K can play back 1080P material that is imported into it. Right now that means that you have some material of your own and you contact K to get it put on an HD for you and then you can import it.

However as Michael says, that means nothing for BD or HD DVD

A manufacturer stating that they can play 1080P is meaningless without qualifiers. All it means is that you have a scaler inside. and that quality and implementation can vary widely.

And as is mentioned with any talks about any sort of media server... it aint legal yet... so nobody "really" has it.

I have been reading more and more about the whole managed copy thing. Over at doom9, they just broke some other major level of the new encryption on these disks. Fox still does not want managed copy to be mandatory. And the studios want to charge extra for this. I hope they get their act together. I really do- if they don't, I think there are a couple of computer companies that will be more than happy to allow us to download high def material. Jobs said it today at All things digital- we are not selling high def yet, but that may change. Once downloadable content takes off, these studios will lose a lot of their power.

how can they lose their power. if fox refuses to release their content on an HD format, is it like they will stop selling DVD's of their movies? Not likely. They will find some other way to deal. Maybe downloadable, who knows.

THe big issue is that the schemes were not well developed. And as such, various elements are being exposed. notice i said exposed and not cracked.

Make no mistake, the power is in the content. because content rules all.

Consolidated power destroys innovation because its need is reduced. If Apple started selling 1080p content on itunes that was as good or better than the hd disks, then apple would start to gain more power as a distributor of media.

I am just thinking out loud here, but consider the effect Walmart has on the distribution of dvds and cds right now. I don't want to see a consolidated distribution model. It puts more power in the hands of those that distribute media. This does not neccessarily reduce the power of content providers, but it could affect them. At least with disks you have multiple rtail venues to purchase them at.

I don't know- hey Ian! stay on topic!

:)

but if apple cannot access any movies other than my cousin vinnie, nobody will want to buy that awesome 4K-1080P transfer

:D

I am meeting with a VP from K today and have an email from them with respect to the HD/BR matter. The email carefully noted they don't preannounce capabilities.

The gist of the message was (1) when (if) the DRM issues are settled, they'll have a solution; and, (2) K is not convinced HD or BR will survive and see it as formats on a short lifespan. This concern on their part mirrors my own feeling, and that of others (including Bob Stuart of Meridian). While newer, better, faster distribution mechanisms for HD content are on the horizon, that does not mean such DRM problems will not migrate into other distribution mechanisms.

(2) K is not convinced HD or BR will survive and see it as formats on a short lifespan.

The cynical might see that as just sour grapes. Given that they can't make these formats work for them, wouldn't that be the position that any company would take in that situation? Neither format really depends on K's style of system to survive or flourish, so the fact that they are only viewable from the shiney disc won't have much to do with it. 99% of people out there just watch the shiney DVD disk now, I would imagine. Only a tiny fraction of people right now would make a decision on these formats based on ripability, so they'll live or die based on other factors. By the time ripability for such huge data sets becomes a broad issue, they will have had plenty of time to work out those issues I would think.

Only a tiny fraction of people right now would make a decision on these formats based on ripability, so they'll live or die based on other factors.
I think you vastly underestimate the power of a feature selling a product regardless of whether people use it. As an example people hardly EVER use PIP on televisions. Yet when the feature first came out everyone HAD to have it. Similarly, if you tell a consumer that "this DVD can be used on a hard drive just like you can put music on your computer but that one can't" that will be enough to sway many people to buy the one that can. And if you don't think Toshiba will make a HUGE deal of that, you don't know marketing :).

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2007/05/28/070528ta_talk_surowiecki?printable=true

And for those who don't want to read that article here's the relevant part:

You might think, then, that companies could avoid feature creep by just paying attention to what customers really want. But that’s where the trouble begins, because although consumers find overloaded gadgets unmanageable, they also find them attractive. It turns out that when we look at a new product in a store we tend to think that the more features there are, the better.

Then, when the subjects were given the chance to customize their product, choosing from twenty-five features, they behaved like kids in a candy store. (Twenty features was the average.) But, when they were asked to use the digital device, so-called “feature fatigue” set in. They became frustrated with the plethora of options they had created, and ended up happier with a simpler product.

It seems odd that we don’t anticipate feature fatigue and thus avoid it. But, as numerous studies have shown, people are not, in general, good at predicting what will make them happy in the future. As a result, we will pay more for more features because we systematically overestimate how often we’ll use them.

Well...Toshiba has other problems...like getting their firmware set for the right color space.

While newer, better, faster distribution mechanisms for HD content are on the horizon

By better, does K mean better PQ/AQ than Bluray/HD DVD?
If so, I disagree.

How can you disagree if the distribution mechanism in question doesn't exist yet ;-)?

Given that they can't make these formats work for them, wouldn't that be the position that any company would take in that situation?
The formats work fine for K ... the issue is not technology. It's the legal issues associated with DRM. That's what has to be solved.

The formats work fine for K ... the issue is not technology. It's the legal issues associated with DRM. That's what has to be solved.

I mean work for them in terms of their being able to cleaim support for them and to therefore make money off of those formats, not that they wouldn't technically work.

ah. yes. OTOH, Dean, K is not the only bunch in the industry voicing the same concerns about the formats and, most of these have nothing to lose or gain one way or the other.

Dean, they have never claimed support. as Q pointed out rather succinctly in this or some other thread, they are one of the only ones saying quite clearly, "we hope to, and if it becomes possible, then we will do everything we can to hopefully have a solution"

Anybody who says more is smoking something. Since the MMC standards are not done (and may never be) anything other is mere postulation. That is why i find it so funny when an un-named lunatic from south FLA goes on about these massive plans that are completely based in fantasy.

WHEN (and if) MMC becomes a reality, then we can talk about who might and how they might support BD/HD DVD. other than that, all we can talk about is a player. And not Vista SP2 or an intervention from Jesus will change that.

"And not Vista SP2 or an intervention from Jesus will change that."

Dang. Those were my last two hopes! :)

And not Vista SP2 or an intervention from Jesus will change that.
But how about from Peter? He is the man that coined the term home theater after all.

As soon as Music Giant gets their video material together, it will be possible to download
their stuff directly from the net into the media server. At least that's my understanding.

But how about from Peter? He is the man that coined the term home theater after all.

un-named lunatic from south FLA

:D :D :D :D :D :D

Managed Copy Article (http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,132229-c,dvdtechnology/article.html) :D :D :D :D :D :D

http://cineramax.com/images/BamaBelle.jpg

The only problem I can see (that can't be fixed with pen and paper) with HD-formats is the storage. if you download a HDDVD from the internet it takes up about 15GB, wich is 2-3 times the size of a normal DVD, so it will eat the server rather quickly

A 2-3x increase in file size is absolutely dwarfed by the rapid increase in hard disk capacity. 750GB per drive is commonplace now. The latest K server can hold up to 9TB, which is about 600 15GB movies. I don't even know if there are even that many HD titles out yet. By the time there are, we'll have multi-terabyte hard disks, and that same RAID system will be up to, say, 24TB or more. And if that's not enough, you can gang up multiple file servers.

When i left a year ago, we had 11 servers with 4TB in one big raid. so the file sizes are not an inconvenience, just a cost factor.

Music Giant just announced the availability of all 13 tracks of Paul McCartney's "Memory Almost Full" album without DRM. Will the K let you download this?

http://mgn.musicgiants.com/AlbumDetails.aspx?ALBUM=91370

No, Music Giants is pretty much wedded to Windows Media Player. So no iTunes, no iPod, no Kaleidescape. You might be able to do a little "CD-burning shuffle" though. That is, burn your Music Giants tracks to CD and load them into the K that way. Since MG uses lossless compression that should give you bit-accurate results.

It woud be a lot more convenient if one could just download it directly to their media server. Does anyone know when MG is supposed to have movies available for download?

Not sure, but I doubt their downlaods will be of the same quality as hddvd or bluray would be on the K

The latest update to K's FAQ regarding BR/HD-DVD isn't very promising.

http://www.kaleidescape.com/faq/#faq9028

it is honest though.

And reality.

It sucks too.

Either the studios give us the convenience and allow K to do their thing, or people will do home brew servers that do the same thing and continue ot improve the elegance factor that K has perfected. I have rad some things this past week about Leopard's dvd player for the mac, and I see things happening in that direction. If they won't let K do it legally,and microsoft can't get their bugs/interfaces/clunkiness fixed, maybe apple can do it :) Even if you have to store your movies on a pc...

the issue is not one of K or Microsoft or even apple... if the studios and the consortium's do not ratify and accept MMC in some manner, then NOBODY can do it (legally)

the issue is not one of K or Microsoft or even apple... if the studios and the consortium's do not ratify and accept MMC in some manner, then NOBODY can do it (legally)

That said, it should be no surprise to K owners that K cannot yet support the import of BR/HD-DVD. K is founded on the basic principle that intellectual property (copyrights) deserve to be protected, and clearly, we will not see this HD support until the studios allow it through proper licensing.

Jim

Fox don't like mmc and mmc doesn't mean free first copy. Would it work if K asking for cc number for most of the times?
I hope K at least could do a frontend which could import HD material from BD-R/RE.

therein lies the issue. NOBODY know what it it will mean (if anything at all)

Once there is a plan... then K and others could realistically say how they were going to deal with it.

The funny thing was that at K (when i was there) there was a subtle feeling that once BD etc hit the market and storing to servers was a reality, then K would lose much of its advantage. and all that would be left was experience and customer base. Of course those are tremendously important.

K was always tying to work the angle of licensing content directly from studios to provide content outside of the BD experience. because lets face it... BD etc, is flawed and destined to not survive.

Drat. Well, maybe K will give in and provide some sort of changer support (if such things are ever released for HD-DVD & Blu-Ray). If that's the best that they can accomplish I hope they will. Much (but, admittedly, not all) of what makes their system a pleasure to use can be accomplished in a changer-based system.

It's not like that FAQ is anything new or reason for pessimism, they are just saying what Dizz and I and others have been saying since the beginning of this thread. Until the HD groups work it out, it's a whole lot of talk about nothing. I wouldn't be surprised if the government intervenes at some point. I think when HD-DVD announces the MMC spec it will be a very significant step. Then this will be something to talk about.

Any reason to believe that HD-DVD will jump on managed copy faster than blu-ray?

It's not like that FAQ is anything new or reason for pessimism, they are just saying what Dizz and I and others have been saying since the beginning of this thread.True, but none of us are actually members of both HD disc consortiums like K is! As such they are party to a bit more inside info than we are. Thus the fact that K would choose to make such a pessimistic statement does not bode well.

True, but none of us are actually members of both HD disc consortiums like K is! As such they are party to a bit more inside info than we are. Thus the fact that K would choose to make such a pessimistic statement does not bode well.

True, they could have just left the old "answer" on the FAQ but instead chose to explain their position in more detail. Frankly, I'm getting the impression they don't believe it would make good business sense to develop a reader/player for formats that do not seem to have a viable following (in addition to the managed copy/licensing issue).

Jim

Any reason to believe that HD-DVD will jump on managed copy faster than blu-ray?
Yes, there have been news articles that HD-DVD is working on the spec right now. Also many articles that one of the major features of the first major MS Vista software service pack will be support for managed copy. It sounds to me like there is a pretty firm time frame for MMC for HD DVD. That's not to say it might not be delayed, but it doesn't read to me like it is just in infinite limbo. Blu Ray on the other hand I have seen no indication of anything, other than BS about how their spec will support it too. I say BS, because when it suits them, they'll just lie. "Supporting it" doesn't mean butkus, implementing it does.

Much (but, admittedly, not all) of what makes their system a pleasure to use can be accomplished in a changer-based system.
I don't really think so Michael. Not even close. For so many reasons.

Whatever their thinking is I appreciate their candor. I am sure that they will continue to get enough business from people who don't care much about these new formats---people who put enjoyment of their existing library at their top priority.

Q: I would be interested to hear what some of those reasons are! I'm not necessarily talking about an off-the-shelf changer, I'm suggesting perhaps something somewhat customized. For example, one with two transports per spindle so two disks could be streamed simultaneously. I believe precedent exists for such changers in the backup storage space.

For example, one with two transports per spindle so two disks could be streamed simultaneously.
Would it not be legal to have a cached copy on a hard drive as long as the disc is in the changer?

I don't know, I haven't read the AACS license agreement. But my money's on "no", if for no other reason than the fact that the AACSLA was probably not going to leave a similar loopole open for AACS as the one K used for DVDs.

An example of what I'm talking about:
http://www.disc-gmbh.com/DISC_Series__BD.927.0.html

Q: I would be interested to hear what some of those reasons are! I'm not necessarily talking about an off-the-shelf changer, I'm suggesting perhaps something somewhat customized. For example, one with two transports per spindle so two disks could be streamed simultaneously. I believe precedent exists for such changers in the backup storage space.
For me the entire Kaleidescape experience is about being able to bypass the sh*t the studios shove down our throats. Like being able to select a movie and GASP have it start to play instead of being subjected to forced previews and DVD menus and so forth. That is only possible because they are able to put the movies on a hard drive. being able to press play nad have a movie start NOW as opposed to in 60 seconds is also a nice feature. It's NOT about the fact that it's hard to wait 60 seconds, it about the user experience of pressing play and seeing the movie so you know the command is working, as opposed to pressing play and twiddling your fingers waiting to see.

