If microsoft theoretically ever released an XBOX with an HDMI port (note I am not asking you to comment on the likelyhood of this happening), would there be anything preventing them from outputting lossless audio right away?

Erik


Wort a try :D

Clever man, clever :).

If the Xbox 360 actually output WMA Pro like the non functioning menu selection infers would the quallity of the converted DD variants offer a higher audio quality than that of the current DD conversion?

Many many moons ago, one of the highlighted features of hi-def disc was the ability to store a copy of the movie. I even remember Bill Gates demonstrating this feature at last year’s CES with Bourne Identity.

- I am sure there are people working hard on this feature but where does this feature stand now?
- With downloading hi-def movies via xbox and I am assuming PS3 and iTV(?) have the studios cooled to this idea?

I am anxious for this feature and I ‘WAS’ leaning more towards HD-DVD because I thought this feature was going to be mandatory and it was going to be ready (bill gate demonstrating this at CES 2006 with vista) but if this feature stays in meetings then I might as well stay on the sidelines

This is first I'd heard about this issue, and is the first time I've heard of any kind of forward compatibility in a published disc.

Perhaps it's related to this coding bug that came up on our forums?

http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=1017546&SiteID=1

That particular bug worked on 1.3, but doesn't in 2.0. But it's not something we'd see in a published disc.

But yes, can you tell me who the publisher is? We can contact them about getting that fixed in their future releases.

The publisher is Digital Sin, 21345 Lassen St., Chatsworth CA 91311; the title is HD Sampler.

I have no idea whether it has AACS on it.

Well, no one is actually delivering a HD DVD-equivelent player (BD-Live) player at all yet is good evidence to me :).

HD DVD's ability to offer greater functionality with simpler implementation means that a PC-based approach can work. Obviously SoC is a long term trend for both platforms, but HD DVD can deliver cost-effectively without SoC.

Everything from Toshiba has been PC based so far, so obviously HDi has to work on a PC platform. Is HDi available for the SoC platforms yet ?? I doubt that the new LG player is going to be PC based so HDi is "must have" for SoC "universal" players..

b2b

I author on both formats and it's not so much the tools as it is the complexity of the code. It takes more time to create and debug BD-J then HDi code by far. Also, the spec itself hinders quick changes to the code, making the process even more time consuming. And I'm not even referring to complex operations.But this is a side-effect of the fact that you are, I presume, writing pure Java code, not using a higher-level tool which aggregates some of the lower-level functions into a higher-level HDi-like scripting language. There are multiple efforts underway to build this sort of tool for exactly the reasons you describe - for many types of content, authoring BD-J content as straight Java code is not particularly efficient. Upon availability of these tools you may well become far more productive.

My point has been that for certain types of content the ability to use low-level API's from Java code will be critical. It will also facilitate a wider range of authoring tools. We're just not there yet, and the result is it takes you longer to developer BD-J content, as it does the others. The situation will improve, and I'm confident ultimately BD-J will support far more compelling content than HDi.

- Talk

Do you think if the LGF people would read this kind of comment from one of the key proponent of the certain format, would they feel comfortable with it and be eager to jump in the same boat because their choice was painful?

Rio / any other insiders,

On this note do you think there was any contractual obligation why LG couldn't do universal players in 2006, but they can do now ?

On this note was there any contractual obligation why LG couldn't do universal players in 2006, but they can do that now ?You can access the format licenses yourself at the Blu-ray licensing site (http://www.blu-raydisc.info). If there were any prohibitions against dual-format players do you not think someone would have made that public by now?

If I wanted to move the PiP to unused areas of the frame as the movie progressed or under user control, then what?As I've said, this is one way of doing it. You sacrifice flexibility, no question. In this case it's up to the movie's producers to determine where the PiP window is most appropriately placed.
Talk says they have 50 gigabytes so what the heck... So I guess this rules out having PiP in any BD-25.No, Amir, as you undoubtedly understand, yet are trying to play this up for effect, this method of PiP would be unlikely to be suitable for a BD-25 disc. In which case you have a full suite of secondary audio/video API's available to create PiP content which will, upon release, undoubtedly work splendidly on the great majority of Blu-ray players and all of those released after June, 2007.
Add this to wasted space by PCM and use of MPEG-2 and what do you have left?Was The Descent MPEG-2? No, it was AVC. What's your point?
Anyway, much appreciation to Talk for helping clear out how "PiP" is done in BD. Useful info for a guy about to go to CES.Yes, I'm sure the audience will be very impressed with your grasp of the competition when you suggest this will be the standard method (or the only method) for producing PiP content on Blu-ray.

I'm surprised you would take a shot at a creative team which worked through existing player constraints to produce an innovative end-user experience, one which clearly few end-users realized was delivered using, as you suggest, such a ridiculous method. If consumers love the movie, love the A/V quality, love the bonus content, and have no idea it didn't actually use secondary video (if they even have any clue as to what secondary video is), where is a single negative impact to the creative team's choice of authoring approach?

But this is a side-effect of the fact that you are, I presume, writing pure Java code, not using a higher-level tool which aggregates some of the lower-level functions into a higher-level HDi-like scripting language. There are multiple efforts underway to build this sort of tool for exactly the reasons you describe - for many types of content, authoring BD-J content as straight Java code is not particularly efficient. Upon availability of these tools you may well become far more productive.

My point has been that for certain types of content the ability to use low-level API's from Java code will be critical. It will also facilitate a wider range of authoring tools. We're just not there yet, and the result is it takes you longer to developer BD-J content, as it does the others. The situation will improve, and I'm confident ultimately BD-J will support far more compelling content than HDi.

- Talk Talk,

...in all seriousness...

This is one of the best posts you have had in the recent past.

In this short post, you have just enlightened me into what you have been working on for the past year or more and it gives me some insight into while you not only support Blu-ray you believe in its potential. I understand a bit more about you now, and that is helpful.

When you post from your heart, it really shows.

Glad you are here. :)


Can you give an scenario where Blu-ray's interactive features using those advanced coding techniques could do something HD DVD would find it difficult to do?

You can access the format licenses yourself at the Blu-ray licensing site (http://www.blu-raydisc.info). If there were any prohibitions against dual-format players do you not think someone would have made that public by now?

Thanks for the link. There can be side contracts apart from the general BD license.

Anyhow, I've not yet heard a convincing reason why 2 or three universal announcements were quickly and unceremoniously withdrawn last year by BD supporting companies.

Why did LG announce a universal player last year, only to withdraw hastily .... and then come back this ear and make essentially the same announcement ?

Was The Descent MPEG-2? No, it was AVC. What's your point?
My point was a general one. That BDA talks about capacity being important, yet, it is wasteful in how it uses, whether it comes to audio, video or now, interactivity.

I'm surprised you would take a shot at a creative team which worked through existing player constraints to produce an innovative end-user experience, one which clearly few end-users realized was delivered using, as you suggest, such a ridiculous method.
You are not half serious with this comment, are you? I am talking shots at the BDA for being so smart, as to leave out such obvious feature that its competitor had with them having full knowledge of it, having participated in DVD Forum and voted for same. Seeing how they now make their content owners do back flips to get to the same functionality, shows how much BDA misjudged the target application for these HD formats.

And if BDA companies who overruled the content companies made their “creative team” suffer through all of this without helping them, then double shame on them. But something tells me this was not the case.

I mean really. I sat across Disney and Warner where the made impassionate pleas for this functionality in front of Sony, MEI, Philips, , etc. in DVD Forum until they got approved. How did these companies walk out, go into BDA meeting the following week and roll their eyes when those studios asked for the same thing?

If consumers love the movie, love the A/V quality, love the bonus content, and have no idea it didn't actually use secondary video (if they even have any clue as to what secondary video is), where is a single negative impact to the creative team's choice of authoring approach?
The negative impact is that instead of working on creative aspects of the project, someone had to sit there and encode the video again. And if the result was not that great, they had to live with it. With HDi, they could quickly change the script, the volume level, the time and place of PiP, do test audiences, etc. until they liked the results – all in less time than it takes to encode the movie again. You are right, maybe the customer doesn’t know they got cheated out of a better experience. But this is AV Science as my “D” friend likes to say. So here, we get to beat you senseless over kludges like this. :D

Amir,

As an Apple user, I was wondering if VC-1 discs (regardless of the format) are going to be supported on this platform, considering the fact that Microsoft has been less than brilliant in providing the latest Windows Media codecs and DRMs for the Mac.

And in the case of HD DVDs, can HDi be read at all on Mac OS X?

Please do not even mention the dual-boot/virtualization options for installing Windows on my Macs ;-)

Amir,

As an Apple user, I was wondering if VC-1 discs (regardless of the format) are going to be supported on this platform, considering the fact that Microsoft has been less than brilliant in providing the latest Windows Media codecs and DRMs for the Mac.
Well, the situation is pretty simple now that Apple machines are based on X86 as the same highly optimized ports can be used that we have. Of course, we also have the PowerPC version for the 360. So VC-1 is not an issue at all.

You should note that there is a big difference between us providing a full blown player (i.e. the case you are talking about) and us providing component technology for someone else who has the know-how to build Mac applications for a living. In case of Apple building the overall player or someone else with experience with DVD playback on the Mac, the situation would be much better than it was for us fending for ourself.
And in the case of HD DVDs, can HDi be read at all on Mac OS X?
Our HDi code is highly portable and since PCs/Macs are pretty fast compared to embedded products, getting it running there is not a big deal. The bigger issue is someone building a secure implementation of the player on the Mac. This is the thing that always held us back. Without Apple's cooperation, it is very difficult to build a secure DRM implementation there. But I expect third-parties to get there, should there be enough demand on that platform for HD optical playback.

Please do not even mention the dual-boot/virtualization options for installing Windows on my Mac ;-)
I won’t :). But come to think of it, that might work too. Just kidding. :D

paidgeek (if you are still around):

i noticed this morning after downloading a number of hd trailers onto the ps3 that the trailers were encoded using avc...

1) sony has stated that they will use avc when it is ready; it seems ready, doesn't it? why isn't sony using it for their bd releases?

2)why were some encoded as both 720p and 1080p? (i downloaded the 1080 of course)

We are using AVC for some titles now as mentioned in other posts. "Open Season" will be the first to street from us, more to follow.

Well, the situation is pretty simple now that Apple machines are based on X86 as the same highly optimized ports can be used that we have. Of course, we also have the PowerPC version for the 360. So VC-1 is not an issue at all.

You should note that there is a big difference between us providing a full blown player (i.e. the case you are talking about) and us providing component technology for someone else who has the know-how to build Mac applications for a living. In case of Apple building the overall player or someone else with experience with DVD playback on the Mac, the situation would be much better than it was for us fending for ourself.

Our HDi code is highly portable and since PCs/Macs are pretty fast compared to embedded products, getting it running there is not a big deal. The bigger issue is someone building a secure implementation of the player on the Mac. This is the thing that always held us back. Without Apple's cooperation, it is very difficult to build a secure DRM implementation there. But I expect third-parties to get there, should there be enough demand on that platform for HD optical playback.


I won’t :). But come to think of it, that might work too. Just kidding. :D

Speaking of portable. Is HDi available for the SoC platforms yet ??

b2b

We are using AVC for some titles now as mentioned in other posts. "Open Season" will be the first to street from us, more to follow.

Such as Lawrence?!

;)

We are using AVC for some titles now as mentioned in other posts. "Open Season" will be the first to street from us, more to follow.Any chance you'll make the transition to 20-bit or 24-bit LPCM with these new AVC titles? Or will 16-bit LPCM remain the norm for the forseeable future? Thus far, we have four >16/48 LPCM titles from Buena Vista and none from anyone else.

If and when you can confirm your first release with 20/24-bit LPCM, please post it here.

Do you think if the LGF people would read this kind of comment from one of the key proponent of the certain format, would they feel comfortable with it and be eager to jump in the same boat because their choice was painful?
The pain of targeting PIP with BD content isn't going to be news to anyone looking at doing it.

A lot of production people have been getting a lot of hands-on exposure to the difficulties of making advanced content for BD - they don't need to hear it from me :).

We are using AVC for some titles now as mentioned in other posts. "Open Season" will be the first to street from us, more to follow.Not that codecs matter to me anymore, still, this is great news!

So, "foreseeable future"* has materialized as about 8-months! Not bad! :) Keep up the good work!

Yes, a question: Have you worked on any kind of advanced interactivity so far? Especially regarding PiP: Does Sony plan on using single stream PiP? Or will you wait for full BD-Video 1.1 to become available in players and utilize advanced interactivity instead?


* As in: "Sony will use MPEG2 for the foreseeable future ... until advanced codecs mature..."

Speaking of portable. Is HDi available for the SoC platforms yet ??

b2b
No, it requires have a dozen Cell CPUs to run ;).

Yes, I'm sure the audience will be very impressed with your grasp of the competition when you suggest this will be the standard method (or the only method) for producing PiP content on Blu-ray.
Well, it's hard to say what the standard method is going to be, unless the plan is to just abandon advanced interactivity for early adoptors.

I can understand why BD companies felt they had to ship a partial version of the technology instead of waiting for BD-Live to be feasible, but the existence of pre BD-Live players is going to put off for many years the time where discs can be authored assuming those capabilities are available

I'm surprised you would take a shot at a creative team which worked through existing player constraints to produce an innovative end-user experience, one which clearly few end-users realized was delivered using, as you suggest, such a ridiculous method. If consumers love the movie, love the A/V quality, love the bonus content, and have no idea it didn't actually use secondary video (if they even have any clue as to what secondary video is), where is a single negative impact to the creative team's choice of authoring approach?
I'm personally very impressed with what the creative team pulled off with this, although I hurt for them for what they had to go through due to the limitations of BD. I've still got the brain scars from trying to shoehorn cool interactive video experiences into Director throughot the 90's, and I can only imagine how many dinners at home were missed in order to deliver PIP without hardware PIP support.

I"m glad we've got something a lot better and simpler for them for when they're doing HD DVD.

The publisher is Digital Sin, 21345 Lassen St., Chatsworth CA 91311; the title is HD Sampler.

I have no idea whether it has AACS on it.
Thanks. I'll have someone follow up with them.

Never underestimate the power of AVS :).

As an Apple user, I was wondering if VC-1 discs (regardless of the format) are going to be supported on this platform, considering the fact that Microsoft has been less than brilliant in providing the latest Windows Media codecs and DRMs for the Mac.

Following up on Amir's comments, I should mention that Apple and any other vendor has a lot of different options for how to get VC-1.

First, we offer under published terms access to x86 optimized decode (and encode as well) C++ source code for VC-1.

Second, VC-1 is a SMPTE standard, so any SMPTE member can get access to the full documentation for the codec, including source code for a reference decoder.

So, while there's a lot we can do to help anyone implementing VC-1, a compnay is also fully able to do their own implementation without even letting us know about it.

From a licensing and implementation perspective, VC-1 is very similar to MPEG-2 and H.264 in this regard.

Well, the situation is pretty simple now that Apple machines are based on X86 as the same highly optimized ports can be used that we have. Of course, we also have the PowerPC version for the 360. So VC-1 is not an issue at all.

You should note that there is a big difference between us providing a full blown player (i.e. the case you are talking about) and us providing component technology for someone else who has the know-how to build Mac applications for a living. In case of Apple building the overall player or someone else with experience with DVD playback on the Mac, the situation would be much better than it was for us fending for ourself.

Our HDi code is highly portable and since PCs/Macs are pretty fast compared to embedded products, getting it running there is not a big deal. The bigger issue is someone building a secure implementation of the player on the Mac. This is the thing that always held us back. Without Apple's cooperation, it is very difficult to build a secure DRM implementation there. But I expect third-parties to get there, should there be enough demand on that platform for HD optical playback.
Yes, I wouldn't have expected VC-1 to be an issue, considering they'll need that for their Blu-ray implementation anyway.

My question though is how much overlap is there between the Blu-ray implementation of DRM and the HD DVD implementation? If there is significant overlap, would it not make sense to simply develop these in parallel (with HDi thrown into the mix)?

That said, I suppose it could be a problem considering that Apple's political stance is more in favour of BD at the moment and they could choose to implement only BD themselves initially and leave HD implementations to third parties (despite the fact that Apple's DVD Player.app already partially supports HD DVD).

