becoming successful only if....
-All DVD's going forward are 2.0 (when/if the format launches)
-All DVD 2.0 discs work on every existing DVD player and DVD 2.0 players
-Massive advertising upon release. Not the pathetic Toshiba marketing team
-Multiple manufacturers producing units and priced very competetively. $150 max. By the time this comes out, Blu-Ray could cost considerably less than it does today
-Emphasize Super Conversion technology for Hi-Def picture
-Software needs to be priced very close to DVD prices

If this technology uses red lasers, it could be cheap! Although, I fear if DVD 2.0 is using the Cell processor, that could jack the price up a bit? Maybe Cell processors will be alot cheaper in a year?

Would HD-DVD players be firmware upgradeable to DVD 2.0? If these machines use cell processors, maybe no? If HD-DVD players are upgradable, there is close to 1 million consumer base!

Thoughts?


They also sold about 700K players world wide and then there is about another 300K add-ons according to Toshiba

As far as why not give it another try? Because HD-DVD is probably going to cost them a them $1Billion is write off.

The last thing Toshiba wants is Blu-Ray to beat out DVD. I see DVD 2.0 as the next logical step as far as Toshibas royalties are concerned! Now Toshiba has to do everything to keep DVD alive and kicking for as long as possible.

Toshiba . . . .

Plan A - HD DVD

Plan B - Super Resolution

Toshiba . . . .

DVD

HD-DVD

DVD

???

Profit

I wonder why they didn't put a poll or ask a question on avsforum for what we want to be in the DVD 2.0?

Also, which is more super - 960p or 1080p upconversion?

This reads to me like those lame "Enhanced CD" things that do nothing but annoy me when they pop up some flash game when I stick them in my PC to rip them to my iPod.

The last thing Toshiba wants is Blu-Ray to beat out DVD. I see DVD 2.0 as the next logical step as far as Toshibas royalties are concerned! Now Toshiba has to do everything to keep DVD alive and kicking for as long as possible.

The question however is how many other companies would stand to gain from enhancing and refreshing DVD's sales and lifecycle? Clearly Toshiba alone could not succeed.

I could see other companies being on board for this. Will Blu-Ray gain mass acceptance? With no answer to that question, why not try to beef up DVD?

Why don't they just make dvd players compatible with HD-DVD and HD-VMD (and maybe blu-ray too) - if they were compatible with hd-dvd they could have 30GB cheap discs (similar with vmd)

No you don't. What you will need is a brand new player that has a SpursEngine in it and enough memory to be able to accomplish Super Resolution. SR is based on chip sets and an Algorthum to make SD look like HD.

For all intents and purposes, the PS3 could be made into a Super Resolution player with just a FW UP because it has the Cell BE which is more powerful than the SpursEngine - which is a co-processor only. It still needs a CPU - The Cell is all that rolled into one chip.

Lee, I look at this as an interesting concept, one question though, since HDTV's will be the first to get SR functionality, why put it in the players? The TV could do the conversion from a standard DVD source, thus avoiding the cost of processing in the player, allowing the consumer to get the benefit of SR with their present player...And, when the new players come out(w/ethernet ports and interactive functionality), they could seamlessly upgrade to the newer tech. when they want....

Lee, I look at this as an interesting concept, one question though, since HDTV's will be the first to get SR functionality, why put it in the players? The TV could do the conversion from a standard DVD source, thus avoiding the cost of processing in the player, allowing the consumer to get the benefit of SR with their present player...And, when the new players come out(w/ethernet ports and interactive functionality), they could seamlessly upgrade to the newer tech. when they want....

If new HDTV's get SR technology . . . what about all the HDTV's that don't have SR tech? You would have to buy a video processor with SR so you could feed it SDTV and DVD. Or just a DVD player so that only DVD would be upconverted to SR. The DVD player would be less expensive than the VP.

There are only about 20% of the total HDTV's being 1080P yet you think it has been around for quite some time when in fact - only about 2 years or so.

I believe the most recent number for people who have broadband service is just over 50 million.

How popular is Xbox Live?

Do a search on the HDSM Forum - Transformers - I believe about 30% used the WE feature according to Paramount.

That 30% is misleading. One of the recommendations for people that had the 360+Add on was to unplug the network connection to get the disc to work. This means that the disc attempts to connect to the internet on loading. The 30% is probably the # of people who had their player connected to the internet, not attempting to use the web enabled features. Even though 30% sounds high, we are talking early adopters here who are more tech savvy and have their internet connection spread around their house.

Why don't they just make dvd players compatible with HD-DVD and HD-VMD (and maybe blu-ray too) - if they were compatible with hd-dvd they could have 30GB cheap discs (similar with vmd)

In order to add HD-DVD support, a blue laser would be needed, which is much more costly. The video processing and decoding for both would add considerable expense. Toshiba can sell an HD-DVD player for $100 and Chinese manufacturers are selling DVD players for $29 at walmart.

Another Nuon?

If new HDTV's get SR technology . . . what about all the HDTV's that don't have SR tech? You would have to buy a video processor with SR so you could feed it SDTV and DVD. Or just a DVD player so that only DVD would be upconverted to SR. The DVD player would be less expensive than the VP.

There are only about 20% of the total HDTV's being 1080P yet you think it has been around for quite some time when in fact - only about 2 years or so.