You are correct that something that is somewhat customized could make it a much more K like experience and my initial response was based on the assumption that you were referring to something like the current 400 disc Sony DVD players. It would need to be a changer that could provide the type of comprehensive feedback required to allow the K interface to work its charm. I do agree with you that a some of the magic could be achieved, but for those of us used to the current experience, it would really suck :).

Re: the announcement, I think there are different ways to read it. While I agree there is a tinge of negativity to it, I think some may be missing the obvious marketing bent behind it. I am quite sure K is being asked about this daily and it is a very strong statement to consumers basically saying "hey, don't wait, the format only has 200 movies out and isn't even a success in the market place and the movie studios don't want to give you a way to copy them, but a K now". It's also a statement that dealers will quote when people are asked about it. I'm a bit surprised people are not seeing what I consider as the marketing bent behind this. K is going to figure out some way to bring HD into the fold, believe me, even if it as Michael suggested. Unless the current formats fail altogether, in which case it may move to the scenario they always wanted of downloads.

I don't know, I haven't read the AACS license agreement. But my money's on "no", if for no other reason than the fact that the AACSLA was probably not going to leave a similar loopole open for AACS as the one K used for DVDs.
I wonder if the AACS prohibits K from capturing analog video. ;)

For me the entire Kaleidescape experience is about being able to bypass the sh*t the studios shove down our throats. Like being able to select a movie and GASP have it start to play instead of being subjected to forced previews and DVD menus and so forth. That is only possible because they are able to put the movies on a hard drive. being able to press play nad have a movie start NOW as opposed to in 60 seconds is also a nice feature. It's NOT about the fact that it's hard to wait 60 seconds, it about the user experience of pressing play and seeing the movie so you know the command is working, as opposed to pressing play and twiddling your fingers waiting to see.I'm glad you clarified. I do think that most of this is possible even with a changer-based system. Well of course, start time will be longer with a changer than with a hard-disk system. But skipping the previews and FBI warnings, having full cover art, masking positions, and the like is still possible. They key of course is that K would still maintain its database so that such things are automatically downloaded when a new disk is added to the changer.

K (like anybody who makes things like this) must sign and work off many different licenses and figure out how to interpret the overlap in all of them. This was why the DVD content coming out the HDMI connections has HDCP present. and why you cannot output scaled analog component DVD (@ 1080i) it kind of sucks, but by the strict interpretations of all the various aggreements that is the only way to legally do it.

FOr analog video, it has copyright. SO how do you deal with that without breaking its copyright law?

THen you also get into all the issues of differing quality in capture devices. So it is not addressed due to the complexities that lay there. However if i had a K and i wanted to add something i had on VHS to the system i would just get it burned to DVD then add it and put in my own metadata.

I think he was kidding about the analog video. Or maybe not- I though he was :)

oh i know. but it got asked all the time.

I use a Sony 777 in my system and it does just skip most of the stuff, though it will sometimes start on the previews, so you have to skip those. Or if it has more than one format on the disk and you have to select, you'll get the menu for that.

But you can certainly do any sort of automation stuff you want. We have customers who do all the automatic screen masking stuff based on AR of the movie in the metadata. And of course dimming lights, powering up the theater equipment, selecting correct inputs and outputs, and all of that, which you would need a separate automation system to do with the K system I believe.

However if i had a K and i wanted to add something i had on VHS to the system i would just get it burned to DVD then add it and put in my own metadata.
I am wondering about capturing analog HD, not SD. There are ways to capture analog HD to a hard drive, so maybe K could just do that for now, unless AACS prohibits it somehow.

I am wondering about capturing analog HD, not SD. There are ways to capture analog HD to a hard drive, so maybe K could just do that for now, unless AACS prohibits it somehow.

I thought that law had to do with cracking the electronic encryption and not the actual copying of content.

This would be pointless- K has a patent on the technique that copies the disk to the hard drive without breaking the encryption, keeping the entire disk within the frame work of a completely encrypted system, and then decrypting on the fly when the disk is played. The copying of content rules implemented by aacs have changed since they discovered this technique for DVD, so now all loopholes have been closed. Unless MMC is approved, K will not be able to do its thing with hd disks. As for analog import, that is a grey area I believe, and because K maintains its status as a system that does not circumvent the law, I doubt they woudl implement something like this.

K offers HD content on a transport disc. minimal amount to be sure, but they can do it. In there was even a case of a customer who had some content they had developed and they sent it to K and K put it on a transport disc and sent it back to the customer. Another thing that was (when i left) not used much to be sure, but an option was for folks who had their own HD camcorders to send the tape to K and they could get that put on a disc for import to their own system.

if you suddenly had a hard drive full of the sopranos in HD that you wanted to add... there are copyright issues involved and i doubt K would do that. ALthough that of course is one of the nice things about doing it yourself on an MCE box. there is nobody to slap your wrist and say "bad... that is bad" right now this is where there is a big benefit the the MCE box or the HD TIVO... lots of HD content.

As for analog import, that is a grey area I believe, and because K maintains its status as a system that does not circumvent the law, I doubt they woudl implement something like this.
I meant that the analog capture could take place internally. Basically, you would insert your disc into the K, and the K would internally convert the video to an analog signal, internally convert it back to digital, and store it on the hard drive.

wow, why would you want to do that?

To bypass CSS restrictions.

but that would be.....

I you want to do that, why not burn the disc without aacs to a bdrom, and send it and the hard drive away to k to have the movie transferred to it as a hi-def file- cant they do that?

in practicality they can, but if they helped you to make an illegal copy of a copyrighted work... that would not be kosher.

What if you named the file, "The Misses and I quality time trilogy." But you told K to name the files "Matrix, Matrix Reloaded, and Matrix Revolutions :)

that might be a red flag. also, in order to transfer the stuff, there is usually a few seconds of quality control viewing to ensure it actually worked. they might notice.

Anyways, once you have "The Missus and I quality time trilogy." on the k, you can add whatever metadata you want...

Well, I was kidding, but here is a second question- can you link movie files together?- for example, split the hidef file in to multiple parts and then link them up through the K manually and add the meta data.

that might be a red flag. also, in order to transfer the stuff, there is usually a few seconds of quality control viewing to ensure it actually worked. they might notice.



K should be able to develop a front-end with a BD reader which could import HD stuff on BD-R/RE. That should't require any DRM related license, is it?

That's technically feasible, sure, but why would they? The market for that would be vanishingly small, and they'd probably be risking a lawsuit (whether justified or not) arguing that the only purpose of such a device would be to support piracy.

That's technically feasible, sure, but why would they? The market for that would be vanishingly small, and they'd probably be risking a lawsuit (whether justified or not) arguing that the only purpose of such a device would be to support piracy.

You are right. :) I also think K's user wouldn't have the time to "author" HD content into BD-R/RE.

But MMC/MC model for bluray/HD DVD would not likely to work well with K's user experience. K's limited(around 4000?) user base made it difficult to licence HD content directly from the studio, IMHO.

So how would K approach the HD era? They couldn't sell the OS since it is dedicated.

Actually, selling the OS might be one heck of an idea- or- put it out there as open source, with a development API, and telling people that they have to abide by the license restrictions...

Let's say the dvd consortium got their way- and the license agreement was amended. Well, that hurts K real bad. Some people will say "screw it, I'll still use what I got," but that will significantly hurt existing sales. If their whole OS was dropped in to the public domain, along with source code, it would allow DIYer hackers and programmers to mess with it. And their patents would still prevent commercial application of the system.

I guess what I am saying is, first class is pretty cheap on a plane with no passengers. If K is going to be killed by a license change, and if managed copy will not be allowed, a serious threat is to say, "OK- fine. We are going to put it out for download for everyone to use."

I actually think that is a point of negotiation.

But- serous question for K users here- can you stitch together movie files uploaded one by one from different dvds?

sort of. you can create a script of trailers, movies, clips, and it plays as one sequence. momentary blips when it switches though.

You see where I am going with this, right? I want to take hidef content, load it on to regular dvds, and put it together on the K.

K does not have the codec to play HD content you burned onto that DVD to the best of my knowledge.

Nice try, but sorry charlie.

Dang, and I thought I had thought of some revolutionary new thing that they had not thought of... :)

If you want the capability today; Axonix Media Max servers & use the MediaDeck 4. These units can be ordered currently with HD-DVD & Blue Ray is coming. The only issue is that if you want both Blue Ray & HD-DVD playback capability; it is my understanding that the decoding software for each format is on the client. This means that you would have to stream Blue-Ray from a Blue-Ray Media Deck 4 & HD-DVD from the HD-DVD Media Deck 4.

I can give you more detail if you interested_ not big on typing if it's not appreciated.

Kalidescape is great & like to use their systems depending on the situation but I often times use the Axonix systems. Both have their advantages. I have found given the choice, my clients have elected to use the Axonix systems though.

If you want the capability today; Axonix Media Max servers & use the MediaDeck 4. These units can be ordered currently with HD-DVD & Blue Ray is coming. The only issue is that if you want both Blue Ray & HD-DVD playback capability; it is my understanding that the decoding software for each format is on the client. This means that you would have to stream Blue-Ray from a Blue-Ray Media Deck 4 & HD-DVD from the HD-DVD Media Deck 4.

I can give you more detail if you interested_ not big on typing if it's not appreciated.

Kalidescape is great & like to use their systems depending on the situation but I often times use the Axonix systems. Both have their advantages. I have found given the choice, my clients have elected to use the Axonix systems though.
Man, what a load of dishonest marketing bullsh*t on their website. I just love this Q & A that doesn't remotely actually answer the question:
Q: What about copyright laws? Is there information on how to obey copyright laws?

A: Yes there is information available on how to comply with copyright laws. Below are two links to articles concerning this subject. In general it is the responsibility of the user to obey all copyright and other related laws when using any computer including the MediaMax. It is recommended that you personally research and/or contact a legal expert on the issue concerning copyrights and other applicable laws before loading any media that may be copyrighted and/or protected media onto the MediaMax.................
So "In general it is the responsibility of the user to obey all copyright and other related laws when using any computer including the MediaMax. It is recommended that you personally research and/or contact a legal expert...

LOL!

Regardless HCCDesignGuy I do appreciate you mentioning them and would also appreciate if you could give some more info their media deck 4, as I couldn't find anything useful on their site. Can you load an HD-DVD and just have it burn automatically? What is the OS?

What is the OS? I am very interested in this. Until the point that I find out that it is simply a custom software solution built on top of a windows vista mce interface. If that is the case, I can build that myself and use mymovies.

QQQ- yeah- dodging the question- basically, what I am reading in to this is that they have not accomplsihed anything that any other movie server does, and K is still the only solution taht will automatically copy a commercial dvd, wiht a legal argument ont eh technique to do so.

HCCDesign guy- you say if given the choice, your clients prefer the avonix- is this based on price? Is the avonix just as responsive/slick and the K? Does Avonix provide their own metadata service, or is everthign getting pulled off of imdb?

QQQ- yeah- dodging the question.
Their recommendation to "contact a legal expert" has to take the cake. That's not just not answering the question, that's a new high in imbecilic marketing :)!

the best one was from one of theothers that i cannot recall off the top of my head

Q 2...

http://xperinet.com/faq.htm

Ya, that was is funny as hell, but at least who ever wrote it was laughing and winking when they wrote it.

I used to use that one in training as a wonderful example of the CYA principle in action.

I love the line about corporate customers using proprietary encryption schemes for video.

So- what is this system running on? I called them, no answer.

i "believe" but cannot recall for sure that it is some sort of linux variation.

do they maintain their own metadata service?

This means that you would have to stream Blue-Ray from a Blue-Ray Media Deck 4 & HD-DVD from the HD-DVD Media Deck 4.


This is strange. How do you implement BD+ VM remotely? AACS has not approved any stream solution/DRM AFAIK.
Do you mean you rip it illegally and streaming? BTW, DVD Forum just said they hope to nail MC in AACS this year. Bottom line for MC according to DVD Forum is at least one full length/PQ copy. No word on the mandatory part. MC fee is also up to the studio. Also, DVD Forum will start to license DVD-download for MOD and EST this Sep.

I am pretty sure they mean rip it illegally. That is the only way to currently do it. if the studios do not give this functionality to the consumer, consumers will take it anyway.

As if anyone actually gives a flying #*&*# about the MPAA, or their useless DRM schemes anyway. Most people take this about as seriously as mattress tags. If you bought the DVD, or HD-DVD, you can watch it as you like.

More power to Axonix for not ripping consumers off, and bowing to the MPAA and their idiocy. Seems like the perfect solution..at a third the price of the Kaleidescape...

and a good way to have a product shut down for being illegal.

You can say stupid s h i t like
If you bought the DVD, or HD-DVD, you can watch it as you like.

until hell freezes over, but all that stupid kind of attitude does is ensure that any real progress in allowing true fair use is delayed indefinitely.

The studio has a right to defend and protect their content. Just because some dumb a-hole who spent 17.99 to buy a shiny plastic copy of a movie that cost 175 million to make feels it is his god given right to copy it onto any and all mediums he feels like does not make anything right.

Contribute to the discussion or go back to the hacker forums.

Your ethics are commendable yet I think it is fair to say that a certain small percentage of Kaleidescape owners have borrowed or rented dvd's to load into their system. So no amount of encryption was useful in that case.