That BDA talks about capacity being important, yet, it is wasteful in how it uses, whether it comes to audio, video or now, interactivity.How is it wasteful to actually use the capacity?!? You've got 50GB. Sure, doing PiP with a secondary video decoder would require less space than doing it with a second encode of the movie. So is it better to use 5GB for the PiP and leave 20GB empty? That would be wasteful. The title already has 6.1 audio and plenty of other bonus features, it's not like there's clear indication that something was sacrificed due to the extra space occupied by the second encode.
The negative impact is that instead of working on creative aspects of the project, someone had to sit there and encode the video again. And if the result was not that great, they had to live with it.Yet by all accounts the result was great, and in the process I'm sure Lions Gate's creative team came up with a bunch of new ideas for the future. Sure, I'd prefer that PiP had been mandatory on all Blu-ray players from the start (along with a network connection). But it's really not that big a deal that it isn't, given that more than 95% of the Blu-ray players in the market today (the PS3) are capable of PiP and network connectivity (a number which will only rise), and that even with PiP support optional Blu-ray technology is sufficiently powerful to provide another mechanism for achieving a fundamentally comparable result.

Your response here (and in the past) also suggests that PiP is the end-all and be-all of advanced interactivity, which I think greatly overstates its importance. But I recognize that you have precious few capabilities left to seize on where HD-DVD has an advantage over Blu-ray, so I understand why you're beating this into the ground. :D

I can understand why BD companies felt they had to ship a partial version of the technology instead of waiting for BD-Live to be feasible, but the existence of pre BD-Live players is going to put off for many years the time where discs can be authored assuming those capabilities are availableI disagree. Based on current estimates, 95% of the existing installed base is likely BD-Live capable. Later this year that number will probably be 98% or more. I don't see 2-5% of the installed base not being able to make use of a given feature as a major impediment for the studios.

Question for the Blue Ray insiders:
Have a look at the jpegs here, please:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=781777
Is this kind of blocking like that on the Pearl Harbor disk? If yes, is it considered acceptable and consistent with high quality and beyond HD slogans to deliver such blocking on 50GB (!) disks?

I have a 52" Sony XBR3 TV, which accepts 1080p over HDMI, VGA and component (the component 1080p is something new in the 52" and doesn't exist in the 46").

The 360 VGA cable properly send 1080p to the TV for both games and movies, however, I also have a PC and want to use the VGA for that. I can't find any VGA switch or the like that won't degrade my signal. Suggestions?

Therefore, I was trying to use the component for 1080p input. Everything I have read says that the 360 will upscale games to 1080p over component, but HD DVD movies will only be output at 1080i due to the copy protection issues.

BUT, Microsoft tech support has told me that they can play HD DVD movies at 1080p over component to a Toshiba 1080p TV. I have a 52" Sony XBR3, which accepts 1080p over component, but MS says it doesn't work to my TV. This disagrees with the copy protection of the AACS that I thought MS said would only allow HD DVD movies at 1080i over component. Perhaps the tech was wrong, but she said she was certain of it. Want my reference # ?


Also, I know you can't comment on unannounced things, but is it technically possible for the existing XBOX to have an HDMI cable over the AV port? I have read posts where people have said that the hardware simply won't allow it. Hopefully you can answer this type of question.

Thanks.

Talk, your announcements above that given that more than 95% of the Blu-ray players in the market today (the PS3) are capable of PiP and network connectivity obviously refer to the volume of PS3s to standalone Blu-ray players which currently can't support that level of Blu-ray performance.

Why would any sensible person now buy a Blu-ray player now that doesn't have those features, at those price points? Isn't that kinda throwing the early adopters under the bus?

Seriously, the lack of those features in the first generation standalone players is the major factor that has stopped me from investing in Blu-ray, because I have no intention of spending a ton of money on a soon to be obsolete player, ie one that will not have those features the PS3 has.

Is there any standalone player now that is available that has those advanced features that I can buy right now?

Qestion for anyone representing BD studios: Won't there be a tendency to avoid using PIP in the future if it is known first gen standalone players won't support it properly?

- Tom

I disagree. Based on current estimates, 95% of the existing installed base is likely BD-Live capable. Later this year that number will probably be 98% or more. I don't see 2-5% of the installed base not being able to make use of a given feature as a major impediment for the studios.


Talk, please clarify that here you really are only saying, and i think it may be speculation, is that the ps3 is BD-Live capable b/c you believe that it represents 95% of existing installed base...you really weren't speaking at all about the standalone players, correct?

RE: Adoption of BD features not currently supported by some first gen hardware...

I disagree. Based on current estimates, 95% of the existing installed base is likely BD-Live capable.

What Mr. Sun's comments indicate here, and this is me paraphrasing, is that the content providers will have no compunction about leaving the 50,000 or so people (or however many it turns out being) that spent as much as $1000 to $1500 holding the bag when they decide to start using features of the Blu-ray format that were not included in most first gen standalone players. Did I get that right, sir?

How long before we start to see "Enhanced for Playstation 3" on Blu-Ray films?

As I've said, this is one way of doing it. You sacrifice flexibility, no question. In this case it's up to the movie's producers to determine where the PiP window is most appropriately placed.
No, Amir, as you undoubtedly understand, yet are trying to play this up for effect, this method of PiP would be unlikely to be suitable for a BD-25 disc. In which case you have a full suite of secondary audio/video API's available to create PiP content which will, upon release, undoubtedly work splendidly on the great majority of Blu-ray players and all of those released after June, 2007.
Was The Descent MPEG-2? No, it was AVC. What's your point?
Yes, I'm sure the audience will be very impressed with your grasp of the competition when you suggest this will be the standard method (or the only method) for producing PiP content on Blu-ray.

I'm surprised you would take a shot at a creative team which worked through existing player constraints to produce an innovative end-user experience, one which clearly few end-users realized was delivered using, as you suggest, such a ridiculous method. If consumers love the movie, love the A/V quality, love the bonus content, and have no idea it didn't actually use secondary video (if they even have any clue as to what secondary video is), where is a single negative impact to the creative team's choice of authoring approach?(emphasis mine)

Talk, would you consider intorducing a "feature" that makes it appear that a person's deck can support PiP, only to find that future PiP do NOT work on their deck a negative from that end-user perspective?

What Mr. Sun's comments indicate here, and this is me paraphrasing, is that the content providers will have no compunction about leaving the 50,000 or so people (or however many it turns out being) that spent as much as $1000 to $1500 holding the bag when they decide to start using features of the Blu-ray format that were not included in most first gen standalone players. Did I get that right, sir?
Forgive me for being dense, but just to make this clear to me... Which specific features again do current standalone Blu-ray players not support?

As for picture-in-picture, etc. which standalone BD players will be able to support it after firmware updates?

Forgive me for being dense, but just to make this clear to me... Which specific features again do current standalone Blu-ray players not support?

As for picture-in-picture, etc. which standalone BD players will be able to support it after firmware updates?

A related question: will current BD players be able to play discs that have certain features that require capabilities those current players do not have, and simply not be able to pick up those features, or will those discs be completely unplayable on current players?

Forgive me for being dense, but just to make this clear to me... Which specific features again do current standalone Blu-ray players not support?
The specific list is as follows:

1. The amount of permanent storage in the player so things like bookmarks, interactivity state (e.g. your name, game score, etc.), downloaded subtitles and such can be stored. Needless to say, no firmware fix can add such hardware to your machine.

2. Hardware decode support for two streams of video: one for main movie, and another for the secondary video. Products using the decoder in the Samsung for example, can not handle an HD stream and SD stream decode. The Toshiba which uses the same decoder decodes the secondary stream using its powerful X86 CPU for this task. That CPU horsepower is missing from equiv. BD players. It is not possible to add such functionality via software unless the hardware is already there.

3. TrueHD and or DTS lossless support. BD doesn't mandate any so it is totally up to the player manufacturer to do so or not. If the computational horsepower is there (again, the Toshiba did with its multiple DSPs) then this can be a firmware update, assuming there is an optimized implementation is available for the underlying instruction set.

4. Networking. Most stand-alone players do not have the hardware connection so there is no way to add such a functionality via software. Even with the connection, this is a very complex subsystem and making it compliant with BD-Live may be beyond the means of some companies. The box may also lack sufficient memory to handle the extra code and buffering needed for networking.

No,

it requires have a dozen Cell CPUs to run ;).

Now that is interesting. No HDi support for SoC players. (I separated the answer from the "CELL" joke)

So when is MS planning to provide SoC HDi support ?? HD-DVD can't go on much longer with only Tosh PC based players..

b2b

Now that is interesting. No HDi support for SoC players. (I separated the answer from the "CELL" joke)

So when is MS planning to provide SoC HDi support ?? HD-DVD can't go on much longer with only Tosh PC based players..

b2b
Bones, if you are just interested in making political side comments disguised in the form of a question, then you are just going to get a sarcastic answer. If you genuinely want to know something, please come and ask it first, before declaring your information as fact in other threads.

Anyway, I am not going to disclose our plans or that of other companies in developing future HD DVD products. But I suggest that you look at the current products in the market for your engineering answer. I am very proud of the great engineering decisions that allowed us to get to get to market first and allowed us to ship the second gen in the same time it took others to ship their first gen. And of course, hit price points that others cannot achieve. There is a lot more to engineering a retail product than minimizing the chip count. And I say this as a hardware engineer who has shipped a lot of hardware products in my day.

And another note. Please don't underestimate our expertise in this area. After all, HDi is software and we are software company, and in my group, one with tremendous expertise in optimizing the same for many embedded platforms.

Bones, if you are just interested in making political side comments disguised in the form of a question, then you are just going to get a sarcastic answer. If you genuinely want to know something, please come and ask it first, before declaring your information as fact in other threads.

Anyway, I am not going to disclose our plans or that of other companies in developing future HD DVD products. But I suggest that you look at the current products in the market for your engineering answer. I am very proud of the great engineering decisions that allowed us to get to get to market first and allowed us to ship the second gen in the same time it took others to ship their first gen. And of course, hit price points that others cannot achieve. There is a lot more to engineering a retail product than minimizing the chip count. And I say this as a hardware engineer who has shipped a lot of hardware products in my day.

And another note. Please don't underestimate our expertise in this area. After all, HDi is software and we are software company, and in my group, one with tremendous expertise in optimizing the same for many embedded platforms.

I didn't mean to offend you... :) A simple "yes" or "no" or "we are working on it and it will be here when it is needed" answer is all that I was asking. I have no doubts as to MSs skill in getting it done, I was only wondering if it was "done".

b2b

Well, here's a question to any insider that can provide an answer:

What's BDs video bitrate allowance for PiP? And if that can't be answered, then a lesser question - does it match HD DVDs?

I disagree. Based on current estimates, 95% of the existing installed base is likely BD-Live capable. Later this year that number will probably be 98% or more. I don't see 2-5% of the installed base not being able to make use of a given feature as a major impediment for the studios.
But 0% of the installed base is confirmed as being BD-Live compatible.

And you're assuming that a PS3=CE player for the studios. We can argue about attach ratios, but clearly each CE player is worth some number of PS3 players from a publisher's standbpoint.

Well, here's a question to any insider that can provide an answer:

What's BDs video bitrate allowance for PiP? And if that can't be answered, then a lesser question - does it match HD DVDs?
Spec mandates support for much higher rates, which is complex to implement, which is why it isn't implemented.

HD DVD mandates a reasonable standard for PIP *for* picture-in-picture use, which is easier to implement, allowing us to make it mandatory.

The technology you can deliver is better than the technology you can't, no matter how compelling the spec is on paper :).

Spec mandates support for much higher rates, which is complex to implement, which is why it isn't implemented.

HD DVD mandates a reasonable standard for PIP *for* picture-in-picture use, which is easier to implement, allowing us to make it mandatory.

The technology you can deliver is better than the technology you can't, no matter how compelling the spec is on paper :).

Thanks Ben for your forthright answer; appreciated. :)

To any HD DVD insider,

I'm looking an HD DVD fan site kit or a press kit with the HD DVD logo, box shots, case color schemes etc.

Do any of you know the location of such a thing?

I hoping to start an HD DVD community site with reviews and information.

Thanks.

No, it requires have a dozen Cell CPUs to run ;).Why is the answer currently "no"?

To any HD DVD insider,

I'm looking an HD DVD fan site kit or a press kit with the HD DVD logo, box shots, case color schemes etc.

Do any of you know the location of such a thing?

I hoping to start an HD DVD community site with reviews and information.

Thanks.
Thanks for your interest. I don't have the answere but I am trying to find out.

Why is the answer currently "no"?
Nihon-go wa wakarimashita?

Why would any sensible person now buy a Blu-ray player now that doesn't have those features, at those price points? Isn't that kinda throwing the early adopters under the bus?I've said before, anyone for whom secondary video or BD-Live support (network connectivity) is an important feature should either wait for release of a player claiming full support (or for Sony to announce PS3 compatibility) or should be prepared to trade up their current machine to a model which does. Many here say "just give me the picture" and appear not to care about interactivity; many others appear eager to trade up to the latest equipment. Anyone not in those two categories should follow my previous advice.
Is there any standalone player now that is available that has those advanced features that I can buy right now?Nope, though that may change later this week pending CES announcements. I fully expect the PS3 will be fully BD-Live compatible (and ought be considered a standalone, as you can just stick in a Blu-ray disc and it plays), but there's always a possibility I'm wrong.

Talk, please clarify that here you really are only saying, and i think it may be speculation, is that the ps3 is BD-Live capable b/c you believe that it represents 95% of existing installed base...you really weren't speaking at all about the standalone players, correct?I fully expect the PS3 to be BD-Live capable (yes, I estimate it at >95% of the installed base with over a million units sold). I consider the PS3 as a standalone player, as it's a single unit, plays Blu-ray automatically when you insert the disc, supports a dedicated remote control, and in general functions very, very well as one. There are clearly people purchasing it for that purpose.

What Talk's comments indicate here, and this is me paraphrasing, is that the content providers will have no compunction about leaving the 50,000 or so people (or however many it turns out being) that spent as much as $1000 to $1500 holding the bag when they decide to start using features of the Blu-ray format that were not included in most first gen standalone players. Did I get that right, sir?Correct. It didn't hold back studios from using DVD authoring features which didn't work on 1G players; it won't hold back studios supporting either format from supporting networked content even though a significant percentage of homes won't have network connected players, and it won't stop them from authoring content requiring secondary video, local storage, or network connectivity on Blu-ray. If they were never going to use a feature not available on every player why would they even have bothered specifying optional API's?

Thanks for your interest. I don't have the answere but I am trying to find out.

Thanks, I look forward to your response. I guess I just spoiled with all the fan site kits that the 360 games get.

Correct. It didn't hold back studios from using DVD authoring features which didn't work on 1G players; it won't hold back studios supporting either format from supporting networked content even though a significant percentage of homes won't have network connected players, and it won't stop them from authoring content requiring secondary video, local storage, or network connectivity on Blu-ray. If they were never going to use a feature not available on every player why would they even have bothered specifying optional API's?
Then what explains the relucatance of Sony to go there? Don Eklund and paidgeek both have confirmed that they are waiting "for the dust to settle." We also know Warner does not want to target a, well, a moving target and is leaving interactivity behind when porting a title from HD DVD.

As to optional APIs, well, that was their mistake with these features. Now wasn't it? :) You can't use something that has caused grief already, as a positive thing in the future...

How about a change of direction.....

Amir, Ben,

We've been discussing the trailers from thelookandsoundofperfect.com in the HTPC forum and I've got a couple questions for you (either of you).

Are these using Main Profile or Advanced Profile? It appears they report wmv3 (ie Main Profile).
How are they encoded? They're only 8Mbps for 1080p, and look very good.

Then what explains the relucatance of Sony to go there? Don Eklund and paidgeek both have confirmed that they are waiting "for the dust to settle."How do you get from "waiting for the dust to settle" to "will only support features available on all players"? Waiting for the dust to settle, to me, implies waiting for upcoming players to be released (especially the PS3, given its market importance), allowing existing players to mature via firmware updates, and establishing a productive workflow with regards to tools and creative staff. You're well aware of the varied dynamics with regards to how studios treat bonus content. In studio discussions I've been told things ranging from "we want to push the limits of what BD-J can support and stay ahead of all other studios in both formats" to "we want to provide the exact same experience on both formats regardless of whether one can do more than the other". Very different viewpoints.
We also know Warner does not want to target a, well, a moving target and is leaving interactivity behind when porting a title from HD DVD.I won't mention specific studios to avoid running afoul of NDA's, but suffice it to say that not once in my many studio discussions have I been told that any studio intends to ignore features which aren't present on every BD player.