Hmm....interesting concept, though......I didn't think about the TV's that do not presently have the tech....you are right, a player would be less expensive than a processor for this purpose....

Hmm....interesting concept, though......I didn't think about the TV's that do not presently have the tech....you are right, a player would be less expensive than a processor for this purpose....

I could see Toshiba licensing the tech to Motorola and Cisco to put into their HD DVR's which are going into the field at a rapid rate.

But according to Motorola - they already have 24 million DVR's in the wild and they would not have SR tech.

It seems that Toshiba plans to make use of cell processors for HDTV upconversion. They could even license "super resolution" upconversion to HDTV manufacturers. It might be really hard to tell the difference between BD and SR on many displays, if these displays were so equipped with "super resolution" technology. What happens when consumers see ads for "super resolution" TV's that seem to "work magic" with their DVD's and DVD players? Who needs an Oppo or an XA2 or a Denon if the TV does "super resolution"? I really think this technology could be more important for HDTV's than for players. It would even be a boon for cable and broadcast HD. To consumers, it would be "good enough," even "more" good enough than straight DVD.

I do think though that it would be futile for the DVD Forum to try to get studios on board with a second DVD format, given that these studios are just now finally backing BD.

Why people keep trying to patch things up instead of just get better stuff? Why super-scale DVDs when you can get real high-def with a BD? If they want to add better scalers to TVs and DVDs, be my guest, but saying that's good enough to go through the efforts of a new, craptastic DVD format, is even worser than trying to revive HD-DVD on an even cheaper, crappier form.

Allan

ps. And super-resolution or whatever is a myth. Nothing artificial replaces real visual information...

Do a search for "Super Resolution"

Can anyone answer the other posters question about why 960p super resolution/super upconversion/whatever is now a focus of Toshiba when there is already "near HD" 1080p upconversion in DVD players and HDTV's? It would be helpful that if you knew the answer to just post it as opposed to directing people to a generic search that yields no specific info.

Why is this not just another upconvert technology, no different than how the Reon/ABT implementations differentiate themselves from the lower end upconverts? Seems like more of a marketing "advancement" to me than actual technology - unless, of course someone could explain how Toshiba SUC technology differs (and is better) than the upconvert technology from Reon or ABT?????

Can anyone answer the other posters question about why 960p super resolution/super upconversion/whatever is now a focus of Toshiba when there is already "near HD" 1080p upconversion in DVD players and HDTV's? It would be helpful that if you knew the answer to just post it as opposed to directing people to a generic search that yields no specific info.

Why is this not just another upconvert technology, no different than how the Reon/ABT implementations differentiate themselves from the lower end upconverts? Seems like more of a marketing "advancement" to me than actual technology - unless, of course someone could explain how Toshiba SUC technology differs (and is better) than the upconvert technology from Reon or ABT?????

You are going to need a person that really understands SR tech. The one thing that I picked up is that it deals with 9 frames as opposed to 1 frame - the way Upconverting works today.

Again - the area that needs it the most is SDTV. DVD already has UP DVD players. MOST people complain about how bad SDTV looks on an HDTV because most HDTV;s are designed to display HD to the best of their ability - not SD content.

Most of the Google results show the Toshiba CES 2008 PR so there is little new or different info available.

The problem with SR is that it uses time-displaced information to reconstruct the missing lines in a frame. Although it can add detail, it will also add artifacting, and it will also be limited in functionality when the camera is not moving on a scene. It certainly can squeeze more information that what current upscaling technologies give, but that will come at a price and still not compare to real HD...

Can anyone answer the other posters question about why 960p super resolution/super upconversion/whatever is now a focus of Toshiba when there is already "near HD" 1080p upconversion in DVD players and HDTV's? It would be helpful that if you knew the answer to just post it as opposed to directing people to a generic search that yields no specific info.

Why is this not just another upconvert technology, no different than how the Reon/ABT implementations differentiate themselves from the lower end upconverts? Seems like more of a marketing "advancement" to me than actual technology - unless, of course someone could explain how Toshiba SUC technology differs (and is better) than the upconvert technology from Reon or ABT?????


The whole answer is more complicated but here is the simple answer.

Regular up conversion starts with one frame roughly 1/3 megapizels of information and makes a two megapixel image that still has only 1/3 megapixels of information.

SUC uses 9 frames or about 3 megapixels of information and converts it to a two megapixel image with about 1.5 megapixels of information.

Let us keep in mind there is a pending patent lawsuit against all the companies manufacturing and using blue lasers:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1010580

If the claimant gets her injunction BD (and PS3) sales grind to a halt for years if the injunction holds while the lawsuit is pending. And it appears she has a strong case. That could open a very wide door for Toshiba and the WG to get this souped up DVD proposal up and running. It could even kill BD entirely if the studios decide they don't want to wait for the lawsuit to run its course.

If DVD 2.0 means hi-def DivX, this might works for some geeks. Not for the masses.

If DVD 2.0 means hi-def DivX, this might works for some geeks. Not for the masses.


I don't see that comparison. AFAIK there will be no such thing as a DVD 2.0 format per se, just a player/processor that will greatly enhance SD DVD much like costly video processors but on the cheap. I think the idea is to give J6P 90% of HD viewing experience with his entire DVD collection at 30% of the cost. Sounds like a weiner to me!!