The logic of rightful use should apply if you have purchased the disk, and keep it stored at home. THe axonix seems like a linux based pc system. As long as the owner of such system has physically the original hd disc in his home, I don't see anyone going to jail over it.

Dizzman-

Well said.

I, like I suspect many people here, are irritated by crap like that post. The attitude shown is what keeps legitimate owners of media from being able to conveniently enjoy it anyway they want.

I purchase the disks, I collect the disks, I do not lend out the damn things, and I love movies. I just want the most convenient way to watch them. I understand that I do not have the right to do whatever I want with the media, but that is where the problem is- I want to rip them to a media server, and I will not share them- even if someone asks. I just don't want to have to load disks and watch stupid menus and trailers.

i want the same thing, and of course the occasional small transgression will hurt nobody, and honestly, nobody cares about it.

However when a manufacturer makes something that flagrantly ignores the existing laws by making it exist that it can ONLY operate with illegal software... it hurts the legitimate manufacturers and "the cause" far more than it helps anything.

I think what people fail to understand is that fair use is not some affirmative right. That is, content companies are under absolutely no obligation to make fair use easy to accomplish. Copy protection does not violate fair use rights any more than a book binding that makes it difficult to copy pages of a book.

Certainly, the DMCA screwed things up for us honest folk by making certain actions illegal even if they are committed in the furtherance of one's fair use rights. I believe the DMCA ought to be repealed, or at the very least a fair use exemption codified in law. But such a law change isn't going to stop content companies from using copy protection on movies.

I honestly can't say I blame them. I'm somewhat surprised, pleasantly so, to see the move away from DRM happening in the music industry right now. But anyone who believes the same will happen with movies is living in a dream world. The production budgets involved are orders of magnitude different. Nobody in their right mind is going to front the $150 million it takes to produce a modern blockbuster if they don't have some assurance of control over its distribution. That control doesn't have to be perfect, mind you---which means copy protection doesn't have to be perfect, either. It just has to be good enough for them to reliably make their profit.

If you have a problem with movie producers making a profit, then you're on the wrong forum.

I don't have a problem with the profit at all. The problem as I see it is that no matter what the studios try to do, it will ultimately fail so why not embrace a company like K who has proven to be a reliable, law abiding company? It amazes me that so many copies of new releases are circulating and now that theaters are moving towards digital pj's it's just a matter of time before someone figures out how to make pristine digital copies of new releases. I feel for the studios. I always buy my movies and refuse any illegal copies, but I think it is ridiculous that I can't have digital storage rights.

Besides the obvious ease of use with the K, the first thing I admired was the fact that it was a physically closed system on a custom OS. I admired the fact that they did not try to say, "well, let's let them connect to their itunes library, or their other computer equipment" It is as closed as it possibly can be. I think they make legitimate, concrete steps to protect the Studio's content from piracy. I think the Studios need to embrace K and say, "This is how it should be done."

I just don't understand the logic behind their foot dragging on MMC. they implement measures- copy protection- to stop piracy. Then, pirates circumvent it and distribute it anyway. The disks are too large, too cumbersome for the average consumer to pirate, so why bother? I guess they are concerned about Joe dumb ass taking his blu-ray, loading it on to his server, and then giving it to his friend to do the same. This is reasonable- but- it's happening right now! Netflix is a fantastic way for that same consumer to build a library of dvds. I think that at a certain point they need to rely on some high-profile arrests to discourage this kind of behavior. And, quite frankly, I have no problem with someone being arrested for causally loaning a dvd to a friend down the street and letting them burn a copy. The fact is, when that person says "It doesn't hurt anybody- I mean, come on, I'm not a murderer," they are a moron. It is true that on the scale of grand crimes in the universe pirating a dvd is not a huge crime. But it is the reason the studios are scared.

If we had to have some kind of compromise, I would not mind being forced to provide the disk to a media server every 20 times I played it, or something like that. But realistically, I don't think the studios are ever really going to be able to do something about the average idiot who priates the occasional dvd. And in the mean time, people who really want this kind of convenience are figuring out ways to get it themselves.

More power to Axonix for not ripping consumers off, and bowing to the MPAA and their idiocy. Seems like the perfect solution..at a third the price of the Kaleidescape...

It has nothing to do with bowing to ****. No serious investments would pour into something illegal in this area and in order to get close to K, you do need $.

Don't even talk about "perfect solution" until you got OS, custom raid, and CE/SoC based frontend solution

Here Here!

More power to Axonix for not ripping consumers off, and bowing to the MPAA and their idiocy. Seems like the perfect solution..at a third the price of the Kaleidescape...

This is funny too. to claim that K is ripping off consumers when you know nothing about their business model or how much in profit they may or may not be making. Or how many millions they have poured into R and D.

So lets appluad those who skirt the laws and make things that are created solely to break the law, and make fun of those who try to come up with a solution that meets the studios concerns for content security and takes the steps to actually (shock) comply with the freakin law!

THis is what was said in the Grokster V MGM case by the supreme court two years ago.

In a unanimous decision issued Monday, the nine justices said companies that build businesses with the active intent of encouraging copyright infringement should be held liable for their customers' illegal actions.

"We hold that one who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright, as shown by clear expression or other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement, is liable for the resulting acts of infringement," Justice David Souter wrote in the majority opinion.


However they also said
the Supreme Court had to acknowledge that the rights of copyright owners can go too far in limiting technological innovation.

And while we are definitely at that juncture, we need to encourage those who do things cleanly, not ridicule them.

WHat i find funny is that there are three viewpoints of those who see a K.

1. I want it, do you take AMEX?
2. That is friggin awesome, once i win the lottery, that thing is on "the list"
3. What a ripoff, i can build one with an MCE PC and an XBOX and DVD lobby. ANybody who buys that has more money than brains.

Why make fun of an innovator? YOu can appreciate it and still say it is not for you at the same time.

Again-

Here! Here!

Not sure what the morale dilemma seems to be. Let me make this simple.

I *own* a large number of DVDs, and HD-DVDs that were all legally purchased.
I reserve the right to access and store that content HOWEVER I WANT. and to backup and store that content HOWEVER I WANT. This is the concept know as "fair use", and is perfectly legal.

I *do not* have the right (or desire) to share my content with others.

Under the moronic DMCA, no US manufacturer is allowed to create technology that bypasses copy protection. This is why all the methods that do so come from oversees...:-)

There is nothing illegal about a company, eg: Axonix from providing a system that allows archiving and retrieval of non-copy protected material.

It is also not illegal for an *end user* to bypass copy protection, for personal use, as this falls under the fair use provisions.

So there you go. No single company can provide a complete solution, but nothing stops a consumer from putting one together.

As far as Kaleidescape, I don't doubt they have a great solution, just like a Ferarri is a great car. But I can spend a lot less, and make a Honda go just as fast..:-)
If I was a standard consumer who didn't know how the K solution works, and the component cost, I'm sure it would be attractive. I'm sure like most "high end" solutions in the AV world, its sold through an "exclusive dealer network" that adds their own huge markups.

I'll pass, and stick to my $2000 4.5TB server solution. Not hard to do when storage is <$.20/GB.

Just ignore this guys posts, it's a complete and total waste of time responding and there's one (or more) of him in every single discussion of every high-end product.

"Hey everybody- you can rip movies to a hard drive!"

No shizz sherlock. We know this. The Kaleidescape is better because of its functionality and usability. We are just missing the HD component. If K gets this, we will be very very happy. The K is worth the money- if you have it to spend. Trust me- I personally use Mymovies and the K system is the pinnacle of usability that software could ever hope to achieve. But with Windows underpinnings, it will never be as smooth.

Oh- and about that Honda/Ferrari analogy- try picking up women in your honda versus a ferrari. 'nuff said.

Oh- and one more thing:

kALEIDESCAPE- HOW WILL IT HANDLE BLURAY AND HD DVD WITH HDCP?

And one more thing- i loved this quote-

"More power to Axonix for not ripping consumers off"

Yeah- I think that is a problem with their customers- feeling ripped off.

K's customers blow tens of thousands of dollars on a high-end niche luxury item- I doubt they think about being ripped off.

I reserve the right to access and store that content HOWEVER I WANT. and to backup and store that content HOWEVER I WANT. This is the concept know as "fair use", and is perfectly legal.I know Q warned, but his faulty thinking does help me lead into a point.

You go right on fooling yourself, proteus7. Don't get me wrong, I think the DMCA ought to be repealed, and I agree that it ought to be perfectly legal. But wishing it doesn't make it so. It just isn't. Sorry.

But in fact, there's something more important than whether or not it is legal for you and I as individuals to rip our discs and store them on a media server. I mean, I really do doubt that the MPAA would go after someone who did this, as long as that's all they did. The bigger problem is that it is illegal for someone to sell us products that enable us to do so. That's the real market buster. That's what prevents every other company on this planet besides Kaleidescape from selling us a DVD server and ripping services. That's why Axonix has to use such laughable language to help people get the job done---and why Axonix would probably lose in court just like Grokster if the MPAA ever decided they were big enough to sue.

Finally, it's important to point out that even if the DMCA were repealed, even if an end-user's ability to rip movies for fair use backup and placeshifting were explicitly enshrined in law, that wouldn't necessarily open up the media server market. Remember, K was not being sued for copyright infringement---they were being sued for violating their license agreement! Thanks to patents, NDAs, contracts, and the like, the DVDCCA and AACS-LA folks can continue to prevent companies from selling ripping services and media servers even if copyright law and the DMCA weren't in the way, because they'd have other means of locking down the encryption process.

Sure, it would be easier for you and I to go on the internet and find the software we needed, but we'd never get the level of integration, automation, and service that K can provide. And heck, for K it took a lawsuit to establish that they could do it!

I reserve the right to access and store that content HOWEVER I WANT. and to backup and store that content HOWEVER I WANT.

let me make it simpler...

You may reserve the right... but you DO NOT have the right.

But in fact, there's something more important than whether or not it is legal for you and I as individuals to rip our discs and store them on a media server. I mean, I really do doubt that the MPAA would go after someone who did this, as long as that's all they did. The bigger problem is that it is illegal for someone to sell us products that enable us to do so. That's the real market buster. That's what prevents every other company on this planet besides Kaleidescape from selling us a DVD server and ripping services. That's why Axonix has to use such laughable language to help people get the job done---and why Axonix would probably lose in court just like Grokster if the MPAA ever decided they were big enough to sue.

As it stands now, the way it's written, the DMCA does bar even the use of any technology that circumvents access prevention measures. Most people don't realize it because the MPAA and the studios have never and likely would never go after end users (a complete PR nightmare, many times worse than the RIAA's bad PR that could even lead to the repealing of the DMCA altogether), but the wording is sure enough in there. I've seen articles questioning whether a case targeted at an end user just for the use of such technology would hold up in court given previously established fair use precedent, but we'll likely never find out the answer to that question.

Remember, the studios were sneaky and smart with the DMCA. It doesn't eliminate or technically override consumers' fair usage rights. It simply establishes the content owners rights by differentiating copy protection from access control. The wording of the DMCA even acknowledges users' previously established fair use rights to copy and says that the DMCA does not remove or reverse those. Of course, this is just a nice use of legalese whereby than ran an end around on fair use rights. Without legal access to the content for the purposes of making a copy, you in effect eliminate users' ability to legally make a copy. The DVDCCA won't issue CSS licenses that offer copy options on cosumer equipment, so there technically isn't a legal way in the US other than the pressing houses (places where commercial DVDs are pressed) to make a copying solution, distribute a copying solution, or even use a copying solution. Kaleidescape found a loophole of sorts in their CSS license and won the court case defending their right to use that loophole (pending appeal, of course).


I reserve the right to access and store that content HOWEVER I WANT. and to backup and store that content HOWEVER I WANT. This is the concept know as "fair use", and is perfectly legal.


Under the moronic DMCA, no US manufacturer is allowed to create technology that bypasses copy protection. This is why all the methods that do so come from oversees...:-)

It is also not illegal for an *end user* to bypass copy protection, for personal use, as this falls under the fair use provisions.

Again, see above. Bypassing copy protection is legally protected. Bypassing access control or access prevention measures is not. CSS is not actually a copy protection measure, it is deemed to be an access control measure, and is therefore protected by the DMCA. I know, it's splitting hairs and is stupid and it sucks, but the MPAA and the studios got their lobbyists to convince Congress to pass the law and shaft consumers.

There is nothing illegal about a company, eg: Axonix from providing a system that allows archiving and retrieval of non-copy protected material.

Absolutely true. In the US, it's also not illegal for a company to produce a system that bypasses copy protection. This is why all those hacks to bypass all those stupid copy protection measures (the marker trick, for example) that the recording studios have tried to add to CDs are perfectly legal. The measures they instituted try to prevent copying, so it's legal to bypass those. They won't institute anything that would control access and therefore be covered by the DMCA because those discs wouldn't be playable on the hundreds of millions of CD players already in use all over the world (the existing hardware would not be able to support any newly created access control measures).

So there you go. No single company can provide a complete solution, but nothing stops a consumer from putting one together.

It's true that in other countries, laws like the DMCA do not exist, so the creation, distribution, and use of such access control circumvention tools is legal. And, with the internet, that tool becomes available to anyone, anywhere. But again, technically it is illegal for the consumer to even use those here in the US.