Amir, as you have said to me, may I ask you to stick to your area of competence?Which specific features again do current standalone Blu-ray players not support?
The amount of permanent storage in the player so things like bookmarks, interactivity state (e.g. your name, game score, etc.), downloaded subtitles and such can be stored.This is incorrect. Blu-ray has two storage mechanisms - persistent storage, for things like bookmarks, and local storage, for disc updates, downloaded trailers and other A/V, etc. Only the presence or quantity of local storage varies between profiles. All Blu-ray players must support persistent storage.

What's BDs video bitrate allowance for PiP? And if that can't be answered, then a lesser question - does it match HD DVDs?As I recall, the BD spec requires secondary video to support the same bitrates as primary (though the combined bitrates can't exceed Blu-ray's maximum supported bandwidth). HD-DVD has much lower bitrate requirements, though there is a seldom-discussed optional feature which I don't believe is supported on any current HD-DVD players which allows for higher-bitrate secondary video.

Correct. It didn't hold back studios from using DVD authoring features which didn't work on 1G players; it won't hold back studios supporting either format from supporting networked content even though a significant percentage of homes won't have network connected players, and it won't stop them from authoring content requiring secondary video, local storage, or network connectivity on Blu-ray. If they were never going to use a feature not available on every player why would they even have bothered specifying optional API's?
I can see the BD-Live features becoming kind of like DTS on DVD. Something that gets used in some high profile titles, but not in most, since many customers won't be able to experience it.

And like DTS, something that uses up capacity and content creation budgets for all customers, even though many won't be able to experience it.

As I recall, the BD spec requires secondary video to support the same bitrates as primary (though the combined bitrates can't exceed Blu-ray's maximum supported bandwidth). HD-DVD has much lower bitrate requirements, though there is a seldom-discussed optional feature which I don't believe is supported on any current HD-DVD players which allows for higher-bitrate secondary video.

Ok cool, thanks for the additional insights Talk!

As I recall, the BD spec requires secondary video to support the same bitrates as primary (though the combined bitrates can't exceed Blu-ray's maximum supported bandwidth).
Ah, thanks for mentioning that. Thus, I can now mention the "The Descent" approach will have the effect of cutting PBR for the title nearly in half, since both streams go at the same time. And statmux won't be of singificant help there, since the two video streams are essentially the same complexity.

Again reminiscent of my 90's Director work, the Descent PIP solution is both a remarkably clever solution, and a brutally compromised hack. Again, hats off to those who pulled it off given all the constraints. I can't wait to see what they'll be able to do with HD DVD :).

... HD-DVD has much lower bitrate requirements, though there is a seldom-discussed optional feature which I don't believe is supported on any current HD-DVD players which allows for higher-bitrate secondary video.

Can any insiders comment on what this is? Perhaps the feature Amir has referred to that allows additional comment streamed from the nework?

Can anybody confirm if it is indeed supported or not and in what hardware?

Again reminiscent of my 90's Director work, the Descent PIP solution is both a remarkably clever solution, and a brutally compromised hack. Again, hats off to those who pulled it off given all the constraints. I can't wait to see what they'll be able to do with HD DVD :).

When can we expect to see their HD DVD results? :)

Ah, thanks for mentioning that. Thus, I can now mention the "The Descent" approach will have the effect of cutting PBR for the title nearly in half, since both streams go at the same time.I don't know if their method does involve both streams at the same time, but if so it clearly hasn't impacted its widely heralded picture quality or stellar audio quality (7.1 lossless PCM), which all must be a testament to AVC and Blu-ray's capacity and bandwidth limits!

And like DTS, something that uses up capacity and content creation budgets for all customers, even though many won't be able to experience it.

Hmm... is this a common thought from those in Microsoft's towards DTS?

Hopefully I shouldn't drawn any conclusions from that, as I'm quite eager for the 360 output thing to be fixed ASAP!

This question if for Amirm.

I am a professional OS X user and I want to know if we are going to see compatibility with VC-1 in any form inside OS X since is needed for the support of BluRay and HD-DVD movies.

Apple have contacted with your team or are you going to give support from a third partie point of view?

This question if for Amirm.

I am a professional OS X user and I want to know if we are going to see compatibility with VC-1 in any form inside OS X since is needed for the support of BluRay and HD-DVD movies.

Apple have contacted with your team or are you going to give support from a third partie point of view?
I can't comment on any specific relationship I am afriad. But I can say that we are quite anxious to see Mac playback for HD DVD. And would provide VC-1 expertise for BD if asked. So hopefully products come to market to support them.

Can an HD DVD insider comment on the following excerpt from the LG dual-player? Specifically, what sort of interactivity is missing from HD DVD playback that will be included when playing Blu-ray discs?

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/01-07-2007/0004500940&EDATE=

In addition to offering Full HD 1080p picture quality from
high-definition discs, the player incorporates interactive functions based
on BD-Java, which allows advanced menus and functions to be displayed over
the video of Blu-ray discs. And, while the same level of advanced menu
interactivity is not available while playing HD DVD discs, the powerful
combination of Blu-ray Disc and HD DVD audio-video playback technologies is
like no other on the market.

Hmm... is this a common thought from those in Microsoft's towards DTS?

Hopefully I shouldn't drawn any conclusions from that, as I'm quite eager for the 360 output thing to be fixed ASAP!

I thought DTS was mandatory in HD DVD, is this not the case?

If it is mandatory then more studios are likely to use it, which is MS point.

HDi insiders, I know that the Studio Canal titles properly support resume, do these titles properly support title name in bookmarks?

It is a pain to try and delete my HD DVD bookmarks from rental places after I have returned the disk since all current bookmarks are listed as "Unknown Title" on Xbox 360.

Can an HD DVD insider comment on the following excerpt from the LG dual-player? Specifically, what sort of interactivity is missing from HD DVD playback that will be included when playing Blu-ray discs?

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/01-07-2007/0004500940&EDATE=
Sounds like he is saying they have not finished their HD DVD implementation and only support the older DVD menus (used by some discs in Japan). If true, they will have hard time getting HD DVD logo and claim compliance as all the discs in US/EU use adavnced content. Maybe they plan to do a firmware upgrade later?

I am running off to CES. If I learn more and can disclose it, I will do that.

I thought DTS was mandatory in HD DVD, is this not the case?
No, they are mandatory in HD DVD. Ben was saying that DTS was not mandatory in DVD so not all discs use it. By the same token, optional features in BD do not get as much use (e.g. TrueHD/DD+).

If it is mandatory then more studios are likely to use it, which is MS point.
Exactly although DTS was used as an analogy, not a real test case here.

HDi insiders, I know that the Studio Canal titles properly support resume, do these titles properly support title name in bookmarks?

It is a pain to try and delete my HD DVD bookmarks from rental places after I have returned the disk since all current bookmarks are listed as "Unknown Title" on Xbox 360.
Ben, do you mind follow up on this part? I don't know the answer.

I fully expect the PS3 to be BD-Live capable (yes, I estimate it at >95% of the installed base with over a million units sold). I consider the PS3 as a standalone player, as it's a single unit, plays Blu-ray automatically when you insert the disc, supports a dedicated remote control, and in general functions very, very well as one. There are clearly people purchasing it for that purpose.

what do you mean by "I fully expect the PS3 to be BD-Live capable"? The PS3 has been on the market since last year and you do not if it does BD-Live?

HDi insiders, I know that the Studio Canal titles properly support resume, do these titles properly support title name in bookmarks?

It is a pain to try and delete my HD DVD bookmarks from rental places after I have returned the disk since all current bookmarks are listed as "Unknown Title" on Xbox 360.Studio Canal titles correctly create the info.txt file that allows players to list the title name in the persistent storage manager.

Very few hollywood titles do this. I expect they will start supporting it now that it's so visible on the 360.

Can anyone shed any light on when triple layer HD DVD's will be used commercially?

Ben, do you mind follow up on this part? I don't know the answer.
I'm on it.

Hmm... is this a common thought from those in Microsoft's towards DTS?

Hopefully I shouldn't drawn any conclusions from that, as I'm quite eager for the 360 output thing to be fixed ASAP!
We like DTS just fine. My point was that it was optional in DVD, so its use was an exception instead of the rule.

It's mandatory in HD DVD, so we'll see DTS-only discs, which wasn't possible with DVD.

Nope, though that may change later this week pending CES announcements. I fully expect the PS3 will be fully BD-Live compatible (and ought be considered a standalone, as you can just stick in a Blu-ray disc and it plays), but there's always a possibility I'm wrong.Actually, you're wrong about one thing at least. You can't just insert a disc and have it automatically play. You have to (most annoyingly) navigate over to the "Video" menu and select the "Blu-ray Disc" item once you've inserted the disc, and waited for it to recognize it.

Interestingly enough, I was most impressed by all the claims online about the PS3 playing a disc in "less than 5 seconds" so I did some timings with "World Trade Center", and found that it's more on the order of 14-15 seconds from clicking on the icon to video starting. This is actually about 5 seconds slower than the 360 (from clicking on the "Play HD DVD" option to first video is 9-10 seconds).

Does anyone know if there's an option to make the PS3 automatically play a BD disc when you insert it? I couldn't find one.

Actually, you're wrong about one thing at least. You can't just insert a disc and have it automatically play. You have to (most annoyingly) navigate over to the "Video" menu and select the "Blu-ray Disc" item once you've inserted the disc, and waited for it to recognize it.

Interestingly enough, I was most impressed by all the claims online about the PS3 playing a disc in "less than 5 seconds" so I did some timings with "World Trade Center", and found that it's more on the order of 14-15 seconds from clicking on the icon to video starting. This is actually about 5 seconds slower than the 360 (from clicking on the "Play HD DVD" option to first video is 9-10 seconds).

Does anyone know if there's an option to make the PS3 automatically play a BD disc when you insert it? I couldn't find one.

Uh... you need to set your PS3 to auto-login and it will start a BD/DVD/CD automatically from standby/off (solid red light). It's only 10 seconds or so to the initial menu or title play, depending on the studio. Hit the Triangle when selected on your user in the XMB (farthest left option from the XMB top menu).

Regarding DTS and HD-DVD, is this chart from DTS accurate?

http://www.dtsonline.com/media/2007/MandatoryTechnology_v2.jpg

We like DTS just fine. My point was that it was optional in DVD, so its use was an exception instead of the rule.

It's mandatory in HD DVD, so we'll see DTS-only discs, which wasn't possible with DVD.

Ok, great. Guess I am a bit paranoid about the audio output from the 360 and it's patch/update for DTS. I'm looking at HDMI switching receivers now (and in addition to watching CES very closely to see what Denon et al announce), this becomes very relevent when considering what my HD-DVD playback option is going to be. Thanks!

I fully expect the PS3 to be BD-Live capable (yes, I estimate it at >95% of the installed base with over a million units sold). I consider the PS3 as a standalone player, as it's a single unit, plays Blu-ray automatically when you insert the disc, supports a dedicated remote control, and in general functions very, very well as one. There are clearly people purchasing it for that purpose.

I wish that were true but it is not; if the PS3 is already powered up and you insert a BD-ROM movie, it does not begin playback...you need to navigate the game menuing system; not even pressing play on the blu-ray remote does the trick :(

and thanks for clarifying that what you really meant by the >95% of bd players was only the ps3...maybe you should have said the ps3 instead of implying otherwise :)

Regarding DTS and HD-DVD, is this chart from DTS accurate?

http://www.dtsonline.com/media/2007/MandatoryTechnology_v2.jpg
Do you have a higher rez version of that? I can't quite make out all the numbers.

Can anyone shed any light on when triple layer HD DVD's will be used commercially?

Additional: Can someone check whether the new LG-Hitachi dual-format drive is TL compatible?

Gary

Additional: Can someone check whether the new LG-Hitachi dual-format drive is TL compatible?

Gary

Its not even fully IHD compatible for hd dvd....why would it be TL?

Its not even fully IHD compatible for hd dvd....why would it be TL? Pardon, I'm not sure we know that for sure.

The press release was not definative, all HD DVD players need to have iHD support IIRC.

Is it possible that the yahoo quote is just a misreading of this portion of the LG press release? If you didn't know about iHD and current HD DVD offerings, you might confuse this statement to mean that HD DVD didn't support such features. The BD-J boilerplate may have mislead the articles writer to assume something here.

In addition to offering Full HD 1080p picture quality from high-definition discs, the player incorporates interactive functions based on BD-Java, which allows advanced menus and functions to be displayed over the video of Blu-ray discs. And, while the same level of advanced menu interactivity is not available while playing HD DVD discs, the powerful combination of Blu-ray Disc and HD DVD audio-video playback technologies is like no other on the market.

...that quote above from the LG press release looks very similar to the quote from the yahoo article below, its my guess that the writer just rewrote the press release and has never seen a HD DVD menu in real life or he would realize that all first generation players support pop up menus....

But while it will display the full range of interactive features contained on Blu-ray discs, such as menus that appear while the film is playing, it will not play similar interactive elements contained on HD DVD discs.

Is it possible that the yahoo quote is just a misreading of this portion of the LG press release? If you didn't know about iHD and current HD DVD offerings, you might confuse this statement to mean that HD DVD didn't support such features. How about this (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2079911,00.asp) one from PC Magazine (not generally known for rehashing others' press releases:
The BH100 fully supports the features of the BD format including Blu-ray Disc Java, allowing for full use of interactive and other features that may be included with a BD movie. Unfortunately, the BH100's HD DVD interactive feature support is non-existent as the format's iHD technology is not supported. While the BH100 appeared to play HD DVD movies just fine, popup menus appeared quite generic as the on-screen chapter selection lacked the thumbnail images seen on other HD DVD players.
The BD-J boilerplate may have mislead the articles writer to assume something here.It's BD-J's fault that the new LG doesn't support HDi?!?

Looks like this is a Blu-ray player which can also play HD DVD video/audio. If it carries an HD DVD logo this seriously calls into question the DVD Forum's compliance requirements. This device surely won't convince anyone studios to drop publishing on Blu-ray in favor of HD-DVD!

what do you mean by "I fully expect the PS3 to be BD-Live capable"? The PS3 has been on the market since last year and you do not if it does BD-Live?Until Sony announces that the PS3 supports BD-Live content, I'm in no position to do so.

Additional: Can someone check whether the new LG-Hitachi dual-format drive is TL compatible?How can it be? Last I heard TL hadn't even been submitted to the DVD Forum as a spec candidate let alone having available a finished spec with appropriate compliance tests.

Amir, assuming the many reports from CES that the LG BH-100 doesn't support HD DVD interactivity beyond that of legacy DVD prove to be accurate, several questions come to find.


The obvious question is how can LG release an HD DVD player which doesn't support HDi? After all of the discussion here about how HD DVD has many mandatory features which are currently optional in Blu-ray (i.e. network connectivity, secondary video support), is there in fact a specific HD DVD format license which doesn't require HDi support? If not, how can LG release an HD DVD player which doesn't support HDi? If so, why haven't we heard anything about it yet? This nugget of information makes the whole Blu-ray profile discussion look downright trivial!
Do you still consider the announced release of this player to be a net positive for HD DVD? Wouldn't you expect studios to choose to release on Blu-ray so they can actually provide interactivity?
Have you asked Gates or Ballmer to call the chairman of LG yet to demand a "clarification" of this information to reflect that the released player will fully support HDi? :D
It's highly unlikely anyone would attempt to build an HD-DVD player without some sort of professional relationship with Microsoft.Well, you may be surprised to know that we have had exactly zero, and I mean zero involvement with LG’s product development. They have developed the entire thing by themselves.I guess I find this point you made much more believable now!

Amir, I'm sure you will be very busy at CES over the next few days (as will I), but I believe the points above are likely to be of concern to a great many HD DVD supporters, so it would clearly be worthwhile for you to respond here in a timely manner. I'm certainly eagerly awaiting your response.

- Talk

Does the LG player support BD-Live?

I wish that were true but it is not; if the PS3 is already powered up and you insert a BD-ROM movie, it does not begin playback...you need to navigate the game menuing system; not even pressing play on the blu-ray remote does the trick :(

and thanks for clarifying that what you really meant by the >95% of bd players was only the ps3...maybe you should have said the ps3 instead of implying otherwise :)

Why would your PS3 require navigating the game menu?
Everyone elses...you insert the BD...BD rom shows already lit up on the screen...you hit enter or play....and the movie plays automatically....or goes to the BD movies menu.
There is no navigating the game menu with the controller or remote. :confused:

If in fact the LG player turns out not to be totally HD-DVD compliant with the HD-DVD specs could the DVD Forum use the AACS system to blacklist the player?