But who cares about any of this if, as I said, no one's coming to break down your door for personal use of these illegal technologies? The point is that the very existence of the law stifles development of more user friendly tools. Why shouldn't Joe Sixpack, who knows very little about tech, be able to use a very user friendly app from a company like Apple to make backups of their legally purchased content or store that content on a media server? As it s now, doing either is way more complicated than it needs to be. It should be as easy to rip a DVd as it is to do with CDs.

The very fact that we are in this "grey area" keeps things stifled. The tools are available, so the people with know-how aren't beating down lawmakers doors to have the DMCA changed. And, since Joe Sixpack doesn't know enough to know that the law prevents him from having these easy tools, he's not raising his voice to demand the law be changed either. However, I have hope that one day, the call for change will get loud enough to finally break down the DMCA wall.

Jeff

Bring on the bit buckets!

Hmm..removing mattress tags is also illegal....


Hopefully we'll start to see more "grey market" solutions from outside the US that give consumers what we want. In Hong Kong and Taiwan, one can already purchase DVD players that ignore region encoding and CSS.

As a famous columnist once said, "the world is flat". As technology continues to advance, I suspect we'll see uncrippled versions of Kaleidescape for a fraction of the price being made and sold offshore, orderable over the 'net.

In the mean time, my jerry rigged 4TB video server that I built for under $2k will just have to do the job...:-). Streams WMV-HD movies at 720 and 1080p to Xbox360's all over the house. If only the proprietary $20k+ Kaleidescape was not stuck at a paltry 480p.

Proteus7- you get the point here, don't you?

Your solution works for you- great. Honestly, I am building something similar at the moment using MyMovies that will stream movies including hd stuff to my living room. I intend to go all out and build something that will be silent and instantaneous in the living room, and something monstrous in terms of storage capacity in my office to hold the media. I have a home network, i have the skills, and I am willing to put up with the potential problems of the media center crashing, possibly. I also cannot currently afford a K, and unless it will support hddvd and bluray, even if I can I will not purchase it.

Your "My server does what K does for a fraction of the cost" arguments do not mean anything here. We don't care- you and I, and many other people, have to build these things in the grey market area because commercial solutions for legally ripping a dvd are either software solutions developed in Antigua, or elegant high-end server solutions that have a patent on doing the rip without breaking the encryption. Until it is legal for a media server be sold/advertised as/supported as a solution that can rip dvds, blu rays, etc. to a hard drive server, this area will not advance in to hd playback.

Do you have any thoughts on how the Kaliedescape system might support hddvd or bluray in its system?

If not, go post in the htpc forum. Your posts are both irritating and juvenile. There are some people here on avsforum that have developed and written the software/hardware you are putting together. Everyone knows what is possible with a DIY system. Go start a flame war somewhere else. try teamxbox, ign, or some other forum like that. But not here- nobody cares about your views on the value of the K system, and unless you have something meaningful to contribute to the discussion, go elsewhere.

Streams WMV-HD movies at 720 and 1080p to Xbox360's all over the house. If only the proprietary $20k+ Kaleidescape was not stuck at a paltry 480p.

By the way from a videophile standpoint the 360 Elite via hdmi absolutely creams the image quality of the K client. K needs an HD client real bad.

Hmm..removing mattress tags is also illegal....By anyone but the end user.
As technology continues to advance, I suspect we'll see uncrippled versions of Kaleidescape for a fraction of the price being made and sold offshore, orderable over the 'net.Don't hold your breath! I mean, I suppose you might see some solutions out there, but nothing like the Kaleidescape. Do you really think that someone is going to invest the kind of development time required to develop a product comparable to the K if they can't sell it in the largest logical markets for it? I mean, sure, a few here and there might slip through the cracks if it were available over the net, but as soon as they threatened to achieve any sort of volume, they would get shut down faster than you can recite the CSS decryption key. Nobody in their right mind is going to invest the kind of development time and money required given those odds.In the mean time, my jerry rigged 4TB video server that I built for under $2k will just have to do the job...:-). Streams WMV-HD movies at 720 and 1080p to Xbox360's all over the house. If only the proprietary $20k+ Kaleidescape was not stuck at a paltry 480p.Sounds like a good setup. For the DIY customer it looks like it's going to be possible to build movie servers for HD-DVD and/or Blu-Ray too, thanks to the hackers. (I have to admit I was wrong in my predictions that AACS would be harder to crack.)

But not everyone wants a DIY solution, frankly. For someone who wants a fully turnkey solution, something like the K is the only game in town right now, and not even they have HD capability yet.

I suspect we'll see uncrippled versions of Kaleidescape for a fraction of the price being made and sold offshore, orderable over the 'net.



I don't understand why would anybody think you could develop a K system(at least in the same league) for a fraction of the price?

Moving back on topic... isn't the sheer size of a BD or HD-DVD movie enough to prevent this solution from becoming practical for a long time? Even at .20 cents a GB, you're still looking at $10 of storage per movie. I'm not even mentioning the hurdles when managing more than 4 TB, once you go beyond ~100 movies. I think the storage industry needs to advance quite a bit more before we see something like K pick up the HD formats. I'd wager that it's more likely we'd see a BD or HD-DVD jukebox integrated into K, at least until the storage problem is solved by the industry (I don't think K is going to solve it).

I think that the hard drive capacities are advancing at a rate that it is always becoming more practical. I would be surprised if we did not see 1.25 TB hard drives by the end of '08. And don't forget- K users can cluster their servers.

Moving back on topic... isn't the sheer size of a BD or HD-DVD movie enough to prevent this solution from becoming practical for a long time?No :) Increases in hard disk capacity, as well as drops in cost per GB, seem set to continue unabated. It's only a matter of time---and not a lot of time at that---before the costs per movie will be acceptable to many.

I think that the hard drive capacities are advancing at a rate that it is always becoming more practical. I would be surprised if we did not see 1.25 TB hard drives by the end of '08. And don't forget- K users can cluster their servers.

Forgot about the clustering... and I guess the cost of K ($25k?) to begin with, trumps the cost of the data storage, even with today's prices? This is considering most people have around 1000 movies, at most, or ~$10000 of data storage and four 3U K servers. I'm a stranger to the 20k+, so I'm not sure how much the system costs... but I figured I'd stop in and pose a few questions.

I think that the hard drive capacities are advancing at a rate that it is always becoming more practical. I would be surprised if we did not see 1.25 TB hard drives by the end of '08.
Only 1.25? There are already 1 TB drives on the market NOW.

Yeah, but I think that the 1tb mark is that magical level where the drive manufacturers want to take a breather before they make the next jump. Keep in mind that it was 500 to 750 to 1tb- the increments have to be the same size percentage wise to attract consumer interest- I doubt we will see 1.25, 1.3, 1.4, etc.- it will probably jump from 1tb to 1.25 to 2tb.

Also- teh market for extremely large drives is extremely small.

9500 posts?!? Geez man!

Sorry, off topic! :)

1.2TB LAPTOP hard drives by 2010 (http://www.engadget.com/2007/08/08/fujitsu-planning-on-shipping-1-2tb-laptop-hard-drives-in-2010/)

One can only imagine how big server drives will be by then.

Forgot about the clustering... and I guess the cost of K ($25k?) to begin with, trumps the cost of the data storage, even with today's prices? This is considering most people have around 1000 movies, at most, or ~$10000 of data storage and four 3U K servers. I'm a stranger to the 20k+, so I'm not sure how much the system costs... but I figured I'd stop in and pose a few questions.

Another point is that many K owners have little or no concern regarding costs of storage. These owners do not stop to calculate the per DVD cost of storage. They just don't care. They bought the K for it's ease of use.

Awhile back I helped another K owner install a system and while we were playing with the setup he sent one of his employees to BB with instructions to pick up one of every action, adventure, drama and comedy DVD in the store. He never discussed cost but I think the bill was over $9k.

(Then he had the nerve to "borrow" my bulk loader. :))

Jim

Awhile back I helped another K owner install a system and while we were playing with the setup he sent one of his employees to BB with instructions to pick up one of every action, adventure, drama and comedy DVD in the store. He never discussed cost but I think the bill was over $9k.

Talk about another world... even if some of you, here, are in it... :eek:

and the thing about the clustering is remember that the guys at K LITERALLY wrote the book on Network Attached Storage.

Well, it seems like the only hope for hi def disks on the K is for managed copy to be implemented. Paramount just announced that it is going HDDVD exclusive today, and I think I remember reading that HDDVD was a lot closer to managed copy implementation than bluray is. Is this true? Does anyone know about this?

After skimming through this thread I thought Avonix was some small company that stole technology from "k" . After going to their website I realize that this is not the case (unless all the accolades and companies serviced were false). These forums can get off topic and become one person or persons views agaisnt another, and the companies that produce the equipment suffer due to bruised egos. I think Avonix is a great solution especially with Hi def capabilities. Thanks for turning me on to them!!

The only time this post gets off topic is when people start discussing things that do not concern K supporting hidef disks.

On that note, it seems like K's future lies in managed copy or downloadable 1080P lossless audio content.

Your "Stay on topic" response to Joey's earnest "On topic" post clearly exposes your lack of impartiality from K and low level of tolerance for market alternatives. Your totalitarian post disgusts me to the point of me wanting to kick you in the chin.

Drunk much?

Your "Stay on topic" response to Joey's earnest "On topic" post clearly exposes your lack of impartiality from K and low level of tolerance for market alternatives. Your totalitarian post disgusts me to the point of me wanting to kick you in the chin.

CINERAPRICK-

You post a lot here. It's pretty impressive. You even put up a picture of yourself on a thread I was reading in another part of avs. But I don't know what's funnier- the fact that you think of yourself as some sort of a home theater installation celebrity or the idea of you getting your fat leg up high enough to kick even a midget in the chin, much less someone who's 6'2". But I digress...

Let me spell out something for you that's difficult to decipher from the title of this post: It is about how the Kaliedescape system might be able to handle Hi-Def formats with the constraints of HDCP. That does not mean that I want to argue about whether MCE systems with xboxes are superior to the K, or what the value perception of K is. I do care about these issues, just not here. Here, I was hoping to facilitate a meaningful discussion about how K might implement support for Blu-Ray and HDDVD. I thought people might have some insight from working with the company in the past (got that here) or maybe some insight in to the goings-on of the copy protection companies that are controlling the idea of managed copy (got some discussion on that too.) But when someone posts some crap about how windows media center is better/worse/same or a custom linux job is better/worse/same as K, it is irritating- because I am pretty sure that you can post new threads on AVSforum. It's easy- just login to your account and read the FAQ- it's in there. In fact- you should go do that- post a thread on why K sucks and Media center based alternatives- like what you sell- are better than K. That would be a good debate. I would participate, in fact. And I would even show you the respect of not trying to derail your thread with some posts about how MCE sucks or what kind of display quality the xbox 360 puts out.

By the way- I love most of your posts. They are informative, well thought out, and you obviously have a lot of knowledge. I happen to agree with you that MCE and xboxes are great. K not handling hidef kills the buying decision for me. And if I were in the market for the cream of the crop alternative- I would want to buy from you, as you sure seem to be at the top of your game. But you might want to work on the social skills a bit. Even though the internet is a series of tubes, you can still come across looking like a jack-hole when you talk about wanting to kick someone in the chin- for any reason.

So- we good here? I am sure we are. After all, someone with your immense level of knowledge and expertise wouldn't throw petty threats around on a home theater discussion form on the damn internet, would they? Uhh- would they? I didn't think so.

Take care- and if you want to kick me in the chin, grab a flight to OC CALIFORNIA and we can arrange a test run. Just make sure you bring your oxygen tank- those airplanes go way up in the sky.

L8

Peter, you are a freakin idiot. I hope one day you gain an understanding of what makes a good system.

The central issues is still that Axonix makes an illegal product. not illegal in and of itself, but illegal in that it can ONLY be used with third party illegal software.

Having said that, if it works for you and you are not concerned about it one day no longer working... then go for it.

Read this... it explains it all quite clearly...

MediaMax FAQs
What about copyright laws? Is there information on how to obey copyright laws?

Yes there is information available on how to comply with copyright laws. Below are two links to articles concerning this subject. In general it is the responsibility of the user to obey all copyright and other related laws when using any computer including the MediaMax. It is recommended that you personally research and/or contact a legal expert on the issue concerning copyrights and other applicable laws before loading any media that may be copyrighted and/or protected media onto the MediaMax.

Axonix requires that you read and agree to the following disclaimer before the MediaMax allows the loading of any media on it:

“Before loading video, audio, images or other media onto the MediaMax it is necessary that you read and agree to the following disclaimer:

Axonix Corporation respects the copyrights of all media publishers and does not condone or induce the violation of copyrights through illegal copying, distribution or other illegal means. Use of this product ("MediaMax") and any software that is loaded onto the product or hardware that is attached to the product for any illegal purpose is strictly prohibited.

Axonix does not produce, sell, ship or induce the use of any means to load media onto its products including DVD CSS decrypting software or any other software that may violate copyright regulations.

The term "load media onto the MediaMax" may include but is not limited to the transfer of any digital or analog formatted video, audio, image or other form of media onto the MediaMax.