Laters,
Jeff

If in fact the LG player turns out not to be totally HD-DVD compliant with the HD-DVD specs could the DVD Forum use the AACS system to blacklist the player?


AACS is in charge of the AACS content that goes on the discs, not the DVD Forum, or any studio.

AACS won't issue the player the needed keys, and so it will never be brought to market, if they aren't pleased about some aspect. But, that won't be due to not meeting a particular format's ancilliary specs.

Gary

This LG press release is really puzzling regarding HDi. I see a big HD-DVD logo below the Blu-ray logo on the machine. As I understood, there is only one HD-DVD profile so far. Can any insider clarify this?

Second question: Which BD player profile does this player support? Cannot find this info from the release.

How can it be? Last I heard TL hadn't even been submitted to the DVD Forum as a spec candidate let alone having available a finished spec with appropriate compliance tests.

True. But, we've had off and on claims of TL compatibility for the current HD DVD drives.

As drives arrive outside the control or involvement of Toshiba, the spec becomes more and more permanent, does it not?

So, can we state categorically that >2 layers and any improvement in bandwidth is a dead issue for HD DVD?

Gary

How about this (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2079911,00.asp) one from PC Magazine (not generally known for rehashing others' press releases:

It's BD-J's fault that the new LG doesn't support HDi?!?

Looks like this is a Blu-ray player which can also play HD DVD video/audio. If it carries an HD DVD logo this seriously calls into question the DVD Forum's compliance requirements. This device surely won't convince anyone studios to drop publishing on Blu-ray in favor of HD-DVD! We may all meet at the LG booth on Monday!

The PC magazines comments do seem to be more definative. I sure more clarification will arrive the next few days.

I am sure this will be a hot topic of conversation at CES.

If anyone can find that the player will support iHD or not, please post any information pro or con.

So, did the DVD Forum bend the rules so they could add LG to the fold?

Amir, you talked about all HD DVD players having to meet mandatory guidelines, like full HDi compliance, ethernet port, etc, and assailed the BD Forum for not doing the same. Why does LG get a pass on this? Was it only Toshiba built players that met all specs? Will the rules further bend when the cheap Chinese players come online?

Regarding the 50 GB HD-DVD "announcement", is the intention for this to work on 1G players? 2G players? Future players? Any increase in bandwidth?

http://blogs.pcworld.com/staffblog/archives/003423.html

Amir and Ben,

Congrats on the IPTV for the 360. The demo is cool! can't wait to try it out :) Any idea where to check to see when it's available in our local areas?

Thanks,
Robert.

Amir and Ben,

Congrats on the IPTV for the 360. The demo is cool! can't wait to try it out :) Any idea where to check to see when it's available in our local areas?

I think you'll have to wait until your IPTV provider announces support for it. Who's your provider?

I think you'll have to wait until your IPTV provider announces support for it. Who's your provider?


I'm with Comcast right now but have ATT if need be.

Toshiba has reportedly announced 50 GB triple-layer HD DVD discs.

For what purpose? 30 GB dual-layer discs seem adequate for movies. Will said 50 GB discs work on existing players or are we talking about a paper launch, or else a format that is destined more for computer data?

And why not 45 GB?

Toshiba has reportedly announced 50 GB triple-layer HD DVD discs.

For what purpose? 30 GB dual-layer discs seem adequate for movies. Will said 50 GB discs work on existing players or are we talking about a paper launch, or else a format that is destined more for computer data?

And why not 45 GB?

Links ??

b2b

How can it be? Last I heard TL hadn't even been submitted to the DVD Forum as a spec candidate let alone having available a finished spec with appropriate compliance tests.If there have never been any compliance tests made for TL HD DVD than doesn't that mean no one knows whether even the HD-A1 players are TL compatible?

Links ??

b2b
http://blogs.pcworld.com/staffblog/archives/003423.html

Toshiba continues to improve HD DVD storage capacity. At the HD DVD Promotion Group's press conference this evening, the company announced it has developed 50GB triple-layer rewritable and ROM media.

This capacity is up from the company’s previous explorations of a higher-capacity 45GB triple-layer disc. Currently, HD DVD maxes out at a 30GB dual-layer disc.

With the new HD DVD TL 50GB disc announced: Will the current players be able to play this disc with an firmware upgrade? And are they going to use the new disc for future movie releases?

With the new HD DVD TL 50GB disc announced: Will the current players be able to play this disc with an firmware upgrade? And are they going to use the new disc for future movie releases?

I would like this question answered also:

Which of the following can play triple layer 50GB disc in its entirety:
Toshiba HD-A1
Toshiba HD-A2
Toshiba HD-A20
Toshiba HD-XA2
XBOX 360 HD DVD Drive

And is this now part of the spec that can be used by studios for movies?

Does the LG player support BD-Live?I've seen no indication pro or con, but the picture shows a "service" port which certainly looks like ethernet. Of course, if this is a fully-compliant HD-DVD player it would have to support networking, but the apparent lack of HDi support calls into question whether it is compliant...

but the apparent lack of HDi support calls into question whether it is compliant...Question for HD-DVD insiders?

How was LG able to demo all the features of the Batman Begins HD-DVD if their player lacks HDi support?

HD-DVD insiders,

When will we hear more about Microsoft's partnership (?) with DirecTV? What does it encompass exactly?

Amir, assuming the many reports from CES that the LG BH-100 doesn't support HD DVD interactivity beyond that of legacy DVD prove to be accurate, several questions come to find.
Will do my best to answer them.


The obvious question is how can LG release an HD DVD player which doesn't support HDi? After all of the discussion here about how HD DVD has many mandatory features which are currently optional in Blu-ray (i.e. network connectivity, secondary video support), is there in fact a specific HD DVD format license which doesn't require HDi support? If not, how can LG release an HD DVD player which doesn't support HDi? If so, why haven't we heard anything about it yet?
Anyone can get a copy of the HD DVD spec and go build something out of it. The player does not explode if it doesn't support all the features :). The "teeth" is in the logo license. If you want to put HD DVD on the player, you must comply with all the specifications including mandatory interactivity features. There is a 90 day grace period from what I recall after which point, you better be compliant with all the tests. If you don’t pass, you don’t get to use the logo.

Customers who want real HD DVD functionality must look for the logo and purchase equipment appropriately.

This nugget of information makes the whole Blu-ray profile discussion look downright trivial!
Per above, no open standards organization can keep people from seeing its specs, and implementing portions of it. That is quite a different matter from BDA making variations and permutations of the spec which people can implement, with full blessing of BDA including logo. Talking about logos, the best thing you could do to reduce confusion about your product is to have logos for BD-Live, etc. But something tells me you won’t go there.

Do you still consider the announced release of this player to be a net positive for HD DVD? Wouldn't you expect studios to choose to release on Blu-ray so they can actually provide interactivity?
I think it is hugely positive for HD DVD. Just a week ago, you were claiming you had all of these BD CE companies who thought they were going to finish off HD DVD in a few months and had no intention of doing anything different. Yet, one of your major CE companies is saying HD DVD is here to stay and wants to build compatibility with that format. Everyone from the press is asking me about LG today and they all saw it as proof of HD DVD making solid progress in the market.

Most importantly, LG dared to cross the line. They announced HD DVD support. There will be others. And I am sure LG will also build fully compliant products, if this one is not it. The positive reception will certainly entice them to do so.

Have you asked Gates or Ballmer to call the chairman of LG yet to demand a "clarification" of this information to reflect that the released player will fully support HDi? :D
Not necessary. I will be meeting with them later this week ;).

I guess I find this point you made much more believable now!
Of course. What I post here is based on facts.

Amir, I'm sure you will be very busy at CES over the next few days (as will I), but I believe the points above are likely to be of concern to a great many HD DVD supporters, so it would clearly be worthwhile for you to respond here in a timely manner. I'm certainly eagerly awaiting your response.

- Talk
It is 11:30 and I could not come to the hotel fast enough to answer it, after seeing it on my phone earlier :).

Of course, I am on a high from a fantastic HD DVD press conference. We announced my favorite which is Meridian building HD DVD players! First high-end company to commit to either format. Of course, we also had the likes of Onkyo, LiteOn, J/K, etc. So we got both the high-end and the low-end covered. Toshiba rocked the house with their announcement of A20 with 1080p support at just $599 MSRP.

On the content side, we announced 240 titles so far, with 40+ independent studios publishing content worldwide on HD DVD. We demonstrated fully functional networked interactivity between both gen 1 an gen 2 Toshiba HD DVD players, moving bookmarks around, downloading additional content, community features (sharing bookmarks with friends), etc. All running on real production shipping hardware. All because features such as PiP and networking are standard in every player. This should answer the question about what the networking port is for and when it will be put to use.

And oh yeah, we announced a joint reference design with Broadcom for a complete HD DVD package including HDi using… their SoC design! So there, hopefully that answers B2b and Rob. Sorry guys. :D J/K and LiteOn machines will use this SoC solution. There are others but they prefer to not say.

There were other stuff I am sure but I am a bit too tired to remember :).

HD-DVD insiders,

When will we hear more about Microsoft's partnership (?) with DirecTV? What does it encompass exactly?
It is a large scale collaboration agreement which includes among other things support of their service on Media Center PCs.

Can a CE device get the HD-DVD logo if the machine does not support HDi?

With the new HD DVD TL 50GB disc announced: Will the current players be able to play this disc with an firmware upgrade? And are they going to use the new disc for future movie releases?
The format is actually 51 gigabytes (17 gigabytes/layer). And it is just at technology proposal at this point. They would need to submit it to DVD Forum for approval. Once we are through that cycle, then one can determine whether it plays or does not (DVD Forum may modify their proposal before ratification).

So at this point, think of it as Honda winning a Formula 1 race with a new engine, and not ready yet to tell you if it fits in your regular car :). But should make you feel good that HD DVD engineers are not sitting around but continuing to innovate.

It is a large scale collaboration agreement which includes among other things support of their service on Media Center PCs.


Cool, thanks for the feedback Amir. I don't expect it, but will the 360 have any support?

Can a CE device get the HD-DVD logo if the machine does not support HDi?
No.

Cool, thanks for the feedback Amir. I don't expect it, but will the 360 have any support?
Indirectly yes. You can watch DTV programming from the MCE using the 360.

Thanks for the direct answer. Doesn't this LG press release pretty much settle the matter, then? It doesn't seem like it will get the logo.

In addition to offering Full HD 1080p picture quality from high-definition discs, the player incorporates interactive functions based on BD-Java, which allows advanced menus and functions to be displayed over the video of Blu-ray discs. And, while the same level of advanced menu interactivity is not available while playing HD DVD discs, the powerful combination of Blu-ray Disc and HD DVD audio-video playback technologies is like no other on the market.http://sev.prnewswire.com/consumer-electronics/20070107/NYSU02507012007-1.html

Indirectly yes. You can watch DTV programming from the MCE using the 360.



Veerrry cool.

Oh crap, now I have to upgrade my WinXP machine to Vista.

I bet hearing that breaks your heart doesn't it? ;) :D

What it doesn't say Rob is whether they plan to do a firmware update to add HDi functionality. I am not saying they will, but that is a possibility.

What it doesn't say Rob is whether they plan to do a firmware update to add HDi functionality. I am not saying they will, but that is a possibility.

Within 90days of public release? When does this period start?

Amir,

What is the motivation behind HD50 aside from "hey, look what we did!" Seeing that you have stated that no HD DVD studios have asked for more space, thus TL45 was never an issue. Have their been inquiries or interest from non HD DVD supporters in regards to needing extra space for whatever reason, in order for them to possible look into support HD DVD?

Also, when will this proposal be presented to the DVD Forum? The TL45 never made it to the meeting table. Will HD50?

Thanks and enjoy Vegas!!!
Robert.

Within 90days of public release? When does this period start?
When the product starts shipping. BTW, I am not a lawyer and all of this is from memory so don't hold me too it too hard. OK? :)

And oh yeah, we announced a joint reference design with Broadcom for a complete HD DVD package including HDi using… their SoC design! So there, hopefully that answers B2b and Rob. Sorry guys. J/K and LiteOn machines will use this SoC solution. There are others but they prefer to not say.

LG perhaps? I believe the LG presentation slide showed that it will be using a Broadcom chip for it's new player.

Amir,

What is the motivation behind HD50 aside from "hey, look what we did!" Seeing that you have stated that no HD DVD studios have asked for more space, thus TL45 was never an issue. Have their been inquiries or interest from non HD DVD supporters in regards to needing extra space for whatever reason, in order for them to possible look into support HD DVD?
This is really a question for Toshiba to answer. We are not joint designers on this thing :). So I can only offer you opinions and that is it. My first opinion is that it is silly to assume that once Toshiba engineers invented HD DVD, Toshiba fired them all :). They are still there, and still innovating.

Second is what you say. If there is a content owner out there thinking they will die without 50 gigabytes, well, Toshiba has one better, literally. :D

Third, I can confirm again that none of the studios using HD DVD today are asking for TL, 45 or 51 gigabytes.

Also, when will this proposal be presented to the DVD Forum? The TL45 never made it to the meeting table. Will HD50?
It is up to Toshiba. In their presentation, they said they expect standardization to be completed by Q4, 2007. So I guess this means they will submit it soon.

Thanks and enjoy Vegas!!!
Robert.
Will do. I have to get some sleep as it is 12:19am! But here is one more thing to keep you all busy discussing this topic. TL-51 has higher bandwidth because it packs the bits closer and spins the drive at 1.5X I believe. So it goes exactly where BD-50 is today and maybe passes it a bit... Quite an amazing technological feat considering the fact that it does not resort to .1mm recording and all the grief that comes wiht that...

Good night!

And oh yeah, we announced a joint reference design with Broadcom for a complete HD DVD package including HDi using… their SoC design! So there, hopefully that answers B2b and Rob. Sorry guys. :D J/K and LiteOn machines will use this SoC solution. There are others but they prefer to not say.

There were other stuff I am sure but I am a bit too tired to remember :).

Good to hear about the SoC... Maybe I missed it, but who is "J/K" ?

b2b

But here is one more thing to keep you all busy discussing this topic. TL-51 has higher bandwidth because it packs the bits closer and spins the drive at 1.5X I believe.Thanks. I hope it gets approved then. I would appreciate it if you could get confirmation on the 1.5X thing. Even if this were put in as another profile, I think that would be good long term.

--Darin

And oh yeah, we announced a joint reference design with Broadcom for a complete HD DVD package including HDi using… their SoC design!

Great news.

Thanks for the direct answer. Doesn't this LG press release pretty much settle the matter, then? It doesn't seem like it will get the logo.\

Come on guys. These are prototype/pre production models on display. Most CE's are guilty of poping logos on their devices before all features are operational for display at conventions. I'm sure Pioneer and Sony had BD logos on their players before they were BD compliant, and i'm sure the LG is no different.

Will do my best to answer them.I certainly appreciate that you a)didn't duck the questions, and b)responded this evening, when I'm sure you have many other competing interests.
Anyone can get a copy of the HD DVD spec and go build something out of it. The player does not explode if it doesn't support all the features :). The "teeth" is in the logo license. If you want to put HD DVD on the player, you must comply with all the specifications including mandatory interactivity features.But that also includes putting "HD DVD" on the box, in the manual, in the ads, etc. as well, no? I'd think at best they could say "plays audio/video from HD DVD discs", but couldn't put the words "HD DVD" and "player" together anywhere. And I'd think you certainly wouldn't want to refer to this as an HD DVD player since it apparently won't be capable of supporting any of the technology you've build around HDi...
Per above, no open standards organization can keep people from seeing its specs, and implementing portions of it. That is quite a different matter from BDA making variations and permutations of the spec which people can implement, with full blessing of BDA including logo.This is a bit of an overstatement, don't you think? Blu-ray has two well-defined profiles, plus a subset of the BD-Video profile for 1G players. While HD DVD may not have profiles, it does have optional features (seldom discussed), and should studios use any of them you'll have many consumers unable to make use of that content.
Talking about logos, the best thing you could do to reduce confusion about your product is to have logos for BD-Live, etc. But something tells me you won’t go there. Perhaps you're in for a surprise... :)

I think it is hugely positive for HD DVD. Just a week ago, you were claiming you had all of these BD CE companies who thought they were going to finish off HD DVD in a few months and had no intention of doing anything different. Yet, one of your major CE companies is saying HD DVD is here to stay and wants to build compatibility with that format.Except they aren't. They're simply reading the physical format and playing back the A/V contained therein. Unless it's TrueHD audio, that is, in which case I guess you won't hear anything unless the studio includes a DD track as well. Oh, wait, there goes that advantage you mentioned previously where HD DVD studios could save space by only including a TrueHD track and being certain everyone can hear it!
Most importantly, LG dared to cross the line. They announced HD DVD support. There will be others. And I am sure LG will also build fully compliant products, if this one is not it. The positive reception will certainly entice them to do so.For your sake, you'd better hope it doesn't do well, because if it does you'll have a bunch of non-compliant players in the market which may force studios to dumb down their titles to reach that audience.
Toshiba rocked the house with their announcement of A20 with 1080p support at just $599 MSRP.Great, only $100 more than the cheapest Blu-ray player with 1080p support!
We demonstrated fully functional networked interactivity between both gen 1 an gen 2 Toshiba HD DVD players, moving bookmarks around, downloading additional content, community features (sharing bookmarks with friends), etc.I'm actually glad to hear this, because it will help push the studios on the Blu-ray side to similarly innovate. From my standpoint anything which pushes the envelope on interactivity is a good thing.
And oh yeah, we announced a joint reference design with Broadcom for a complete HD DVD package including HDi using… their SoC design!Which SoC design? The super-powerful one they announced recently, or the older ones which are more likely to be found in current and near-term player designs?
TL-51 has higher bandwidth because it packs the bits closer and spins the drive at 1.5X I believe. So it goes exactly where BD-50 is today and maybe passes it a bit... Quite an amazing technological feat considering the fact that it does not resort to .1mm recording and all the grief that comes wiht that...Interesting statement, considering there may be all manner of grief which comes from packing the bits closer together. If not, why didn't they do that from the start?

Thanks again for responding head-on, and I hope you don't feel I'm being unnecessarily harsh in pointing out what I think are serious issues with the LG player for your format of choice. I'm sure you'll do the same should any Blu-ray news come out in the next few days which might have a similarly negative impact...

- Talk

Come on guys. These are prototype/pre production models on display. Most CE's are guilty of poping logos on their devices before all features are operational for display at conventions. I'm sure Pioneer and Sony had BD logos on their players before they were BD compliant, and i'm sure the LG is no different.Except that LG seems to be confirming that this player will not have HDi support in it. If it were only the demo model which didn't, they'd clearly be highlighting that fact, since releasing a non-compliant player has a significant impact on the whole format. My guess is the SoC chipset in the LG simply can't run HDi well-enough to implement it (as has been suggested by other insiders). Why else would they possibly leave it out and run the risk of alienating a large swath of the market?

I suppose I might as well ask since these Qs will come up soon enough.

1. What's the cost of these 50 GB discs projected to be?

2. Is Toshiba or MS going to subsidize the discs for the studios, if they adopt them?

3. What stage of development is it at? What kind of yields are expected or being obtained?

4. What kind of protective layer? Same as HD30?

thanks to whoever provides definitive answers.

cheers

On the content side, we announced 240 titles so far.

amir, wouldn't you agree it is more accurate to say that the HD DVD PRG didn't announce 240 titles, but rather that it was announced that 240 titles* would be released?

* Actually 300 according to the press release (http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/01-07-2007/0004501052&EDATE=).

Is'nt this 50GB disk just a 5GB increase of the TWIN format, that is in the specs. of playable formats in the G2 players?

Will DVD-Forum go for this replicator technology?
This proprietary 2P technology is applicable to any kind of production of dual or multilayer optical media. (http://www.nmeinc.com/technology_vmdproductionline.aspx)

I think you'll have to wait until your IPTV provider announces support for it. Who's your provider?

So with the IPTV for the 360 if all you have is Time Warner Cable in you rarea, with not even talks of AT&T o rsuch bringing IPTV, then I will not be able to get IPTV for th e360. I am very confused on this. So it appears this will only help people who live in places where they are served by FIOS or IPTV providers? Can some insider please xplain how this will work?

Whether Sony is the only company actually replicating BD50 discs today (I don't know), every expectation is that others will enter this market in time. Anyone who licenses the format and pays the appropriate IP has the right to manufacture the discs.

I am very surprised that you say you don't know if there is anyone besides Sony replicating BD50's or not currently but that doesn’t directly answer my question anyway.

I understand a company will be allowed to create there own BD50 disks if they are capable of doing so but what are the issues of creating such a disc (Total HD) when it is being bundled with an HD DVD side? Would they need Sony/BDA approval to do such a thing?

Also similar question to the HD DVD camp, since the Blu-ray format goes against the standards approved by the DVD Forum for high definition does this violate any rules by bundling this type of disc with an HD DVD side and putting the HD DVD logo on it?

No, Amir, as you undoubtedly understand, yet are trying to play this up for effect, this method of PiP would be unlikely to be suitable for a BD-25 disc.

Yes, I'm sure the audience will be very impressed with your grasp of the competition when you suggest this will be the standard method (or the only method) for producing PiP content on Blu-ray.

I'm surprised you would take a shot at a creative team which worked through existing player constraints to produce an innovative end-user experience, one which clearly few end-users realized was delivered using, as you suggest, such a ridiculous method.

If consumers love the movie, love the A/V quality, love the bonus content, and have no idea it didn't actually use secondary video (if they even have any clue as to what secondary video is), where is a single negative impact to the creative team's choice of authoring approach?

Talk, I will direct my question to you since it is similar to your above comment but if anyone else would like to also add there input on it, please do so.

The above quotes (at least to my understanding of it) implies that this way of performing the PIP type features are fine and there are no negative results to us as a consumer.

Out of the announced titles scheduled for release soon I see 13 titles that are announced for being released on BD50 disc's. Only 3 out of all 13 of these BD50 titles reach being 2 hours in length.

I don’t understand where so many movies this short in length (under 2 hours) are being put onto BD50g discs. Is it because of this extra functionality and how it is being inputted that requires this much space?

Are BD50 discs going to be required for all these 90 minute movies that have any PIP type features?

With the promise of more BD50 releases I expected to see more longer running movies being announced, although I do see an increase of BD50's announced I don’t see any even reaching 2.5 hrs on a BD50 scheduled.

Instead I see things like Crank (just as one example but there are many others similar) that is only 87 minutes long scheduled for release on a BD50g disc.

I would appreciate anyone that can shed some light on this matter and whether or not this is the average length of a movie that has extras that we can expect. I did expect to see more 2.5 - 3 hour movies plus extras all fitting on BD50s.

So has the equation changed regarding "Deep Color" and "xvYCC", with the improved HD-DVD disc capacity, and the arrival of HDMI 1.3? Are we going to see movies encoded with "Deep Color" and "xvYCC" color space at some point down the road? Say by 2009 maybe? Disc capacity certainly won't be an issue will it?

LED and Laser backlighting is confirmed to be taking off now, so home user displays are going to be ready for it.

Or is this still not going to happen for a long time? I asked about this in the old thread and the impression I got was the outlook was bleak.

Why would your PS3 require navigating the game menu?
Everyone elses...you insert the BD...BD rom shows already lit up on the screen...you hit enter or play....and the movie plays automatically....or goes to the BD movies menu.
There is no navigating the game menu with the controller or remote. :confused:

Earz, this isn't the place for this discussion and my comments were in response to an insider's post, but just to answer you:

if my ps3 is started without a disc in it (either game or movie), the menu seems to default to the "game" menu item...after i load a movie in the player, it doesn't switch automatically to the "video" menu but instead just sits there at the game menu. pressing play on the remote does not begin playback of the movie. i HAVE TO NAVIGATE THE PS3 MENU SYSTEM to get over to the "video" menu and THEN have to navigate to the BD-ROM (i have some downloaded videos that seem to populate the video menu...then i can hit play or select enter to get movie playback to begin.

if the ps3 is started from a power off state with a movie already in the player, THEN it will start playback easily...

if i'm the ONLY person experiencing that type of behavior that is very strange; i do recall reading a review that described this exact behavior as well (i think it was sound & vision)...i'm at the latest firmware rev.

If this has been asked/answered already my appologies.

Lots of conversation going on at HTF about this and since I haven't heard any insider tips thus far I'm compelled to ask:

Why has Warner Brothers dropped Dolby True HD tracks from several BD titles that are provided on the (otherwise identical) HD DVD editions? Superman Returns is a prime example. This seems to be a key factor in why owners of both formats are choosing to buy the HD DVD edition over the Blu-ray in these cases... to get the Dolby True HD.

Arguments about lack of full decoding in first-gen BD players is moot given that all BD players are compatible with Dolby True HD and can extract the core DD stream pending future software updates to extract the full lossless LPCM (and the PS3 can extract full LPCM from Dolby True HD right now).

Please advise. Is Warner choosing to do this to favor HD DVD and its sales or are there other technical obstacles behind the disappointing omission of Lossless audio tracks on their BD discs?

So with the IPTV for the 360 if all you have is Time Warner Cable in you rarea, with not even talks of AT&T o rsuch bringing IPTV, then I will not be able to get IPTV for th e360. I am very confused on this. So it appears this will only help people who live in places where they are served by FIOS or IPTV providers? Can some insider please xplain how this will work?
IPTV by definition means a TV service provided by your IP network provider, not TV over generic IP services. So yes, you'd need to have an IPTV service for this to work.

The basic idea is to let a 360 work as an additional IPTV set top box, without requiring an additional purchase, and something else to stick in the room. I'd love to have this for the bedroom, or my office. But I live in a Qwest neighborhood...

It is up to Toshiba. In their presentation, they said they expect standardization to be completed by Q4, 2007. So I guess this means they will submit it soon.

TL-51 has higher bandwidth because it packs the bits closer and spins the drive at 1.5X I believe. So it goes exactly where BD-50 is today and maybe passes it a bit... Quite an amazing technological feat considering the fact that it does not resort to .1mm recording and all the grief that comes wiht that...

I have a question for any insider regarding the new TL 51g HD DVD disc. Supposing that 1st and 2nd gen HD DVD players can actually read the disc (I would ask, but I assume nothing is definite until the spec is finalized), could a transfer initially made for Blu-ray be easily/cheaply ported over to HD DVD without a new transfer being made? And if so, can the 1st gen machines (X/A1 and 360) play a 5.1 PCM audio track?
Thanks for any info.

If this has been asked/answered already my appologies.

Lots of conversation going on at HTF about this and since I haven't heard any insider tips thus far I'm compelled to ask:

Why has Warner Brothers dropped Dolby True HD tracks from several BD titles that are provided on the (otherwise identical) HD DVD editions? Superman Returns is a prime example. This seems to be a key factor in why owners of both formats are choosing to buy the HD DVD edition over the Blu-ray in these cases... to get the Dolby True HD.

Arguments about lack of full decoding in first-gen BD players is moot given that all BD players are compatible with Dolby True HD and can extract the core DD stream pending future software updates to extract the full lossless LPCM (and the PS3 can extract full LPCM from Dolby True HD right now).

Please advise. Is Warner choosing to do this to favor HD DVD and its sales or are there other technical obstacles behind the disappointing omission of Lossless audio tracks on their BD discs?And to take that a bit further,

Given that Warner are presumably using a LPCM master to put into the TrueHD encoder in the first place and that ALL BD players support PCM and that their BD50 releases have a fair bit of unused space on them, why not simply put a lossless PCM track on BD?

Also, why are Warner persisting with such low bit rate DD and DD+ encodes on the majority of their titles? How about a minimum of 1.5Mbps, or preferably some kind of lossless (master downsampling not included) for all discs?

Are these technical or political decisions?

The maximum bitrate for the good old Dolby Digital is 640 kbps.

Amir,

I know this was touched on back when it was first announced in mid November, but I can't remember if anybody directly asked this question. With Bandai Visual being included in the CES press release of studios that support HD-DVD, and with Bandai Visual announcing back in November that they would be using VC-1 for their HD-DVD release, hopefully you can answer these two questions I have. First, Bandai Visual is a Japanese company, so most likely their home country releases won't have english subs/dubs. Will "Bandai Visual USA, Inc.", its own wholly owned U.S. subsidiary, or "Bandai Entertainment", Bandai's North American distributive unit, be supporting HD-DVD by releasing content in the US? Do you know if any US releases, or at least releases containing english subs/dubs are in the works? Secondly, is Bandai Visual exclusively supporting HD-DVD? Thirdly, and I assume I know the answer to this one but figure I'll ask anyways, with the demonstration as CES of the networking capability of the HD-DVD format, is there any word that Bandai Visual is at the very least aware of the Additional Subtitle Stream support in the HD-DVD format, and if so, do you have any information you can divulge that they are considering employing that to provide additional subititles for their japanese only releases? I assume that last question is one WAY too obscure cookie jar for you to have you hand in it, but I figure it doesn't hurt to ask.

Thanks! :)

IPTV by definition means a TV service provided by your IP network provider, not TV over generic IP services. So yes, you'd need to have an IPTV service for this to work.

The basic idea is to let a 360 work as an additional IPTV set top box, without requiring an additional purchase, and something else to stick in the room. I'd love to have this for the bedroom, or my office. But I live in a Qwest neighborhood...

Thanks for the answer. It's kind of a downer though as it appears that it will be years before I can take advantage of it, so I'm not sure why MS is doing this if they can't provide the service to the installed base in the US.

I'm sad that there is no 360 V2 with HDMI announcement today as I was hoping to hear one after the articles on engadget.com. Oh well. If it wasn't announced today I doubt we will hear something in the next few weeks.

So Sony announced a $32,999 70" XBR3 with x.v.Color. A little out of my price range. The set doesn't say it is HDMI 1.3, is that what they mean by x.v.Color? That they are supporting the extra colors of HDMI 1.3?

Would I be able to see a difference on the existing 360 HD DVD over the VGA at 1080p?

I am thinking of buying either 42" XBR3 or 52" XBR3, but I may wait until later this year for a newer XBR model that supports HDMI1.3 or x.v.Color if someone can tell me if I will see a difference between current cable broadcasts on HD or the 360 HD DVD.

Thanks.

And where is the 360 HDMI announcement? Grrr...

Just a bump for my question about the lack of Dolby True HD tracks on various BD titles (Superman Returns) that are present on the HD DVD edition...

Originally Posted by amirm
It is up to Toshiba. In their presentation, they said they expect standardization to be completed by Q4, 2007. So I guess this means they will submit it soon.

TL-51 has higher bandwidth because it packs the bits closer and spins the drive at 1.5X I believe. So it goes exactly where BD-50 is today and maybe passes it a bit... Quite an amazing technological feat considering the fact that it does not resort to .1mm recording and all the grief that comes wiht that...

Amir, your description suggest that the 51G disc is not a triple layer but a dual layer disc.

Any confirmation that this could actually be the case?

So has the equation changed regarding "Deep Color" and "xvYCC", with the improved HD-DVD disc capacity, and the arrival of HDMI 1.3? Are we going to see movies encoded with "Deep Color" and "xvYCC" color space at some point down the road? Say by 2009 maybe? Disc capacity certainly won't be an issue will it?
Doing >8-bit was never a disc capacity issue, it was a limitation of decoders, bitstreams, etcetera. Doing more is going to require another generation of formats.

LED and Laser backlighting is confirmed to be taking off now, so home user displays are going to be ready for it.

Or is this still not going to happen for a long time? I asked about this in the old thread and the impression I got was the outlook was bleak.
I wouldn't say bleak - 8-bit done right can look great, even with forthcoming displays.

Amir, your description suggest that the 51G disc is not a triple layer but a dual layer disc.

Any confirmation that this could actually be the case?
He wrote TL-51 right in his post. TL = triple layer.

Can the 1st gen machines (X/A1 and 360) play a 5.1 PCM audio track?
Thanks for any info.
Sure, it'll play back PCM just fine.

I don't know of any titles that have used it, since TrueHD is mandatory, but it's in the spec.

Just a bump for my question about the lack of Dolby True HD tracks on various BD titles (Superman Returns) that are present on the HD DVD edition...Don't take this as gospel, because I thinks it's a pretty weak arguement...