In particular but not limited to, it is agreed that you will not load any content onto the MediaMax that you do not rightfully own and possess whether that content be movies, music, photos or any other media. Loading any media including but not limited to rented, borrowed or loaned movies or any other media that you do not rightfully own and possess is strictly prohibited.

All other content license rules and regulations as defined by the copyright holder shall be adhered to including but not limited to the prohibition of any illegal distribution or copying of any content that has been loaded onto the MediaMax.

In no event, whether you agree to this disclaimer or not, shall Axonix Corporation be liable for any losses dues to illegal use of this product or any incidental, exemplary, special, or consequential damages regardless of whether Axonix Corporation was advised of the possibility of such damages.”
If you have more questions about this topic we encourage you to research the subject thoroughly and/or contact a legal expert on the subject before purchasing or using the MediaMax. The following two web sites provide a good background on the subject.

you getting your fat leg up high enough to kick even a midget in the chin, much less someone who's 6'2". But I digress...



Relax - there was a tongue in cheek in there somewhere. Besides I was not talking about face chin but tibia chin. I have heard that term used for the lower foreleg. Moe used to practice that therapy with Larry and Curly.

The point being that we can't Stay on topic forever if K does not get up their butts, I would really appreciate their coming with a more pro-active outlook come CEDIA. Like showing some new PROTO boxes (with outstanding picture quality) and a TIMELINE. They can do that much. If they don't they will rush out to market thus sacrificing ultimate IMAGE FIDELITY FOR A SECOND TIME. Yes their first room client is pretty weak videowise.

Dizzman you are a K stockholder, one of few I take it, it is obvious you are not independent voice in this matter.

Regarding me selling MC HTPC, I have done a lot of research and hands on testing, but I am not 100% comitted yet. The art slideshow with music is a homerun, but that type of application can be made to run on different platforms; perhaps even K.

It should also be obvious that i love to wind you up. You ae such an easy target. And while i am a shareholder (one of the few agreed) i also was let go by them and could potentially have the biggest axe to grind. In many ways i HATE that i still love and want the product. I know about it than most here and if there were flaws, i would know about them. But it is that good.

What many folks around here do not seem to get is that ANY manufacturer that shows ANYTHING other than simple disc based playback is either full of shite or breaking the law.

And that is all there is to it.

If you buy an MCE and get some grey market software and load up all your DVD's and HD discs, then it can be argued that ou are allowed to do so. It is an argument that would never hold up in a court of law, but that is irrelevant at this point.

For any manufacturer to show some sort of system that stores and palys things back, they are breaking numerous laws and setting themselves up for legal action.

NOT THE BEST STRATEGY SOME MIGHT ARGUE

Until the folks out there who make the discs come up with some sort of solution, you are limited by law from any manufactured solution.

Take a moment, read the FAQ above from Axonix.

[QUOTE=Dizzman;11436959]

And that is all there is to it.

For any manufacturer to show some sort of system that stores and palys things back, they are breaking numerous laws and setting themselves up for legal action.

NOT THE BEST STRATEGY SOME MIGHT ARGUE

Until the folks out there who make the discs come up with some sort of solution, you are limited by law from any manufactured solution.

[QUOTE]

I THINK THAT k SHOULD BUILD THE BOX AND SHOW IT -PENDING MANAGED COPY. THEY CAN SHOW IT WITH A SPECIALLY LICENSED DEMO CONTENT. BUT THEY SHOULD SHOW THEIR COMMITMENT WITH A PROTO BOX.PERIOD.

why don't i build a car and show it. i can demo the "anti gravity module" pending.

It is unclear how MMC will work, so you cannot answer any questions.
It is unclear when (IF EVER) MMC will show up, so you can give no timeline.
The only way to simulate it involves using software that breaks most licenses that you have agreed to, so you put yourself in legal jeopardy.

What of this is a good idea?

I repeat, Peter, you are a freakin idiot.

They have been clear from the beginning... if and when MMC shows up, they will make it work JUST LIKE the existing system. So this mythical demo is to show the content only. it will not show the experience as they already show HD content at the shows.

this is the most annoying part of the new formats. Quite possibly the most exciting part of it is completely unknown.

It is fustrating on all sides. Once MMC opens up, a whole side of the AV industry will be created. How many manufacturers have some box in a lab just waiting for MMC to be legal. Ther is so much cool crap that is waiting to see the light of day once it is legal to do so.

On that note, it seems like K's future lies in managed copy or downloadable 1080P lossless audio content.


downloadable 1080p lossless audio content??? That doesnt make sense....Audio has a 1080 resolution? say it ain't so ;)

If not, go post in the htpc forum. Your posts are both irritating and juvenile. There are some people here on avsforum that have developed and written the software/hardware you are putting together. Everyone knows what is possible with a DIY system. Go start a flame war somewhere else. try teamxbox, ign, or some other forum like that. But not here- nobody cares about your views on the value of the K system, and unless you have something meaningful to contribute to the discussion, go elsewhere.

Wow, I do care about his view and I do share it. He has as much right to post as you do!
Are you the gate keeper here?



Sadly it costs people 25K to load 300 movies and watch them simultaneously. This will come down in price. There will be competition at some point and Kscape is just a waste of money long term. Online Broadband will be the best choice in the future, I think Kscape is already an obsolete technology but enjoy your 25K expenditure and your 480p movies.

After skimming through this thread I thought Avonix was some small company that stole technology from "k" . After going to their website I realize that this is not the case (unless all the accolades and companies serviced were false). These forums can get off topic and become one person or persons views agaisnt another, and the companies that produce the equipment suffer due to bruised egos. I think Avonix is a great solution especially with Hi def capabilities. Thanks for turning me on to them!!


I think its Axonix not Avonix and its a 1/2 the price of kscape, its not a bad start. It does 1080p already.

Not counting scaling of DVD's, it does it illegally.

And i agree that it is a waste of money. Just like buying a PC since it will be obselete by Christmas. THey will be faster better smaller cheaper by then.

why don't i build a car and show it. i can demo the "anti gravity module" pending.

It is unclear how MMC will work, so you cannot answer any questions.
It is unclear when (IF EVER) MMC will show up, so you can give no timeline.
The only way to simulate it involves using software that breaks most licenses that you have agreed to, so you put yourself in legal jeopardy.

What of this is a good idea?

They have been clear from the beginning... if and when MMC shows up, they will make it work JUST LIKE the existing system. So this mythical demo is to show the content only. it will not show the experience as they already show HD content at the shows.
Of course if they show that mythical box, and then MMC doesn't allow them to do what the mythical box showed, everyone will be up in arms screaming about how they mislead everyone etc. Besides, the "experience" as far as K Client's go is the GUI and the features the system provides, and we all, or at least most of us in this thread, already know what that looks like, and we all also know what HD looks like. So I'm not sure what K showing some prototype box playing a Blu Ray or HD movie would accomplish other than opening themselves up to all sorts of nasties.

it may shut peter up. Of course then we would see thirty pages of how he was going to design a system and use a wireless toilet paper roll to control it.

Are you the gate keeper here?



No. I am just a dude who wants to keep this post on topic. People can post things about htpcs and their usefulness in topics dedicated to those subjects. I am running one with mymovies- i love it. But i don't want to compare its features and pros and cons here, because this is about the K system and how it might handled hidef disks.

i give up- screw it. Anyone here seen the soup this past Friday? Man, that clip of the pickle licking girl cracks me up. Oh- I have a pet tortoise. And I can't wait for the new batman movie- The joker's going to be killer.
:):confused::eek::mad::rolleyes::cool::p;):D:o

iPhone's bitchin' too- put itunes movies on it- it will kick the crap out of the k anyday.

Hamsters are funny.

Sadly it costs people 25K to load 300 movies and watch them simultaneously. This will come down in price. There will be competition at some point and Kscape is just a waste of money long term. Online Broadband will be the best choice in the future, I think Kscape is already an obsolete technology but enjoy your 25K expenditure and your 480p movies.

Sorry, but your information is incorrect. The less expensive K-System can store 336 DVD's for $13,900 (msrp). Axonix is NOT less than half K's price (mentioned in a seperate post), and never has been. If you believe Axonix's online claims versus K, fine, but their assertions are incorrect and, IMO, intentionally misleading.

The K-Player upconverts DVD's in the same manner as any DVD player, and can output both 720p and 1080i (you are correct it does not output 1080p).

I've played back movies from the K-Player at 1080i and Marantz 9600 DVD player (upconverting to 1080p), and cannot see a difference (not saying there is no diff., only that I cannot see it). I'm presently using a Sim2 HT5000 PJ, and the PQ from K is as good as the stand alone DVD players we have (got two (Marantz and Oppo) that I've not gotten around to selling).

I only know of one Axonix owner and he has mentioned having loading/playback issues several times in conversation (his experience may not be the norm). I know approx. 25 K owners, not one of which has reported ANY problems. This is what we pay for when we buy into K. It just works.

Jim

(Yes, one of my companies sells K products)

FYI for everyone here, Penngray posts a lot in the automation forum and he belongs to that particular church of DIY that believes anything too expensive is as he says, and I quote, a "RIPOFF". Crestron is a "RIPOFF", plasma TV's above 5K are a "RIPOFF" and so on. So I would not expect him to look at any piece of engineering that is the price of the K and say "wow, that's neat". He buys almost everything from Ebay or on closeouts, not that there is ANYTHING wrong with that, EXCEPT that he thinks anyone who buys things like K are suckers. And he likes to post endlessly about how his 25K DIY automation system is so much better than 100K systems other people bought. And he has no problem at all with have very strong opinions on things he has never seen and knows very little about. Just so you know where he's coming from.

The crack cocaine spider figured building webs was for suckers. I think he likes the K though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHzdsFiBbFc

Thanks QQQ.

OK I am back on topic- and thank you QQQ JlgLaw and Dizzman. Personally, I would like to see someone ask some direct questions to K at CEDIA about managed copy and their plans for it, if anyone here is going.

I'm planning to be there (after stopping in South Bend for the Notre Dame opening game:)). I'll ask, but I'm sure I'll get the same answer: "Once they implement.....then we'll be able to ....." (not complaining here, I'm one of those that recognizes K's model is one of licensed compliance and respect for copyrights. I've got no problem with that.)

Jim

OK I am back on topic- and thank you QQQ JlgLaw and Dizzman. Personally, I would like to see someone ask some direct questions to K at CEDIA about managed copy and their plans for it, if anyone here is going.


I heard MS is struggling to nail MMC in the AACS 1.0. However, current breaching of AACS doesn't help on this.
I personally don't think MMC would ever see the light.

MC would probably come with the price tag even for the first copy. If most MC transaction require user intervene and a certain percentage of movie couldn't be MCed, it would not be a good match for K (load and forget).

My question to K would be how they would approach the HD era if there is no MMC/MC. I am sure there is a plan B? Do they have a plan to push K's tech to a wider market or even J6P? Could they license their tech/solution to others? Integrate partial of UI into a chip which could be adopted on every STB/TV/DVD player?

If MMC/MC went south, current K’s user base is not larger enough to guarantee a steady stream of HD content in transport drive.

DAMM!

Smileys are not working for me.

I wanted to do a big grin smiley.

MS announced plans to release service pack 2 for Vista today (but not til 2008) and interestingly there is no mention of managed copy. It was originally claimed that would be part of the service pack release.

MS announced plans to release service pack 2 for Vista today (but not til 2008) and interestingly there is no mention of managed copy. It was originally claimed that would be part of the service pack release.

You mean service pack 1 on 2008Q1?:) I don't think MS has ever officially claimed MC would be a part of the SP1 or Vista. Their WMDRM is AACS approved which means third party could build MMC/MC application on top of this DRM.

Of course MS could build such application just like they could integrate HD DVD player into MCE, but I have my doubts.

For K to build MC server, besides all the license issue. K needs to submit their own DRM to AACS for approval.


Also, Universal put up their HD site. (http://www.universalhidef.com/) You could register online. I am sure this site and related account would acting as a clear house for future MC/MMC and "U-shop".

Here's the thing about managed copy- It will never completely work. Because each disk is not uniquely identifiable and not attached to an owner, there is nothing and never will be anything to stop someone from taking a friends disk and copying it to their mmc server- except for a transaction-based system that verifies and takes a payment each time this is done.

If the studios would remove their heads from their asses, they would realize that closed products like K are their ideal target for selling downloadable hidef content. There is no way to write the file, the architecture is closed, the operating system is proprietary- F! What more protection could they want?

And let's think about the business side of the equation- itunes is the more dominant online movie sales venue- and with everything increasing in terms of bandwidth, computing power, and quality, it is only a matter of time before Steve Jobs says, "One more thing- all itunes movies are now available at the same quality as hidef disks. Also- they are watchable through itunes, with apple tv. Starting tommorrow." Do the studios really want the distribution channels to be owned by apple? Do they really want a salesforce of the ugliest people on earth selling the hardware that plays their movies (seriously- have you walked in to an apple store lately? :) Heck- even itunes drm is hackable!

Think about it- the studios should want k to succeed and want their hardware to come down in price so they can allow K users to directly download hidef movies to their systems. Imagine it-

"K- you can sell ET, Indiana Jones, Star Wars, Jaws, Howard the Duck, what ever the hell you want to 30$ a pop online to your system. For the first year, we want 100% of the cost of the movies. After that, we want 50% of the movie sales to go towards the cost of bringing down the cost of this K hardware. And now we have direct distribution for our movies. Tell Walmart, Apple, Microsoft, Target, Netflix, and everyone else who ever made a buck off of our movies to go to hell. You can make money licensing your hardware platform if you want. But its your OS- we want the average Joe to have this thing."