Blu-ray uses the unique Dolby Lossless to allow Blu-ray devices to leverage the core DD stream separate from the DTHD stream.

Long story short, Dolby Lossless != DTHD, therefore they would have to do *some* modicum of work, not just a straight port.

At least that's what an insider told me. :)

Ooops...gotta ask a question...insiders, does this sound reasonable?

I have a question that may have been covered already, but I haven't seen it -- HD-DVD and region coding.

Let's put aside whether content providers will or should use it. I'd like to know if region coding exist at all and is hardcoded in the HD-DVD specs.

If so, how many regions? Could it be implemented at will should a legal necessity arise? And what about the players already in the market?

thanks to all in advance!

I have a question that may have been covered already, but I haven't seen it -- HD-DVD and region coding.

Let's put aside whether content providers will or should use it. I'd like to know if region coding exist at all and is hardcoded in the HD-DVD specs.

If so, how many regions? Could it be implemented at will should a legal necessity arise? And what about the players already in the market?

There is no region coding in HD DVD whatsoever.

The possibility of adding it is being looked at, but there is no commitment to do so, nor is there any extant support in any existing titles or players for it. If it did happen (far from a given) it wouldn't be for a while.

Could anyone shed some light on the Windows CE 6.0 Broadcom SoC reference design? Will the system support playforsure or even act like a V2 Vista MCE extender?

I am very surprised that you say you don't know if there is anyone besides Sony replicating BD50's or not currently but that doesn’t directly answer my question anyway.Replication isn't an area I spend much time focusing on....
I understand a company will be allowed to create there own BD50 disks if they are capable of doing so but what are the issues of creating such a disc (Total HD) when it is being bundled with an HD DVD side? Would they need Sony/BDA approval to do such a thing?No issues whatsoever. As long as the disc meets all Blu-ray media spec criteria, the fact that it may also meet HD-DVD media spec criteria is of no concern from a BD licensing standpoint.

Out of the announced titles scheduled for release soon I see 13 titles that are announced for being released on BD50 disc's. Only 3 out of all 13 of these BD50 titles reach being 2 hours in length.

I don’t understand where so many movies this short in length (under 2 hours) are being put onto BD50g discs. Is it because of this extra functionality and how it is being inputted that requires this much space?I've seen no indication that anyone other than Lionsgate is pursuing this method of providing a PiP user experience.
Are BD50 discs going to be required for all these 90 minute movies that have any PIP type features?Unlikely if they're using secondary video.
With the promise of more BD50 releases I expected to see more longer running movies being announced, although I do see an increase of BD50's announced I don’t see any even reaching 2.5 hrs on a BD50 scheduled. I would appreciate anyone that can shed some light on this matter and whether or not this is the average length of a movie that has extras that we can expect.I have no idea whether your observation that most of the movies are short is statistically correct. Nonetheless, I've seen nor heard no evidence suggesting there is a concerted effort to avoid releasing longer movies (there clearly are some, like Kingdom of Heaven).

Blu-ray uses the unique Dolby Lossless to allow Blu-ray devices to leverage the core DD stream separate from the DTHD stream.

Long story short, Dolby Lossless != DTHD, therefore they would have to do *some* modicum of work, not just a straight port.

At least that's what an insider told me.I thought this was the case as well (Amir said so some months ago, referenced by me more recently), but more recently he claimed this was not the case and that Blu-ray titles with TrueHD would need a companion DD track. Based on other information I've seen I tend to believe Amir's old story (that there is a core DD track within the lossless Dolby stream, a la DTS), but I would like to see definitive indication of this.

I thought this was the case as well (Amir said so some months ago, referenced by me more recently), but more recently he claimed this was not the case and that Blu-ray titles with TrueHD would need a companion DD track. Based on other information I've seen I tend to believe Amir's old story (that there is a core DD track within the lossless Dolby stream, a la DTS), but I would like to see definitive indication of this.

Blu-ray Dolby TrueHD spec requires a core Dolby Digital stream, that's why Warner didn't port it over from their HD DVD counterparts: it would have required reauthoring and reencoding.

"Legends of Jazz" indeed has a core DD stream, running at 448Kbps. This can be output thru the SPDIF port on BD players. Even though they didn't have to, they also offer a separate Dolby 5.1 track at 640Kbps...a different sounding mix (as well as a PCM 2.0 stereo version)!

Amir-

I know you have answered a few questions on the TL51 spec, but I have some...

1) Is it your feeling/understanding that Toshiba plans on submitting the TL51 spec to become part of the actually HD-DVD spec. I know they showed off the TL45 spec but nothing came of it. Obviously if they don't, then it's a bit of a moot point from most of our perspectives.

2) You also mentioned the TL includes an increase to 1.5x read speed, which coupled with the density increase would greatly increase bandwidth. If the TL spec becomes part of the HD-DVD standard, is there any reason the 1.5x spec or increased density could not carry over to the SL and DL specs? I can't think of a situation currently where the higher layer count can support a higher read speed than a lower layer count.

Thank you,
Chris

I thought this was the case as well (Amir said so some months ago, referenced by me more recently), but more recently he claimed this was not the case and that Blu-ray titles with TrueHD would need a companion DD track. Based on other information I've seen I tend to believe Amir's old story (that there is a core DD track within the lossless Dolby stream, a la DTS), but I would like to see definitive indication of this.

Amir's newest claim is the correct one. In order to import a TrueHD track into BD, you need an AC3 encode of the same material. At that stage, they are interweaved. Dolby's software will create a compliant TrueHD stream for both formats in one pass. The fact that Warner decided not to use it on some of their BD releases is puzzling because they already did the work.

Blu-ray Dolby TrueHD spec requires a core Dolby Digital stream, that's why Warner didn't port it over from their HD DVD counterparts: it would have required reauthoring and reencoding.


I get that, but how much work can it really be? Aren't we literally just talking about pushing a button?

My thought was that maybe since the core is coupled into the MLP-based Dolby True HD stream for BD, that it might increase the bandwidth/bit-space needed which might tax a single-layer 25 gig BD if the HD DVD was already pushing those limits.

Thoughts?

Something seems wrong IMO. It's hardly "equal" support when the HD DVD gets the lossles audio but the BD version doesn't!!!

Fyi just finishing Emmy award dinner... When I get back to hotel will answer questions put to me....

Amir, is there a Universal Studios announcement (titles) still forthcoming?

[fingers still crossed for Jurassic]

Talkstr8t I noticed you are a Blu Ray insider...what is your position...what company do you work for. :)

Amir,

A bit off topic but since you are avideo enthusiast, I'm wondering if have had time to wander the booths. Mainly, have you seen the 8th gen Pioneer plasmas that they are claiming to be amazing? If so, what is your take on it's PQ?

Thanks,
Robert.

Fyi just finishing Emmy award dinner... When I get back to hotel will answer questions put to me....
Please be sure to let us know about that amazingly innovative game controller that won an award. :)

Amir,

A bit off topic but since you are avideo enthusiast, I'm wondering if have had time to wander the booths. Mainly, have you seen the 8th gen Pioneer plasmas that they are claiming to be amazing? If so, what is your take on it's PQ?

Thanks,
Robert.
I only had a couple of hours to look around. But did try to see the new Pioneer but it was not on display yet. I understand however, that it uses a filter to achieve its better black and as a result, its screen is more reflective. Given the fact that I think reflections are an issue already for Plasma, that does not seem a full step forward to me. Our contacts say the current FH-1 is superior as a result.

On the other hand, I was pretty impressed with the new Sharp LCDs with 3000:1 contrast ratio. It was great to see black and detail in blacks, rather than shades of gray (or blue in the case of some other LCD makers). I tried to look for vertical banding that people complain about but I only saw it once and that could be in the content but I have no seen that kind of artifact before. So for now, a guarded thumbs up for the Premium LCD line from Sharp.

Please be sure to let us know about that amazingly innovative game controller that won an award. :)
Oh, I let someone else do that :).

But this was a real honor, winning an Emmy award for Windows Media in streaming architecture. As most of you know, the heart of Windows Media is Windows Media Video which is the same codec as VC-1. So for those of you who are a fan of VC-1, this is an award for you as much as it is for us.

This was the third Emmy award that I had gotten over the years for the products that I have managed but it was the most special as we got recognition from the traditional judges for new ways of delivery content.

Microsoft also won a second Emmy for DirtectX 10.

Amir-

I know you have answered a few questions on the TL51 spec, but I have some...

1) Is it your feeling/understanding that Toshiba plans on submitting the TL51 spec to become part of the actually HD-DVD spec. I know they showed off the TL45 spec but nothing came of it. Obviously if they don't, then it's a bit of a moot point from most of our perspectives.
Yes, as far as I know, they are going to propose it to DVD forum for standardization.

2) You also mentioned the TL includes an increase to 1.5x read speed, which coupled with the density increase would greatly increase bandwidth. If the TL spec becomes part of the HD-DVD standard, is there any reason the 1.5x spec or increased density could not carry over to the SL and DL specs? I can't think of a situation currently where the higher layer count can support a higher read speed than a lower layer count.
Persumably machines which are compliant with the new TL spec, will be able to read single and double layers just as fast (minus the small difference between 15/17). So yes, that makes logical sense.

Could anyone shed some light on the Windows CE 6.0 Broadcom SoC reference design? Will the system support playforsure or even act like a V2 Vista MCE extender?
That is an extra functionality which obviously possible to add easily once the OEM uses this platform. But it is really their option. We are not forcing them to do so.

I have a question for any insider regarding the new TL 51g HD DVD disc. Supposing that 1st and 2nd gen HD DVD players can actually read the disc (I would ask, but I assume nothing is definite until the spec is finalized), could a transfer initially made for Blu-ray be easily/cheaply ported over to HD DVD without a new transfer being made? And if so, can the 1st gen machines (X/A1 and 360) play a 5.1 PCM audio track?
Thanks for any info.
Answering the last part, yes. There are already Japanese concert titles with PCM tracks.

Answering the other part, I have to think about that a bit more as what HD DVD and BD allow for each stream allocation may still be different. But at high level, you are probably right.

Amir,

I know this was touched on back when it was first announced in mid November, but I can't remember if anybody directly asked this question. With Bandai Visual being included in the CES press release of studios that support HD-DVD, and with Bandai Visual announcing back in November that they would be using VC-1 for their HD-DVD release, hopefully you can answer these two questions I have. First, Bandai Visual is a Japanese company, so most likely their home country releases won't have english subs/dubs. Will "Bandai Visual USA, Inc.", its own wholly owned U.S. subsidiary, or "Bandai Entertainment", Bandai's North American distributive unit, be supporting HD-DVD by releasing content in the US? Do you know if any US releases, or at least releases containing english subs/dubs are in the works?
I know Bandai is very interested in US market for their titles, indeed more so than their home market where they already have a strong presence. But I don't know the specifics so let me find out and get back to you.

Secondly, is Bandai Visual exclusively supporting HD-DVD?
As far as I know, they have not announced support for BD. Of course, we don't ask for exclusivity so they are free to publish in other formats. They are however, extremely interested in interactivity features of HD DVD including networking so that makes it hard for them to target BD.

Thirdly, and I assume I know the answer to this one but figure I'll ask anyways, with the demonstration as CES of the networking capability of the HD-DVD format, is there any word that Bandai Visual is at the very least aware of the Additional Subtitle Stream support in the HD-DVD format, and if so, do you have any information you can divulge that they are considering employing that to provide additional subititles for their japanese only releases? I assume that last question is one WAY too obscure cookie jar for you to have you hand in it, but I figure it doesn't hurt to ask.

Thanks! :)
You are right. I don't understand the question. :) But they are going to take advantage of network features to download additional content to the machine after you buy the disc and other advanced community type scenarios which we showed at CES. Did this answer it?

To any real insider on the HD DVD side:

Is it official that the A20 will support 1080p24 output as well as 1080p60? If not official, has Toshiba indicated that it will support 1080p24 when it ships outside of something official (and that you can repeat).

Also, Toshiba's press release listed all the different kinds of players (including the XBOX360 add-on) and then indicated that they estimated that there were more than 175,000 players sold total in North America. That doesn't seem to match up very well with some of the claims I've seen posted here that had higher numbers. If there were 70k first gen players sold and 100k XBOX360 add-ons, that doesn't leave much room for second gen player sales, even if there were 200k total for everything. Did Toshiba sell 60k second gen players in 2006, or was that total for all standalones in 2006? Did the HD DVD camp sell more than 220k total players in NA in 2006?

--Darin

Amir,

Thanks for the prompt reply about the Pioneer.

Is there a transcript or public recording of the "and the winner is....." that you participated in earlier? If not, was there anything, that you feel interesting come out of that?

BTW, good work so far on the HD DVD. With the CE support side properly addressed, I believed cheap players to be the key for some time now, all that is left is the content. I'm sure that's being worked on as we speak :)

Talk, there is too much stuff to discuss in this thread. I will comment a couple but the rest is probably best to other format discussion threads.

But that also includes putting "HD DVD" on the box, in the manual, in the ads, etc. as well, no?
I don't know how they are going to do that. The logo is owned by DVD Forum and its use is governed by them. Again, I am not a lawyer and can not interpret all the rules of the forum. Suffice it to say, we didn't see companies building DVD players by leaving half the features out and put the logo on the box.

While HD DVD may not have profiles, it does have optional features (seldom discussed), and should studios use any of them you'll have many consumers unable to make use of that content.
Well, everything the content owners create is being tested on the largest volume player: Toshiba and Xbox 360. So your point is not valid in practice, even if it were in theory (which it is not).

Perhaps you're in for a surprise... :)
I would love a surprise. Everyone would then see the patchwork of BD implementations out there. But at least the customers wont’ be surprised.

For your sake, you'd better hope it doesn't do well, because if it does you'll have a bunch of non-compliant players in the market which may force studios to dumb down their titles to reach that audience.
You tell me. The box is retailing for $1,200. There are superb HD DVD players listing for $500 with more functionality and by the time this box comes out, it will also face stiff competition from new $599 A20 with 1080p support and such. Given all of this, you think the volume of installed base is made up of this Universal player or other brands? I think the answer is obvious. The people who buy this player are BD customers who are used to paying >$1,000 for a player and are worried about the format war so they opt for the LG to give them some comfort that it can play HD DVD, should BD falter somehow.

I'm actually glad to hear this, because it will help push the studios on the Blu-ray side to similarly innovate.
Except that they can’t because they are liable to get grief if they advertise features for a disc, that does not play on some players with no way for the user to know in advance, before purchasing said discs. What’s more, this stuff is not easy. You can try to copy us be you also have to put in the engineering and software/service expertise behind which we both know is hard.

From my standpoint anything which pushes the envelope on interactivity is a good thing.
Sometimes I wonder though as you downplay the stuff you can’t do in BD. Really, we need to be on the same side of this equation and not cross purposes.

Interesting statement, considering there may be all manner of grief which comes from packing the bits closer together.
You mean like what happened to BD? :) Come on now. They are going from 15 to 17 gigabytes per layer. That is not a big change. But if you know more about optical engineering than I, feel free to expand on what sort of “grief” you think they are going to get, which Toshiba engineers don’t know about.

Thanks again for responding head-on, and I hope you don't feel I'm being unnecessarily harsh in pointing out what I think are serious issues with the LG player for your format of choice. I'm sure you'll do the same should any Blu-ray news come out in the next few days which might have a similarly negative impact...

- Talk
I am not sure this post is harsh but my head is down reading the rest of the posts in the other threads. Really, I am used to industry people going to CES and getting business done. Did you really have that much free time to post here left and right? If so, you are going to have to go solo for the most part as we are busy to talk to a ton of people interested in HD DVD :). And one more thing, if you think the show and panel discussions are going in your favor, then I think you have only attended your own press conference!

Stupid question perhaps for Amir, or anyone else who may know, about the 51gb HD discs.

If they can squeeze 17gbs per layer out now does that mean they can easily spin DL titles out to 34gb? Would this be any harder than the current DL discs?

Stupid question perhaps for Amir, or anyone else who may know, about the 51gb HD discs.

If they can squeeze 17gbs per layer out now does that mean they can easily spin DL titles out to 34gb? Would this be any harder than the current DL discs?
That is a logical conclusion. Indeed, there is no requirement for all three layers to be used. One can use two layers and get 34 as you say.

Thanks Amir! I figure if TL doesn't pass or has problems down the road an extra 4gbs is an extra 4gbs. ;)

Thank you so much Denass :). On that note, it is 1:06am and I have to be up and ready to go to a bunch more meetings at 8:00am!!! So good night everyone...

I know Bandai is very interested in US market for their titles, indeed more so than their home market where they already have a strong presence. But I don't know the specifics so let me find out and get back to you.


As far as I know, they have not announced support for BD. Of course, we don't ask for exclusivity so they are free to publish in other formats. They are however, extremely interested in interactivity features of HD DVD including networking so that makes it hard for them to target BD.


You are right. I don't understand the question. :) But they are going to take advantage of network features to download additional content to the machine after you buy the disc and other advanced community type scenarios which we showed at CES. Did this answer it?
First, thank you very much for addressing my questions. It's great to hear your impression as to Bandai's feelings regarding releasing content on HD-DVD in the US. I saw a picture taken I think during the HD-DVD press conference that showed a shot of a Bandai anime title on the big screen, I don't know if it was a still shot or an actual video clip, but it looked like they were showing off a PiP implementation of a scene in a movie and the corresponding hand drawn story board. The Bandai logo was at the top of the screen, and the picture just brought a HUGE smile to my face, thinking about just what cool things they can do interactivity-wise. Needless to say I'm very excited about the subject, and I will look forward to any additional information you're able to share.

Lastly sorry for my unclear last question. I was refering to the aspect of HD-DVD networking spec that allows a player to access a server a studio would potentially set up, in order to download an additional subtitle stream that didn't exist on the disk. This is something I have asked you about in the past, but of course only the studios would know whether they'll be setting up servers and providing subtitles for this purpose in the future. But I was wondering, with the focus that seems to have been put on showing off the networking functionality of the HD-DVD format at CES -- and if Bandai was planning on releasing some HD-DVD content only in Japan (which would most likely mean no english subs/dub on the disk) -- if you had any knowledge of Bandai's level of awareness/interest in setting up a server to provide english subtitles for their Japanese language only HD-DVD releases?

Thank you again for taking the time to review my post and respond. :)

Oh, I let someone else do that :).

But this was a real honor, winning an Emmy award for Windows Media in streaming architecture. As most of you know, the heart of Windows Media is Windows Media Video which is the same codec as VC-1. So for those of you who are a fan of VC-1, this is an award for you as much as it is for us.

This was the third Emmy award that I had gotten over the years for the products that I have managed but it was the most special as we got recognition from the traditional judges for new ways of delivery content.

Microsoft also won a second Emmy for DirtectX 10.
Hey! A three time Emmy award winner huh? Cool! I think you should add that to your sig:

Amir
Microsoft
HD DVD insider
Three time Emmy award winner
VC-1 insider in BD/HD DVD
Ask me questions about HD DVD here

I think that'd be real cool. Nothing wrong with tooting your own horn a little. :D ;)

Amir,

Under the assumption the proposed TL51 spec is accepted as is, are the first generation players physically capable or supporting it? In other words, would all that would be required is a firmware update and we're good to go? Or are the drives not spec'ed out to support 1.5x and we're SOL, or are we SOL for another reason?

Thank you.

PS: Congrats on the award -- well deserved! :)

I've seen no indication that anyone other than Lionsgate is pursuing this method of providing a PiP user experience.
Unlikely if they're using secondary video.

I have no idea whether your observation that most of the movies are short is statistically correct. Nonetheless, I've seen nor heard no evidence suggesting there is a concerted effort to avoid releasing longer movies (there clearly are some, like Kingdom of Heaven).

For clarification I do know that past BD50 movies were longer length movies but my question was directed at announced titles coming out soon and whether or not these new interactive features are taking up so much space that they are causing the movies to be shorter in length?

My observations may be incorrect but it now seems that announced titles in BD50 are getting shorter in length compared to as you pointed out previous movies such as Kingdom of Heaven that is marked as 191 minutes long on highdefdigest without any interactivity such as PIP type features.

According to highdefdigest in the list of titles coming out soon there are 13 titles that have announced specs of being on a BD50 disc and as you can see 10 out of the 13 titles are all under 2 hours in length.

1 --- Crank --- 87 minutes
2 --- Saw II --- 92 minutes
3 --- Resident Evil: Apocalypse --- 94 minutes
4 --- Layer Cake --- 105 minutes
5 --- Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy --- 109 minutes
6 --- Casanova --- 111 minutes
7 --- Mr. & Mrs. Smith --- 112 minutes
8 --- Chicago --- 113 minutes
9 --- Ladder 49 --- 115 minutes
10 --- Glory --- 118 minutes
11 --- The Prestige --- 128 minutes
12 --- The Guardian --- 136 minutes
13 --- Flyboys --- 140 minutes

@paidgeek:

now that sony has announced some of its upcoming 2007 releases, are there ay exciting details you can share with us regarding audio and/or extras that will be included?

tia

That is a logical conclusion. Indeed, there is no requirement for all three layers to be used. One can use two layers and get 34 as you say.I'm guessing support for the HD-DVD51 media is all or nothing? That is, if first-generation players can't support the full 51Gb, then there's no chance of them supporting 17Gb or 34Gb?

If the new spec isn't compatible with first-generation players, could a studio produce a double-sided disk with 34-50Gb on one side and a backward-compatible 15-30Gb on the other?

@both sides:

is the 1394 connector dead for these new formats? do you know of anyone that might be offering such a solution for delivering audio to a receiver?

I'm guessing support for the HD-DVD51 media is all or nothing? That is, if first-generation players can't support the full 51Gb, then there's no chance of them supporting 17Gb or 34Gb?

I don't know the answer, but I wouldn't assume it wouldn't work. Certainly Audio CD was upgraded with higher density a couple of time while maintaining backwards compatibility.

We'll have to wait for the results of testing.

Can someone who understands what signal the 360 HD DVD is outputting tell me if viewing it on Sony's new XBR x.v.Color will look any different (i.e. more colors, less banding, less motion blur)? I don't really understand what Sony's x.v.Color is, I think HDMI 1.3 but not sure.

Or is the 360 just not capable (yet) of putting out a higher quality signal that the Sony x.v.Color set would need in order to look any better than the standard 46" XBR3.

The reason I ask - trying to decide to buy a 46" XBR3 now, or perhaps wait until Sony releases a newer 46" XBR3 set with x.v.Color. I just don't know if I would need a newer HD DVD in order to take advantage of what the x.v.Color offers.

Thanks.

Hey - also - anyone would have an idea of what adding x.v.Color to a 46" XBR3 would do to the price of the set, I would like to know. Does that type of technology maybe add a few hundred to the cost, or do you think it would double the cost from like $3500 now to $7000.

I just don't understand the tech - thanks for helping.

Lastly sorry for my unclear last question. I was refering to the aspect of HD-DVD networking spec that allows a player to access a server a studio would potentially set up, in order to download an additional subtitle stream that didn't exist on the disk. This is something I have asked you about in the past, but of course only the studios would know whether they'll be setting up servers and providing subtitles for this purpose in the future. But I was wondering, with the focus that seems to have been put on showing off the networking functionality of the HD-DVD format at CES -- and if Bandai was planning on releasing some HD-DVD content only in Japan (which would most likely mean no english subs/dub on the disk) -- if you had any knowledge of Bandai's level of awareness/interest in setting up a server to provide english subtitles for their Japanese language only HD-DVD releases?
Ah, that is more clear. As I mentioned, they plan on providing network services for their titles. So once there (for digital downloads) then providing subtitles should be pretty easy. And as you know, HDi menus are dynamic so once the download happens, the new subtitles would nicely show up in the menus for the menus as if it was always there.

But let me find out if they are planning on providing this exact feature.


Hey! A three time Emmy award winner huh? Cool! I think you should add that to your sig:[/QUOTE]
Thanks! That was well done :).

Amir,

Under the assumption the proposed TL51 spec is accepted as is, are the first generation players physically capable or supporting it? In other words, would all that would be required is a firmware update and we're good to go? Or are the drives not spec'ed out to support 1.5x and we're SOL, or are we SOL for another reason?

Thank you.
I think we should wait to see the proposal to the forum and then go from there. It is hard to answer such questions without due process for the specification.

PS: Congrats on the award -- well deserved! :)
Thank you so much.

I'm guessing support for the HD-DVD51 media is all or nothing? That is, if first-generation players can't support the full 51Gb, then there's no chance of them supporting 17Gb or 34Gb?
That is a good question. I would think that providing compatibility with the slightly denser pits will be easier than reading a third layer but I am just guessing. We should wait to see the full spec and then go from there.

If the new spec isn't compatible with first-generation players, could a studio produce a double-sided disk with 34-50Gb on one side and a backward-compatible 15-30Gb on the other?
Boy, you guys should come and work for Toshiba with these creative ideas :). But yes, I see no reason why double sided discs are not possible this way but they would obviously be somewhat more difficult/expensive than just using a blank on the other side.

@both sides:

is the 1394 connector dead for these new formats? do you know of anyone that might be offering such a solution for delivering audio to a receiver?
1394 is disappearing rapidly from what I can see. This is a trend that has been going on for a while I am afriad. But I don't closely watch this area so maybe someone else has a better prespective.

The trend is now to decode everything in the player and send ready to display/amplify content to the receiver. So the concept of compressed transmission over 1394 is no longer in vogue.

Amir wrote:

I think I speak for many here at AVS and videophiles everywhere when I offer you a heart-felt- "Congratulations!"

:)
Thank you so much David. Much appreciated.

I second that Congrats Amir on your accomplishments

Looking forward, which medium would ultimately be cheaper for blank recordable disks? Both on a per disk basis and per MB. Are there any inherent licensing fees that would create a large disparity between the two?

Was TL45 ever formally submitted to the DVD Forum?

Was TL45 ever formally submitted to the DVD Forum?
As far as I know, no.

Ah, that is more clear. As I mentioned, they plan on providing network services for their titles. So once there (for digital downloads) then providing subtitles should be pretty easy. And as you know, HDi menus are dynamic so once the download happens, the new subtitles would nicely show up in the menus for the menus as if it was always there.

No, I never really had a picture in my head of how that would work. But that sounds very cool. Just like how it should be. You guys thought of everything with HDi.

AFAIK, TL45 only gives more storage where as TL51 seems to be 1.5X and so increase also throughput to (I bet) someting around 50mb/s...

--Patrice (not insider at all)

AFAIK, TL45 only gives more storage where as TL51 seems to be 1.5X and so increase also throughput to (I bet) someting around 50mb/s...

--Patrice (no insider at all)

Asked as a question:

Does the TL51 add throughput? (I doubt it).

- Rich

I'm guessing support for the HD-DVD51 media is all or nothing? That is, if first-generation players can't support the full 51Gb, then there's no chance of them supporting 17Gb or 34Gb?

If the new spec isn't compatible with first-generation players, could a studio produce a double-sided disk with 34-50Gb on one side and a backward-compatible 15-30Gb on the other?
I'd like to know too.

I'm guessing that, like the situation with 650 meg and 700 meg CDs, the current players wouldn't mind the 17 Gig layers. Is that reasonable?

Also, is it reasonable for me to be optimistic that players like the Xbox 360 add-on will take to TL-51 like a duck to water?

As far as I know, they have not announced support for BD. Of course, we don't ask for exclusivity so they are free to publish in other formats. They are however, extremely interested in interactivity features of HD DVD including networking so that makes it hard for them to target BD.
Ok, something just hit me, and I'd very much like to hear your thoughts. You say that the interactivity features of HD-DVD are something Bandai is very excited about exploiting, and assumably played a part in their decision to release content on HD-DVD. Then you say, "it would make it hard for them to target BD".

So here's my question. One of the reasons that was listed months ago for why Disney decided to go BD exclusive was because they felt they could not do without the interactivity features that BD provided! So I'm totally confused here. How do two separate studios come to 180 degree divergent opinions on the same topic? :confused:

Has something changed in the mean time? Have expectations been tempered by reality? Is there a different conception of just what "interactivity" entails in the minds both studios? It'd be really great if you could clear all this up for me as best you can when you get a chance, if it is um, clear-up-able at all.

Thanks! :)

Amir-

thank you for answering my other questions - I appreciate it. I have a couple more if you have the time.

1) Some are saying some of the Studio Canal releases in Europe - even though they are encoded at 1080p24 - have the PAL audio speed up issue. Specifically, Basic Instinct is mentioned. Do you know if this is true? If so, can you call them or something and tell them to cut it out? :) I can't think of a reason to encode the movie properly but then screw up the audio.

2) Do you expect any more title announcements at CES? I know it's a couple more days, but I was hoping for the HD-DVD calendar to fill up a bit more in Jan and Feb.

Cheers,
Chris

Amir's newest claim is the correct one. In order to import a TrueHD track into BD, you need an AC3 encode of the same material. At that stage, they are interweaved. Dolby's software will create a compliant TrueHD stream for both formats in one pass. The fact that Warner decided not to use it on some of their BD releases is puzzling because they already did the work.So we clearly still have a disagreement here, at least between you and PeterTHX. What are interweaved?

Talkstr8t I noticed you are a Blu Ray insider...what is your position...what company do you work for.This has been discussed ad nauseum in the past; for various reasons I choose not to disclose my employer, but the moderators have the information required to validate my insider status. My employer provides technology which is present in Blu-ray players.

I don't know how they are going to do that. The logo is owned by DVD Forum and its use is governed by them.Perhaps they'll use the HD DVD ROM logo which is used on burners? That wouldn't require them to support all the player stuff, just to have a drive capable of reading HD DVD ROM discs. Regardless, not good news for studios in terms of HD DVD minimum platform compatibility.
Well, everything the content owners create is being tested on the largest volume player: Toshiba and Xbox 360. So your point is not valid in practice, even if it were in theory (which it is not).Oh, so buyers of other players get no comfort that content is tested there? That doesn't sound good. And where is my previous point not valid? LG has clearly confirmed no plans, now or in the future, for HDi support on this player.
You tell me. The box is retailing for $1,200. There are superb HD DVD players listing for $500 with more functionality and by the time this box comes out, it will also face stiff competition from new $599 A20 with 1080p support and such. Given all of this, you think the volume of installed base is made up of this Universal player or other brands?Clearly there is a clamor for a universal player, and none others seem to be on the horizon, let alone available within two months.
I think the answer is obvious. The people who buy this player are BD customers who are used to paying >$1,000 for a player and are worried about the format war so they opt for the LG to give them some comfort that it can play HD DVD, should BD falter somehow.Or, more likely, HD DVD customers looking to gracefully exit the format in favor of Blu-ray, so they want a player which will at least minimally preserve their existing investment in HD DVD titles.
Except that they can’t because they are liable to get grief if they advertise features for a disc, that does not play on some players with no way for the user to know in advance, before purchasing said discs.Come on, Amir, you know this is ridiculous. A consumer will know if they have a player that supports networking (because they would have to have configured that networking). To suggest people will be upset because they buy content advertising "networked bonus content" and can't use it because they don't have a network capable player is far-fetched at best.
What’s more, this stuff is not easy. You can try to copy us be you also have to put in the engineering and software/service expertise behind which we both know is hard.Oh, yes, the combined strength of the Blu-ray community is clearly incapable of building the required content and infrastructure to support networked content. Ignoring every other BD company, Sony alone has obviously built out significant content and network infrastructure for supporting networked gameplay and commerce on the PS3. How is building far more constrained bonus content for BD titles a harder task than what Sony alone has done for the PS3?
Sometimes I wonder though as you downplay the stuff you can’t do in BD.I have never downplayed interactivity - I have consistently defended it as being of clear consumer value, in spite of many here who just want to "watch the damn movie". The only thing I have downplayed is the suggestion that PiP is the end-all and be-all of interactivity.
You mean like what happened to BD? :) Come on now. They are going from 15 to 17 gigabytes per layer. That is not a big change. But if you know more about optical engineering than I, feel free to expand on what sort of “grief” you think they are going to get, which Toshiba engineers don’t know about.A Toshiba engineer was previously quoted as saying there is no way that (45GB) TL would work on legacy drives. Are you now committing here that TL51 will work on all HD DVD drives? If not, how do you foresee TL51 impacting the format war? Will studios support it if it means incompatibility with legacy HD DVD players?

- Talk

Has something changed in the mean time? Have expectations been tempered by reality? Is there a different conception of just what "interactivity" entails in the minds both studios? It'd be really great if you could clear all this up for me as best you can when you get a chance, if it is um, clear-up-able at all.Given your interest in anime, I think another good question is why would anime studios support HD DVD more than Blu-ray given Blu-ray's 96% market share in Japan?