Hey Spielberg- are you reading this?

Because if you are, your movies are being ripped off by pirates as we speak, and DIY'ers are copying disks to hard drives on home brew systems anyway, and there is nothing you can do about it but not make money off of the thing. Sit down with your pal George Lucas and play with that K system. Think about it- that right there is the only truly un-copyable system for your movies in hidef formats.

Here's the thing about managed copy- It will never completely work. Because each disk is not uniquely identifiable and not attached to an owner,

iansilv

Each disk is uniquely identifiable via BCA(burst cutting area) and a serial number. It doesn't have to attached to an owner.



there is nothing and never will be anything to stop someone from taking a friends disk and copying it to their mmc server- except for a transaction-based system that verifies and takes a payment each time this is done.

They don't need to stop that. Each managed copy transcation is recorded in online database. The first copy could be free. The 3rd and after could be the same as retail.





If the studios would remove their heads from their asses, they would realize that closed products like K are their ideal target for selling downloadable hidef content. There is no way to write the file, the architecture is closed, the operating system is proprietary- F! What more protection could they want?

K has too little of a user base (3000-4000?) for any studio to seriously considering licensing HIDEF content on a steady base.


Do the studios really want the distribution channels to be owned by apple?

I don't know about that. But studio certainly don't want to foot the bill for such infrastructure. For online distribution to really taking off, it has to be a co-ordinated effort.


Think about it- the studios should want k to succeed and want their hardware to come down in price so they can allow K users to directly download hidef movies to their systems. Imagine it- ?

Why should studio even care about the tiny user base? If you are Xbox360, then it is a different story.

Why should studio even care about the tiny user base? If you are Xbox360, then it is a different story.
I don't think any studio would care about K per se, however they should want to see K type solutions which respect their IP succeed.

Lymzy-

Whoa! I did not know that! So each disk is in fact uniquely identifiable. Wow- that does change things significantly. I thought we were dealing with a situation where the disks themselves have no unique traits. Well, why don't they link the serial numbers to the upc codes, link those upc codes to transactions, and track who pirates disks?

I mean, honestly- I hate pirates. I really do think it is stealing. Pirates screw people like, well, me who want to be able to enjoy our media conveniently with things like managed copy. If the ability to uniquely identify a disk is in place, why not take it to the next logical extension?

Heck, I am sure K could read these serial numbers as well and report back against a database to keep fellow k owners from copying disks to each other's systems.

Lymzy-

I disagree with you on the size of the user base option. A movie studio taking an existing movie encoded in hidef and supplying the file to be bought within a protected system like the K is not that big of a deal. The fact that all of these systems- K, xbox 360, ps3 all are capable of playing hidef movie files means the studios don't have to cater to each one individually. They can just supply the files to be sold and downloaded within a set of specifications for a protected system,and let the manufacturers work out the details.

In other words, the amount of work on their part to supply a movie to a system that meets their specs for proprietary (non-pc) hardware and protected software in a closed architecture product shoudl be no different- in theory- for a user base of 50 people or a user base of 500,000 people.

As for an infrastructure, just let the K download through an encrypted broadband connection on the internet. The hardware side is taken care of by the manufacturers. It is a series of tubes, after all.

Heck, I am sure K could read these serial numbers as well and report back against a database to keep fellow k owners from copying disks to each other's systems.

I don't follow you. Studio doesn't care who copy whose disc as long as it is done legally. The whole point of MC is to generate more revenue via internet MC transaction besides the physical disc sales.

should be no different- in theory- for a user base of 50 people or a user base of 500,000 people.

That is exactly the problem.:) The cost is no different. But the profit from two user base differs dramatically. License master quality HD content from Studios is not an easy task.

I don't follow you. Studio doesn't care who copy whose disc as long as it is done legally. The whole point of MC is to generate more revenue via internet MC transaction besides the physical disc sales.

I am talking about a situation where MC is not done on a paid transaction basis. Meaning, K reads a disk, and before it copies, it checks the serial number of the disk being copied against a database of other K user's discs and halts the copying with a warning message if the disk has been copied on to another user's K system somewhere else.

That is exactly the problem.:) The cost is no different. But the profit from two user base differs dramatically. License master quality HD content from Studios is not an easy task.

Yeah, but if the studios are making 5 bucks a sold download, what do they care what the installed user base is per hardware system? K could have 5000 users, their competitor could have 3000 users. They make 5 bucks each download sold, what do they care if the 1000 users that pay for those downloads come from K or its competitor?

What I am saying is that a single file- when placed in to a protected "ecosystem" like the K- should be able to be bought and transferred without fear of a piracy issue. And that same file should not need to be converted for each system's format. The studios could strike licensing deals with K or its competitors on an individual basis, like music companies do with itunes.

And this keeps the downloaded files off of the pc architecture which is open and puts it on to protected, closed architecture systems like the K. Heck, if the studios wanted to, they could use a third party service to transfer that hidef file from them to the "ecosystem homebase" where it would be downloaded, to prevent any sort of hacking/piracy/theft- the kind where the simpsons movie ends up on the internet because someone with early access to it puts it up from a dvd screener or something.

And if it is really so difficult to create a single format hidef master file, they can just buy AnyDVDHD and rip their own disks :)

Did K display at Cedia? Anybody talk to them/ get any news or info?

K was there. Nothing new in hardware. Showed some of the new movie/TV program packages.

I restrained myself from going in that booth. I did not want to find myself in the position of having the urge of kicking anyone in the Shinbone. The MediaMax booth was very nice btw.

Did K display at Cedia? Anybody talk to them/ get any news or info?

They displayed the new I-tunes integration. They told me the next release will include the ability to sync from the K to a users Itunes collection.
You can have multiple different uploads to various I-tunes collections as well.

I think it was called "music to go"

They told me one step at a time when I asked about 2-way sync.

Also they have a Pronto touch screen controlling the K now as well with the K gui. ALthough it wasnt really working.

NOt much else besides the sleek new 3u server.

I did not want to find myself in the position of having the urge of kicking anyone in the Shinbone.

To be clear, you feel this way because they are not prepared to show you a BS example of something that may or my not ever be a real prodduct? So you are pissed off that you are not being shown vapourware?

Wow, that is a pretty progressive viewpoint.

They displayed the new I-tunes integration. They told me the next release will include the ability to sync from the K to a users Itunes collection.
You can have multiple different uploads to various I-tunes collections as well.

I think it was called "music to go"

They told me one step at a time when I asked about 2-way sync.

Also they have a Pronto touch screen controlling the K now as well with the K gui. ALthough it wasnt really working.

NOt much else besides the sleek new 3u server.

Wait! Whoa! They are outputting to Itunes? That is pretty significant, don't you think? I am impressed! I hope it supports apple lossless or something. Sonos....

Hi

Extremely informative discussion. I believe that the ease of copying bits is a threat to the studios and anyone who produce entertainment material... THey are faced with a new paradigm and I can understand their feeling lost... I would have seen the K-people as a venue, inconsequential in term of revenues but certainly innocuous. They constitue excellent PR.. I must say that the lack of HD on the K is to me deal breaker for now...

I agree. I just don't understand it. I can see hwo the studios are reluctant to give up major distribution control to one distributor (itunes comes to mind) but if they create a standard that the devices must operate in, I can't see how it can be bad. Especially given the fact that each disk is uniquely identifiable. Just disable copying int he entire device if someone borrows a disk that has already been copied to another device- match it to a large database.

Hello guys,

I just to want to join the conversation again as a proud owner of a 3U server and 2 movie players with both movie and music licences. We have also another k system in our showroom and although we have tried several solutions (from windows media centers with NAS to other k competitors) it is the only movies server system we are willing to sell to our clients.

About the Kaleidescape music integration with pcs, this is from their faqs:

Q: Can I get the music on my Kaleidescape System onto my iPod or other portable music player?
A: The current release of KEAOS does not support this feature. In the future, we will enable Kaleidescape customers to export the music on their Kaleidescape System to their PC. Customers will then be able to access their music using iTunes or other media player applications, and export it to an iPod or other portable music player. Kaleidescape will provide this feature in a future KEAOS software release, which will be provided automatically to existing customers. We expect this software release to be available in 2007.


Q: Can I get the music on my PC into my Kaleidescape System?
A: The current release of the KEAOS software does not support this feature directly. However, Kaleidescape customers can burn CDs with the music on their PC and import these CDs into their Kaleidescape System. For best results, first import your CDs directly into your Kaleidescape System. A direct import has higher audio quality and fewer pops and dropouts. When a CD is imported into the Kaleidescape System, it is not compressed and all of the fidelity of the original CD is preserved.

Q: Can I stream music from my Kaleidescape System to a PC on the network so that I can play my Kaleidescape music through my PC's speakers?
A: No. We may add this feature in the future

I must say that the lack of HD on the K is to me deal breaker for now...

Here is the latest on MMC/MC for HDM.

http://contentagenda.com/article/CA6491476.html?industryid=45174

Quote
"“We’re working out the details of setting up and maintaining a default server for managed copy,” Ayers said. “There will probably be several managed-copy servers out there, but AACS-LA will offer a server itself that will at least handle basic managed-copy functions for smaller studios that don’t want to maintain one themselves. The idea is that, even if it isn’t a great business for a third-party to offer a managed-copy server, smaller studios will be able to use the AACS server at a cost that will make it viable for them. How all of that is going to work is what we’re working on now.”

Even if no fee is being charged for a copy, AACS managed copy will still require an online transaction to authenticate an original disc, certify the DRM being used on the copy or to unlock the content.

The group intends to make managed-copy mandatory for content participants within one year of a final license being adopted. That likely pushes any managed-copy implementations into the first part of 2009, at the earliest."


As long as it's coming, I am patient. :)

And as long as it's not here, people will be doing it anyway. Six weeks from now...

And as long as it's not here, people will be doing it anyway. Six weeks from now...


Six weeks from now says who? James from slysoft?

You can rip but you can't import it into K until there is MMC license.

If BD+ falls, then they will be even more motivated to implement MMC. If it does not, then all the movie studios will find the idea of an uncrackable copy protection irresistible, they will all eventually go purely blu-ray, and they will have far less pressure to implement MMC. If BD+ is infact unbreakable, then they can put up with our complaining because there is nothing we as consumers can do. But if people can rip the disks, then they will be more motivated to give consumers the managed copy they are looking for. Just my 2 cents.

And yes- I am counting on James from Slysoft.

if they call it uncrackable... that is just more motivation for hackers.

I truly hope it is cracked, and people are working on ti right now. HDDVD seems to have more ground on implementing MMC, and that would help get it on to the K.

The studios probably don't give much thought to managed copy of the HD formats. The market simply doesn't exist yet and these formats might fail anyway. So whatever happens with managed copy, it will not be resolved on a timeline that Kaleidescape or its customers will appreciate.
And I'm also not convinced Apple can close deals with the Studios for the not-quite-HD content they wish to sell through a developed infrastructure. Maybe Disney will get the ball rolling. But maybe not. It will be interesting to see what develops between Friday and Christmas in Cupertino.

The market simply doesn't exist yet

But there are quite a few people rip from netflix...
I agree on "it will not be resolved on a timeline that Kaleidescape or its customers will appreciate"

My question always is does K has a plan B in the HD era?

Agreed; Rip and copy is pretty common. Rip and archive to network attached storage is not. I only know of one person that stores content this way and they download everything from the torrent sites anyway. And I consider both of the above theft.

I can't afford and don't even need a K system but have dabbled with AppleTV. ATV product makes sense in regards to personal content, short form content, trailers, and even YouTube (although there is an interface problem with YouTube). Its not practical for transport streams, due to the lack of managed copy. I bought it as an interface to itunes playback but, after experimenting, have a problem with leaving the video on just to navigate the playlists. I also found I prefer to spin discs in my main system- habit, I guess. Loading a disc for movies also isn't a problem in my set-up but I don't have 12,000 square foot house either.

I have to wonder if the iPod touch / iPhone + APX will eventually replicate Sonos functionality but at a lower cost. For the most part I like the Sonos but I don't like the clunky, single purpose controller and I'm concerned Apple (or someone) will trump their business model as soon as I buy one. But I would purchase a few zone players in a heartbeat if their system was semi-open (like had a Salling clicker app for some of the major cell/handheld platforms).

Agreed; Rip and copy is pretty common. Rip and archive to network attached storage is not.

Not true at all, many of the DIY HA or the HTPC people out there have their DVDs on their network. I have 300+ DVDs in boxes now because I have them on 2TBs worth of drive.

Just starting my HD movie collection, I own 3 HD-DVDs and I have them now on a 1TB disk...25G per HDDVD though :eek:

And I consider both of the above theft.


I own it, I can do what I want with it. Its stupid to call it theft. Heck there are 100 year old laws in some states that are broken daily, the law is never applied in these cases because it doesnt make sense.

I know the copywrite law crap and it doesnt make sense at all, I own a copy of the movie, I can destroy it, copy it, cut it in half, modify it and so on all I want that is the law of logic. I will not distribute it.

Because if you are, your movies are being ripped off by pirates as we speak, and DIY'ers are copying disks to hard drives on home brew systems anyway, and there is nothing you can do about it but not make money off of the thing. Sit down with your pal George Lucas and play with that K system. Think about it- that right there is the only truly un-copyable system for your movies in hidef formats.



Nothing is every un-copyable....period. There will always be smarter people on the otherside. The amount of money spent trying to stop it is more money then the piracy costs itself, bad management in my opinion.

The volume business and the money is in the John Q public so I dont think the whole K thing matters in the end to the industry since its just too small of a factor.

IMO, I think most the people ripping the DVDs for playback do own them also, I think its a very, very small percentage that rip "borrowed" DVDs. Probably not even 1% of total sales.

I own it, I can do what I want with it. Its stupid to call it theft. Heck there are 100 year old laws in some states that are broken daily, the law is never applied in these cases because it doesnt make sense.



In California, it is illegal to shoot a whale from a moving car. I broke that old law yesterday! :) (joke of course)

Seriously, I think that the original law said it was ok to make a copy of media purchased for backup, but no one has legitimately challenged the latest laws. I do agree that downloading from torrent sites is heft- that is the kind of crap that keeps mmc from being implemented sooner, and keeps the anti-piracy efforts going.

I own it, I can do what I want with it. Its stupid to call it theft. Heck there are 100 year old laws in some states that are broken daily, the law is never applied in these cases because it doesnt make sense.

I know the copywrite law crap and it doesnt make sense at all, I own a copy of the movie, I can destroy it, copy it, cut it in half, modify it and so on all I want that is the law of logic. I will not distribute it.

You can call it what you want and you can express your opinion... but it is not fact. what the law says (whether you like it or not) is that you do not own it. you are a party in an agreement to watch it under certain conditions.

Dizzman- I thought the old legal argument came from VHS players when they first came on the market- they were allowed because people could legally make a copy for backup purposes on the media they owned, but recently the law has been written that it is illegal to break the encryption,and that is where the quagmire exists.

that is true. and in order to make a "backup" you are breaking protection. or to play off a pc... same thing.

hey, i am the first wanting the rules to be changed, they just wont if people feel that they have the right to do whatever they like and write their own.

If you want to copy your purchased DVD's to NAT, I could care less. It is against the law but I doubt you would be prosecuted. Renting, ripping and burning is theft and its far more common than ripping your personal copy for the convenience of random access. NAT archives are very uncommon in the grand scheme of things.

Managed copy of HD discs will eventually be worked out but the market for hi def is so small its not a priority for the studios and probably won't be for at least a couple more years.

iTunes already has managed copy; I have downloaded some Piaxar shorts and they will play on two different devices simultaneously.

Didn't the DVD IP holders recently update their legal requirements to provide some form of managed copy?

Forgive if this has been mentioned (I really did read through a good bit of the thread), but basically what MediaMax is offering is nothing more than saying "you can illegally do this and we'll support it" -- but I like Kaleidescape better. Is it possible to use some 3rd party softwae to get HD/Bluray onto Kaleidescape or is it too closed of a system?

I'd imagine even if it were possible, the artwork wouldn't be available as they probably don't make a habit of indexing bluray/HD releases.

Not possible, K is a closed, propprietary system. (Actually, I guess given the level of talent out there, anything is "possible," but K would never allow it, not to mention it violates our user agreement with K.)

Jim

Is it possible to use some 3rd party softwae to get HD/Bluray onto Kaleidescape

Even if you can load the HD/Bluray movie onto K, you would still need K's frontend to support it.

K's current frontend couldn't support the new formats.
I don't expect K release a new frontend until there is a mature SoC solution for both HD DVD and Blu-ray(which would be at least 1Q2009) and K's DRM is approved by AACS to accept manage copy. K never rush anything to the market until they could get it right.

K never rush anything to the market until they could get it right.

The nerve of those bastards! :D

Actually, I guess given the level of talent out there, anything is "possible,"

I would be REALLY impressed if somebody managed that!

As would I, but to be honest, I'm tech-savvy but I'm sick of hacking and tweaking. I'd like to just get something and have it work -- no months of trial and error, tinkering, building myself, just buy it, it works and it's amazing.

That's my reason for going with them -- I'll still demo the MediaMax system though as I don't like how you have to pay licensing fees with K, the database retrieval I understand, but the licensing is just a kick to the gut IMO.

it is not really a license fee. you are paying for lifetime software updates. they only broke it out a few years ago. it used to be all wrapped up together.

Either way, it's a pretty penny. Anyone hoping to save up for one would then need to get comfy paying 700/year for updates.

I did find out that you can get the lifetime license for like 2700 or so though which is good (assuming you plan on having the system for 4 years or longer it's cheaper)

The cool thing about K is that it is literally idiot proof. The thing is just so slick, its ridiculous. I just hope they can update their system to play bluray and hddvd disks. If they can't, its a deal breaker for me.

That WOULD be cool, if only to eliminate the need for two players. I also hope it can be done with a simple software upgrade and a drive change (to read the discs of course)

I also hope it can be done with a simple software upgrade and a drive change (to read the discs of course)


Don't mean to rain on your parade. I would guess K's front end is based on Sigma Design 8620 or similar SoC design.
HDM is 10x complex than DVD in general, not only decoding but also interactive layer. It would require a change of the SoC which couldn't be accomplished by software.

Everything K is their own. From the OS up. yes i am serious... their CEO has a PhD in computer science from Stanford and his speacialty is Real Time OS's. so they wrote every line of code themselves.

Everything K is their own. From the OS up. yes i am serious... their CEO has a PhD in computer science from Stanford and his speacialty is Real Time OS's. so they wrote every line of code themselves.

But that doesn't mean they wrote their MPEG2 decoder? I would be very suprised that their decoder is software based.

It appears that the way in which Kaleidescape will handled copying dvd's will be "corrected" by the CCA with an amendment called the 'Managed Copy Amendment'. This is regular dvds only. The purpose of the amendment is to explicitly disallow all copies media server copying.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20071104-dvd-licensing-group-to-vote-on-closing-copying-loophole.html

Since the current Kaleidescape system can only import from standard dvds I wonder if this will hasten their interest in adding support for HD-DVD or blu ray.

Nothing will hasten their interest in adding the HD discs... Since it has always been a big interest.

NOBODY can import HD discs legally. that is the issue

Release the OS out to the wild. If this loophole gets closed, K is looking at some serious long time litigation to get it back. I say, release their K operating system out to the wild for people to build htpcs with linux. Or- have them put their patent out for open source development- the one that allows them to copy the disks.

Here is the thing- if the DVD group os going to close the loophole that allows them to remain in business, they should go out with a bang!

If they (DVD-CCA) vote to bring in the new amendment, Michael will do exactly what he said he would, litigate the antitrust issue. That case will likely take years to resolve. In the meantime, it is likely there would be a injunction to stay the implementation of the new rules imposed because of the irreparable harm K would suffer during the litigation process. So for now at least, it should be business as usual.

Jim

The purpose of the amendment is to explicitly disallow all copies media server copying.
If the amendment is approved, will K disable all copies on all servers, even on servers that have already been sold?

According to K's service agreement (http://www.kaleidescape.com/licensing/service-and-license-agreement.pdf):
"Kaleidescape reserves the right to discontinue one, some or all of the features of the Kaleidescape Service you receive at any time, at Kaleidescape’s sole discretion."

the big variable i wonder about is if the proposed amendment might be amended to add the word... "henceforth". i wonder (not being a lawyer) on how the courts feel about retroactive contract amendments that shut down somebody who is totally legal and even goes beyond what is required.

K could theoretically shut things down, but it is unlikely that any compliance order could go into effect until such time as all the legal wrangling worked its way through the courts.


i would love to see this go to court and have a judge laugh at all the wrangling for an encryption scheme that in reality holds no water.

Uhh... i K is going to do that, i think they would warn teir customes, advisng them to simply unplug their servers from the net. I don't think the problem is that- I think the problem is when the dvd cca license ges renewed with these new terms. Someone correct me i I am wrong, but it is an annual licensing agreement, correct?

Dizz is correct, you cannot retroactively change the terms of a contract unless both parties agree and their is new consideration involved.

Of course the agreement is only good for the specified term and can obviously be changed. Not sure what K's licensing agreement says in this regard.

Better start loading up on drives and content before the plug gets pulled!:D

Jim

I recently watched part of a movie on a 3 chip 720p DLp that was being fed its signal by K on a 125 2.35 screen and it looked horrible!! With home theater screens getting bigger and bigger the need for 1080p is absolute! How anyone would plunk down $20-$30k for a sysem that is not ready for HD is hard to believe. There is a local dealer that is promoting another system that is similar, cheaper and handles HD? I know its doing it Illegally, but some rules just might have to be broken. Why aren't these other companies being hit with lawsuits? Just about everyone I know has made a copy of a VHS tape and gave it to a friend, which would of violated that big disclaimer in the beginning of the movie and fined $250,000. How many of those lawsuits have ever been activated?

As may already be known here, the vote did not occur. The DVD-CCA has instead tasked one of their "working groups" to evaluate a way to implement the restrictions they are seeking without creating more litigation. Although several studios were pushing for the amendment, "cooler heads prevailed" (as one commentator put it) and it was decided to seek an alternative way to address the issues.

Likely, K's threat of immediate, and prolonged litigation had an impact.

Jim

good. I wish these idiots would figure this stuff out. People bymor emovies when they can watch them easily.

I recently watched part of a movie on a 3 chip 720p DLp that was being fed its signal by K on a 125 2.35 screen and it looked horrible!! With home theater screens getting bigger and bigger the need for 1080p is absolute! How anyone would plunk down $20-$30k for a sysem that is not ready for HD is hard to believe. There is a local dealer that is promoting another system that is similar, cheaper and handles HD? I know its doing it Illegally, but some rules just might have to be broken. Why aren't these other companies being hit with lawsuits? Just about everyone I know has made a copy of a VHS tape and gave it to a friend, which would of violated that big disclaimer in the beginning of the movie and fined $250,000. How many of those lawsuits have ever been activated?


I don't think the K system can be blamed for your observations. I've seen K's image on 2.35 screens that large (and larger) and when properly setup, they look as good as any DVD player. I've historically compared the K Movie Player to an excellent Marantz player, a Denon, and a Pioneer, and the K image was just as good.

Without knowing all of the setup components it is difficult to comment on why the image was poor, but the reasons are often found in the display device, screen, room conditions, etc.. If the K was at fault, then it would always be so, but the K systems I've seen, including my own, provide an excellent image on very large screens. I do, however, agree that HD material is the way to go, and clearly provides superior imaging on large screens.

No comment on the illegal copying.

Jim

I thought I would add this post here since a bunch fo people are subscribed to it:

Kaleidescape adding iTunes integration
Kaleidescape is about to ship a new version of its software for all owners that includes synchronizing ones music collection into iTunes.

The server handles all transcoding into MP3 formats (your choice of bitrate), and the integration is very nicely done. All meta data migrates to iTunes and onto iPods including cover art. Slick.

Details and screenshots posted on Kaleidescape Forums:
http://www.kscapeowners.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=5

--josh

Has Kal addressed the future upgradability of their platform at all? Not meant to be a stirring post, but I do notice that the players only have one Ethernet connection. I cannot tell how many outputs the servers have, but I it reads like the servers only have one Ethernet output. Which means that either client will need to have Cat6 installed or at least two runs of cat5e to carry HD audio/video from the server, to the player.

I think the Ka system is totally slick and would really avoid me getting the 11pm call on while out of town from the wife, " how do I play this movie" call."

While I am ready to accept that I might need to upgrade the player portion of the unit, I would hate to have to upgrade all the Ka boxes to accept HD content.

Maybe I am thinking about this incorrectly.

Josh do you have a link to the thread that contains the screen shots. I opened several threads on topic with no luck. Thanks Josh.


I thought I would add this post here since a bunch fo people are subscribed to it:

Kaleidescape adding iTunes integration
Kaleidescape is about to ship a new version of its software for all owners that includes synchronizing ones music collection into iTunes.

The server handles all transcoding into MP3 formats (your choice of bitrate), and the integration is very nicely done. All meta data migrates to iTunes and onto iPods including cover art. Slick.

Details and screenshots posted on Kaleidescape Forums:
http://www.kscapeowners.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=5

--josh

Has Kal addressed the future upgradability of their platform at all? Not meant to be a stirring post, but I do notice that the players only have one Ethernet connection. I cannot tell how many outputs the servers have, but I it reads like the servers only have one Ethernet output. Which means that either client will need to have Cat6 installed or at least two runs of cat5e to carry HD audio/video from the server, to the player.

I think the Ka system is totally slick and would really avoid me getting the 11pm call on while out of town from the wife, " how do I play this movie" call."

While I am ready to accept that I might need to upgrade the player portion of the unit, I would hate to have to upgrade all the Ka boxes to accept HD content.

Maybe I am thinking about this incorrectly.


The K servers are already capable of both storing and delivering HD content. In fact, all K Servers already come with a couple of HD programs installed.

As you may know, in most K installs a "switch" is used to connect up the components (K-Players and Server). This allows the Server to reach the individual players in a system (simultaneously). While I cannot speak for other installers, my company has been using gigabit capable routers and switches (and Cat6 cable) for some time, anticipating the need to support HD content usage.

Yes, there will be a need to add at least a new "reader" capable of importing HD-DVD or BR (or both). A more important question is how the current line of Players will deal with 1080p content (currently they are 1080i).

Having said all that, I think it is possible that K will move to downloadable HD content, not HD "readers." This is just MY opinion and it IS NOT based on any specific information. It just seems logical that they would move in this direction given the structure of their systems. We'll see.

Jim

Josh do you have a link to the thread that contains the screen shots. I opened several threads on topic with no luck. Thanks Josh.

Hi Alan,

Try this: www.kscapeowners.com/forums/showthread.php?t=213

If that doesn't work, the SS are in the 4th thread down in the link Josh provided (KEAOS v3.5...)

Jim

Thanks Jim that worked:)

Forgive my transgression...I have not read this whole thread. I guess two questions, is K going to have the ability to use HDDVD and BD and if it doesn't isn't that something of a death knell ?

Forgive my transgression...I have not read this whole thread. I guess two questions, is K going to have the ability to use HDDVD and BD and if it doesn't isn't that something of a death knell ?

yup... to the death Knell question, at least in my opinion.

Apparently, they are ready to go as soon as managed copy is implemented. HDDVD is closer to implementing that than bluray, as I think I read somewhere that it is a requirement for hddvds to support it when it is finalized.

It would be seriously sad if K could not support hidef disks. The fact is, people ARE buying them, especially the market for which K caters to.

yup... to the death Knell question, at least in my opinion.

Apparently, they are ready to go as soon as managed copy is implemented. HDDVD is closer to implementing that than bluray, as I think I read somewhere that it is a requirement for hddvds to support it when it is finalized.

It would be seriously sad if K could not support hidef disks. The fact is, people ARE buying them, especially the market for which K caters to.

Given the size of a hidef file, they better make the storage cheaper! It would seem that on the basis of increased storage cartridge sales, they would be motivated to make hidef work. That or they know that with the advent of highdef, they will need to lower the storage price... who knows.

I think K understands that the demand for HD content is increasing, the question is which method of delivery makes the most sense going forward. On the one hand you have all of us dual format owners (BR/HD-DVD) with increasing HD libraries (I probably have more than 100 disks at this point) that will obviously need some sort of "reader" to import our collections, and on the other hand you have emerging downloadable content possibilities (which seem to be favored by some studios for obvious reasons).

Clearly, something will be done to allow for HD content storage. K is not a company that touts it's plans in advance. They will make relevant announcements when they are ready to do so, and no amount of pressure from the outside will change that. That should not be read as they have their head in the sand, or just don't care about what we think. They do. It is just a case of K playing by the rules, and remaining compliant with their current contracts while negotiating new contracts. There is no need to announce "dates" for new products and services when some of the process is outside their control.

We have all seen how WE handle companies that announce products and then miss the date, and so has K.:)

Jim

Given the size of a hidef file, they better make the storage cheaper! It would seem that on the basis of increased storage cartridge sales, they would be motivated to make hidef work. That or they know that with the advent of highdef, they will need to lower the storage price... who knows.

Lower prices certainly appeal to us all, but not likely from K.

There are many reasons for the drives being priced as they are. We might not agree with these reasons, but they are K's reasons, not ours. The drives are enterprise category drives, not drives off the shelf at CompUSA. They are monitored 24/7 and quickly replaced during warranty periods, which are longer than over the counter drives. Shipping is included (usually FedEx 2 Day, or faster).

More importantly, K is a company that has created a business model based on quality, not quantity. That has a cost. Their margins are, like every successful company, properly calculated to operate the WHOLE business, including R&D, and support. Companies not properly structured (poorly capitalized, poor margins, etc.) are short lived. (Say goodbye to CompUSA, BTW)

Jim

Lower prices certainly appeal to us all, but not likely from K.

There are many reasons for the drives being priced as they are. We might not agree with these reasons, but they are K's reasons, not ours. The drives are enterprise category drives, not drives off the shelf at CompUSA. They are monitored 24/7 and quickly replaced during warranty periods, which are longer than over the counter drives. Shipping is included (usually FedEx 2 Day, or faster).

More importantly, K is a company that has created a business model based on quality, not quantity. That has a cost. Their margins are, like every successful company, properly calculated to operate the WHOLE business, including R&D, and support. Companies not properly structured (poorly capitalized, poor margins, etc.) are short lived. (Say goodbye to CompUSA, BTW)

Jim
Well, there you go. I had no idea. Well, if there was a reason, then there it is. I didn't knows that it did all that. I have read that K has reduced the cost of storage in the past, just not much.

The big thing about K is that
A. The system does FAR more than most people know. even the owners of the systems. when we would teach dealers about the system, it was two days of "holy crap, i had no idea!"
B. They say what they are going to do and do what they say. they will not tell you about any impending release until it is ready to ship. For various reasons.

And they will never speculate on a feature (no matter how vital) they they do not know how or if they are going to implement it. You can bitch and moan about it... but this is how enterprise companies build things. They may sell a CE product, but they are an enterprise company.

Unfortunately, what most seem to be missing is that K is completely proprietary (thus the hideous expense). As its based on a custom Linux kernel, it is very unlikely that it will EVER be playing HD-DVD or Blu-ray, simply because AACS will never allow it. To date, ONLY Windows has been approved for HD-DVD and Blu-ray playback..and I'm sure the AACS consortium regrets the day they allowed it.....

Other than a fairly slick software package, most of which revolves around making the DRM Nazi's happy, K really isn't that special on the hardware side.
My own home storage solution is significantly better, simply because the storage is down in the garage, and NOT making noise in the media room. And unlike a NAS, with the attendant reliability problems, this appears, and performs as local attached storage.

Solutions like Axonix, based on Vista Media Center (nice custom skin they did there!) are going to steadily eat into K's customer base. Exactly as happened in the computer industry, with the rise of cheap commodity hardware. Because in the end, K made a large investment in R&D, and legal, in order to sell a DMCA approved compliant, legal solution...and the vast majority of people could care less.

What evidence do you have that the K runs Linux? They specifically state in their FAQ that they do not---and cite copy protection concerns as the reason. Even if they customized the Linux kernel that doesn't necessarily mean someone is just going to be able to boot it in single-user mode and go to town.

Besides, AACS runs serious risk of anti-trust lawsuits if they don't provide K with the same access to AACS approval as Windows. If MMC is ever approved and finalized, the K will almost certainly provide a more compelling security argument than Windows.

Unfortunately, what most seem to be missing is that K is completely proprietary (thus the hideous expense). As its based on a custom Linux kernel, it is very unlikely that it will EVER be playing HD-DVD or Blu-ray, simply because AACS will never allow it. To date, ONLY Windows has been approved for HD-DVD and Blu-ray playback..and I'm sure the AACS consortium regrets the day they allowed it.....

Other than a fairly slick software package, most of which revolves around making the DRM Nazi's happy, K really isn't that special on the hardware side.
My own home storage solution is significantly better, simply because the storage is down in the garage, and NOT making noise in the media room. And unlike a NAS, with the attendant reliability problems, this appears, and performs as local attached storage.

Solutions like Axonix, based on Vista Media Center (nice custom skin they did there!) are going to steadily eat into K's customer base. Exactly as happened in the computer industry, with the rise of cheap commodity hardware. Because in the end, K made a large investment in R&D, and legal, in order to sell a DMCA approved compliant, legal solution...and the vast majority of people could care less.

yeah... well, try to explain to someone who has the money for K that a linux/NAS/ solution will be better, and I think they will blow you off and use the K. The only problem with k- and I mean only- is that it does not do hidef And that is what we are discussing here. So congratulations on your criticisms of K, if you actually use it you might realize its awesome UI and admire the "it just works" factor.

My own home storage solution is significantly better, simply because the storage is down in the garage, and NOT making noise in the media room. And unlike a NAS, with the attendant reliability problems, this appears, and performs as local attached storage.

Solutions like Axonix, based on Vista Media Center (nice custom skin they did there!) are going to steadily eat into K's customer base. Exactly as happened in the computer industry, with the rise of cheap commodity hardware. Because in the end, K made a large investment in R&D, and legal, in order to sell a DMCA approved compliant, legal solution...and the vast majority of people could care less.

What are you talking about? The K server can be located whenever you want. Mine is located in a rack on another floor. If you plan your system well (you need a good integrator for this) you only need physical access to only one Movie player (to load content). All the other movie players and the server(s) can be installed centralised on a rack.

I have tried a lot of solutions before I purchased K. Windows MCE, Linux, Buffalo NAS, my own build multi-terabyte servers...Nothing compares to it. The K is a pleasure to use and takes home entertainment to a new level. It makes everything easy. All the other solutions require multiple types of software, constant updates and are almost impossible to be deployed for a STABLE multi-room environment. Also do not tell me that it is easy to maintain a multi terrabyte array at home.

Then keep the kaleidescape and stack the ax system on top of it just for HD, that way you have the best of both worlds.

do not forget that ax playback of HD is for all intents illegal...

K is most definitely not linux. it is a custom os. the CEO has a phd from stanford in conputer science and specializes in OS

All I want to know is how to make a "floating head" avatar like Peter has.

Merry Christmas everyone.

All I want to know is how to make a "floating head" avatar like Peter has.

Merry Christmas everyone.

Anybody here planning on visiting K at CES and badgering them about hd? i know I will...

What's to badger them about? Until MMC is approved by AACS, they are in a holding pattern just like we are.

On the other hand, I have said before that they ought to provide jukebox support. Obviously you can only handle one stream per transport in such a situation, but that would allow for full high-def support within their very attractive GUI. So maybe it's worth nagging them about something like that.

Blu-ray jukeboxes do exist; see here (http://www.blurayjukebox.com/) for example. The top-end model can handle up to 690 discs; and up to 14 drives can be installed for simultaneous access. (Installing multiple transports takes away from disc capacity). Don't know about hd-dvd.

That's an idea- but who makes an hddvd jukebox?

I don't really mean badger them, it's just that last year, they said, "well, our customers don't want it, and they don't have largec ollections of hd material to organize." I woudl have acepted, "we have to wait for managed copy to be approved. Here are the companies ou can pester about that: ..."

I just want them to be a little more direct and specific, that's all.

Seems to me that the Blu-Ray jukeboxes I cited above could be converted to universal jukeboxes now that universal ROM drives are available.

Sony's 200-disc changer (http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=8198552921665231960)

What's to badger them about? Until MMC is approved by AACS, they are in a holding pattern just like we are.

On the other hand, I have said before that they ought to provide jukebox support. Obviously you can only handle one stream per transport in such a situation, but that would allow for full high-def support within their very attractive GUI. So maybe it's worth nagging them about something like that.

Blu-ray jukeboxes do exist; see here (http://www.blurayjukebox.com/) for example. The top-end model can handle up to 690 discs; and up to 14 drives can be installed for simultaneous access. (Installing multiple transports takes away from disc capacity). Don't know about hd-dvd.

Michael - That looks like a very interesting option. Sure it's expensive and it obviously doesn't have the capabilities of a HD based system, but in theory it would allow multi-room access to HD movies. Seems like it would be worthwhile for Kaleidescape to investigate, unless they feel that managed copy or HD downloads will be here faster than they could implement a change system.

Still this seems like a great stopgap while DRM gets sorted out and on second thought, just wonder how much more expensive this changer would be than 25TB in HD space based on Kaleidescape's prices for servers and HD's.

http://www.asaca.com/products/images/bdfamily_lg.jpg

The Asaca Shibasoku Teracart (http://www.asaca.com/products/bd.htm) is probably the finest option.

the issue with developing stopgap solutions is how much R and D/money goes into a stop gap. and how much additional business it gets you.

I K's case, i would guess the math does not work out.

With storage hovering at around $.20/GB right now, I'm curious what K charges for their drives..which are..after all, standard off the shelf SATA drives. Now, if these were truly enterprise drives (ie..SAS, or Fibre), then I could understand it.

I don't deny the K software is pretty sweet...I just don't like paying inflated hardware prices for closed, proprietary systems, which is why I will also never own a Mac.

they are enterprise level drives. they also continuously scrub and monitor them. they are most definitely not the type of drives you get at best buy. and they build an enclosure around them, and if one over goes, they proactively overnight one to you at their expense.

With storage hovering at around $.20/GB right now, I'm curious what K charges for their drives..which are..after all, standard off the shelf SATA drives. Now, if these were truly enterprise drives (ie..SAS, or Fibre), then I could understand it.

I don't deny the K software is pretty sweet...I just don't like paying inflated hardware prices for closed, proprietary systems, which is why I will also never own a Mac.

Although Diz has already answered this (pointing out the drives are NOT "off the shelf" drives), here's an example of what you are paying for:

The customer leaves on a Thursday on a weekend trip. His K Server reports a drive issue on Friday. He returns Monday and finds his K system is shutdown. Simultaneously, his dealer is receiving an email about a drive issue in that system. The dealer contacts the client to discuss the issue and while they are speaking on the phone FedEx shows up at the door to deliver a new drive from K. Total elapsed time from problem detection to new disk delivery to client, 3 days. No charge to the client.

This was a 5U System, the newer 3U Systems have a hot swap capability built in (and they still ship a new drive).

It should also be noted that this is only one of two disk failures I'm aware of, and the other was handled in a similar manner.

Jim