Given your interest in anime, I think another good question is why would anime studios support HD DVD more than Blu-ray given Blu-ray's 96% market share in Japan?

Isn't a good deal of anime $ generated in N. America?

AFAIK, most anime DVDs run upwards of 6500 Yen in Japan, this trend (unlike Hollywood DVDs) continues/increases in N. America with most DVDs costing around 100 bucks.

Doesn't Sony control many Anime titles and haven't they put out GITS2: Innocence with a 7.1 PCM track? Anyone know what else the BDA has planned in terms of anime releases (paidgeek)?

As an anime fan, I say bring them all on. I know I've reserved a good deal of money for Bandai's titles as well as future ones like GITS: SAC (and 2nd GiG). The same will be true for BD releases, if they are quality (like I hear Innocence is).

So we clearly still have a disagreement here, at least between you and PeterTHX. What are interweaved?Dolby's Roger Dressler in his post to the Blu-ray software forum:
TrueHD is the same for both disc formats, and the same file can technically be used on both. There may be other reasons why this is not being done.

i happened to be in a BB today and played around with the sony bd player briefly; it was connected to a bravia lcd and was playing a sony bd demo disc.

are all the trailers encoded using the same codec? if so, which codec?

while playing a trailer and pressing the "display" button i was only presented with bitrates but nothing about the codec.

i am asking b/c the trailer clip for open season looked very, very good...i think if the movie is as good as the trailer on that demo there will be a new reference disc...imo

AFAIK, most anime DVDs run upwards of 6500 Yen in Japan, this trend (unlike Hollywood DVDs) continues/increases in N. America with most DVDs costing around 100 bucks.

HUH? :confused: Where do you shop? One volume of a series usually lists for $30, and will sell for $20-30. So if you meant a series, you're right, they do get quite expensive, but the individual dvds don't come anywhere near $100.

Given your interest in anime, I think another good question is why would anime studios support HD DVD more than Blu-ray given Blu-ray's 96% market share in Japan?
Well, we have Amir's comment above. And from the english press release that was just released this morning, the reasons they're decided to release on HD-DVD is:

1) "To take advantage of the image quality VC-1 has proven to provide."
2) "Exploit HDi to add value to their HD-DVD releases and develop promotion plans." (I guess Blu-Wizard didn't catch their fancy. ;) )
3) "Collaborate on new business models based on HDi network functions, managed copy et al."

In general, as Shinoharu Kawasaki, president and CEO of Memory Tech so succinctly puts it in the middle of the press release:
"Memory-Tech will work with Microsoft and Bandai to develop a complete one stop service (encoding, authoring, disc replication and HDi network infrastructure) for creating HD-era packages with the kind of high picture quality and HDi navigation that is sure to attract customers."

Looks like MS's footwork has paid off.

But hey, aren't you the one supposed to be answering questions? :)

Ok, here's one for you. Can you please post the data from which you make the assertion that that BD has 96% of the market share in Japan?

Thanks. :)

To Amir or anyone else who can help, there is a big problem with some of the Studio Canal releases. KING KONG is fine. TOTAL RECALL is not yet known. But BASIC INSTINCT and all three RAMBO films suffer from a higher pitched soundtrack vs. all NTSC versions. They sound exactly like a PAL speed soundtrack. They also sound like some older Hong Kong films that were transfered in PAL and then converted to NTSC for video, but which somehow kept the higher pitch of the 4% PAL speedup. I am not saying these have been encoded at 1080p/25. I am saying that the sound on these titles is off. They are pitched higher than they are supposed to be.

This is now being talked about by quite a few and many are on record as saying it is there. I am 100% certain of this. I spent nearly two hours comparing BASIC INSTINCT on HD-DVD to the US release versions and have zero doubt that the HD-DVD has a soundtrack with the pitch being too high. Everyone sounds like they have sucked helium. Jerry Goldsmith's score clearly has a higher pitch to it. It is so obvious that I am absolutely stunned that some have not detected it.

This is not acceptable. Whatever is going on over in Europe needs to be looked at and the problem corrected because these films are BD exclusives here in the USA and that means us HD-DVD supporters who care about quality will have no choice but to buy into the competing format. I was thrilled about HD-DVD in Europe, but very worried about the PAL speedup issue. Clearly that fear was warranted.

Amir, I hope you are listening and can find out what is happening. You've proven time and time again that you truly do care about this product.

I am not crazy, nor are the other people here who have noticed this. We love the transfers and the VC1 encoding. Picture quality is amazing from these Studio Canal releases. But the sound issue is BIG for many and rightly so.

Thanks for your attention.

Originally Posted by Roger Dressler
TrueHD is the same for both disc formats, and the same file can technically be used on both. There may be other reasons why this is not being done.


then can any insider share what those reasons might be?

Amir,

What would you guess the timeline to be for proposal of TL51 to the DVD forum?

Do think that this is likely to be proposed at the next meeting? And if so, when is that?

For those that are anxiously following this, do you think they should be looking for real information about it being added within the next, say, 2 months? Or it this something that we shouldn't expect to hear anything concrete about until the end of the year ?

Amir, congrats on the Emmy :)

Do you know when Universal is announcing their HD DVD line up?

talk,

could you please place into context the comments from a toshiba engineer stating current drives could not support triple layer hddvd? IIRC, he did not even work in the drive department.

Um Amir what's the story on no release announcement for Universal at CES?

I think we all have the same question - that is tremendously underwhelming. I am an HD-DVD owner and you have to admit that the announcements (with dates, mind) for this year are overwhelmingly in BD's favour - what ON EARTH happened with Universal ?

I know you are going to say that you can't speak for Universal, but at some level you guys are going to have to speak for and with one another on this, as BD has managed to give impression they are communicating with a single voice.

Very disappointing. Unless I am mistaken, there is no equivalent conference year with a greater press coverage, so no reason to hold back on any announces, as doing so just avoids free press.

Um Amir what's the story on no release announcement for Universal at CES?

To follow on the same line, I'm wondering what would be the requirements from Microsoft and Toshiba to join the BDA and end this war.

Let's totally disregard technology and engineering, and only focus on politics and finance. As long as the dispute continues, the economies of scale will be decreased and the confusion will not help the lambda consumers. There must be a breaking point where a diplomatic compromise would guarantee a larger and safer return on investment in the long run.

So, what would be a gracious requirement for joining forces? A diplomatic agreement on a number of royalties and patents? A guaranteed market share for VC1 encodes? Hardware and software support for the replication companies that invested in HD-DVD?

In short, is it politically too late for any kind of deal, or it is never too late?

I posted this in the HD DVD Players (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9410248) forum, but someone there recommended that I ask it in the Insiders thread.

I've been having an ongoing debate with a rep from R&B Films. The packaging to their Chronos HD DVD indicates a 1080i encoding, which I commented in my review was an odd decision considering that they claim to have remastered it specifically for this disc and all the major studios are authoring discs at 1080p24.

This has lead to a lengthy discussion about whether HD DVD really supports 1080p or not. He confirmed with their authoring house (Technicolor) that the disc is authored with 1920x1080 data encoded with 2:3 reverse field cadence flags to instruct the HD DVD player how to decode for 1080i output. As I understand it, that's the same thing all the major studios do, and I told him I believe it would be safe to label their packaging that the disc is 1080p. An HD DVD player's decoder can use the cadence flags to decode as 1080i, or could theoretically ignore them and output as 1080p24 (as the Sony and Pioneer Blu-ray players do).

He insists that this is not accurate, and that all of the major studios are misleading the public by claiming their discs are 1080p. As far as he's concerned, HD DVD only supports 1080i and that's the end of the story.

This got me thinking about how DVDs are authored. Isn't film-based content on DVD soft telecined and stored on disc as 720x480 frames with the same 2:3 cadence flags for decoding and output? And yet we don't ever refer to DVDs as"480p".

So, are HD DVD discs really "1080p" or not? I'm hoping an insider can explain how it really works in a way I can relay back to the R&B rep.

Add me to the list of those asking "What's up with Universal????"

So we clearly still have a disagreement here, at least between you and PeterTHX. What are interweaved?
Interweaved isn't a technical term for it, just used it in a general sense. OK, I'll try it again. As Roger Dressler from Dolby said, a TrueHD encode can be used on both formats with no changes. The difference is that the TrueHD track can be directly imported in an HD-DVD project without any further work. It does NOT include a DD+ or AC3 core. For it work on the Blu-ray side, a standard AC3 stream must also be created, normally at 640kbps but it can be less. Now this step may or may not be specific to Scenarist BD. I have not had the chance to use Blu-print. When you want to import TrueHD into BD, you would point to the standard AC3 stream. At that point, you would say that you actually want to import a TrueHD stream and point to it. The 2 streams are then imported as a single audio track to be used.

then can any insider share what those reasons might be?
I can think of 3 reasons, but do not know if any are correct. One, an exact port of the HD-DVD may be bigger than the 25GB BD disc they want to use. The TrueHD track would be the easiest thing to cut possibly because of reason three. Two, Blu-print does not yet allow for TrueHD import. Maybe Talk or paidgeek can answer that one. Three, Warner felt it was not necessary since all current player, sans the PS3, do not decode it anyways. Again, I do not know the actual answer.

I posted this in the HD DVD Players forum, but someone there recommended that I ask it in the Insiders thread.

I've been having an ongoing debate with a rep from R&B Films. The packaging to their Chronos HD DVD indicates a 1080i encoding, which I commented in my review was an odd decision considering that they claim to have remastered it specifically for this disc and all the major studios are authoring discs at 1080p24.

This has lead to a lengthy discussion about whether HD DVD really supports 1080p or not. He confirmed with their authoring house (Technicolor) that the disc is authored with 1920x1080 data encoded with 2:3 reverse field cadence flags to instruct the HD DVD player how to decode for 1080i output. As I understand it, that's the same thing all the major studios do, and I told him I believe it would be safe to label their packaging that the disc is 1080p. An HD DVD player's decoder can use the cadence flags to decode as 1080i, or could theoretically ignore them and output as 1080p24 (as the Sony and Pioneer Blu-ray players do).

He insists that this is not accurate, and that all of the major studios are misleading the public by claiming their discs are 1080p. As far as he's concerned, HD DVD only supports 1080i and that's the end of the story.

This got me thinking about how DVDs are authored. Isn't film-based content on DVD soft telecined and stored on disc as 720x480 frames with the same 2:3 cadence flags for decoding and output? And yet we don't ever refer to DVDs as"480p".

So, are HD DVD discs really "1080p" or not? I'm hoping an insider can explain how it really works in a way I can relay back to the R&B rep.
I think things got a bit mixed up. Most HD-DVDs are 1080p24. The reason for the confusion may be because the 1080p24 encode has metadata attached so the player will know how to handle the transition to 1080i. So your thoughts are 100% correct. A player that outputs native 1080p24 should ignore the metadata and output the stream. A real world example is to follow. I did a 1080p24 encode, using Microsoft's encoder, for HD-DVD. I then was able to remove the extra metadata for HD-DVD and have a 1080p24 encode for Blu-ray which I imported into Scenarist BD. It involved zero encoding to go from what the R&B rep is thinking is 1080i to 1080p24 for Blu-ray. That wouldn't be possible if the HD-DVD was truly 1080i. I'm sure Amir and Ben will also affirm what I am saying, which I'm sure will mean more to the R&B rep than coming from me.

hi Amir
hope you can help
Is the laser in the HDDVD players the same in Bluray's
I ask this because I heard bluray had problems getting a good yield to work in the early stages.
That being the case I am concerned at the life span of the laser in both formats more so bluray.It would be huge problem if they were found to have a short lifespan
thanks

Boy, you guys should come and work for Toshiba with these creative ideas :). But yes, I see no reason why double sided discs are not possible this way but they would obviously be somewhat more difficult/expensive than just using a blank on the other side.

A 30/51 flippy disc would be FIVE layers, wouldn't it?

Gary

A player that outputs native 1080p24 should ignore the metadata and output the stream.Question for any insider: Can a compliant CE HD-DVD player just ignore this metadata? What about with PiP in the mix?

Regarding Talk's hint that there logos may be used to distinguish between the various levels of BD player, I think it might just work. Just need to get the education on it.

It'd be similar to how we currently have different levels of DTS, different logos for different capabilities. If the BDA did this properly, they could cover their behinds and it would make it easier for sales folk to explain to customers. If someone asks if a player can do XYZ, with a bit of background info and looking at the player's BD logo, they could arrive at an answer and educate the customer in the process.

Talk, are you able to provide further insight? Am I getting warmer or colder?

Cheers...
Duy-Khang Hoang

Boy, you guys should come and work for Toshiba with these creative ideas :). But yes, I see no reason why double sided discs are not possible this way but they would obviously be somewhat more difficult/expensive than just using a blank on the other side.
A 30/51 flippy disc would be FIVE layers, wouldn't it?
I always assumed that 3 layer would use two layers molded together like one side of a 30GB twin format disc and one layer molded by itself bonded together with 'glue' like that used to bond the layers of dual layer HD-DVDs. Molding could be done on any 30 GB hybrid (flippy disc) HD-DVD line. All known technology.

BTW, from what I have heard, the hard part about physically going above 3 layers read from one side is the limits on total reflectivity.

Insiders, I asked Toshiba CES booth staffers about HD DVD and the color gamut/resolution enhancements in HDMI 1.3 but they coludn't tell me more than what the sign in the booth said.

Does the HD DVD format accommodate the extra color bits or the wider color space? Or is an HD DVD player only able to "enhance" the color data that was laid down on the disc (akin to the way today's players and HDTVs "improve" a 480-line red DVD by scaling)? Are the answers to those questions the same with respect to the Blu-ray format and Blu-ray players?

Will we see movies any time soon that are telecined to capture the film's colors significanty better than is done today? In other words, will those titles be made so they can look better on the TVs that use the HDMI 1.3 color features?

hi Amir
hope you can help
Is the laser in the HDDVD players the same in Bluray's
I ask this because I heard bluray had problems getting a good yield to work in the early stages.
Well, yes in that they are both blue lasers. No in that Sony makes their own, whereas other companies source from Nichia Chemical (original inventor of blue lasers) and Sharp. Sony is on its own, having to manufacture much higher volume in order to ship PS3s. The others only need to make enough for the HD DVD (and stand-alone BD) use. Given the fact that we and Toshiba are currently the largest volume customers, as you can imagine, we have an easier time getting parts than say, a low volume BD company.

That being the case I am concerned at the life span of the laser in both formats more so bluray.It would be huge problem if they were found to have a short lifespan
thanks
Indeed, life span could be an issue as it is shorter in blue laser products. This is not a big deal for stand-alone playback where you use the machine very infrequently, but a bigger deal when you play a game for hours on end. Hopefully Sony has thought this through. Note that this is also a big problem in cars where the temprature is elevated. When we talk to companies who want to put these players in the car, they immediately rule out BD but think HD DVD can be made to work although that is also challenging.

A 30/51 flippy disc would be FIVE layers, wouldn't it?

Gary
They are not all on the same side. That is, we are not trying to read all 5 layers on one side of the disc. Two (SD layer) are on the other side. And three on the other. We have 4 today with combo discs.

Question for any insider: Can a compliant CE HD-DVD player just ignore this metadata? What about with PiP in the mix?
Sure. Again, HD DVD does not spec how you output the signal, only how you decode it. I could build an HD DVD player and only put SD video on it at 480p and not violate any spec. I am sure the same is true of BD. All the standard tries to do is to tell an implementor, how to make sense out of what is on the disc itself.

As an analogy, DVD spec did not spell out how you upsample the video to 1080p either. But of course, there are a ton of players which do that, and they are fully compliant with the logo.

Even if one were to worry about this, as long as the player has a normal mode where it outputs 1080i (which it always would anyway) you are compliant.

As to PiP, there are many solutions. Simplest is to drop the frames. The other is to interpolate down, ala what the TV guys are showing at CES with frame interpolation (which is pretty easy for SD video). Or do something simpler which is just to filter the frames. Since the PiP video is not the critical element, any and all of these solutions would work just fine. I expect high end products to go for frame interpolation.

Add me to the list of those asking "What's up with Universal????"
I don't know who started this concern with Uni. See my response here: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9413893&&#post9413893

In a nutshell, Uni runs the promotion group for HD DVD in US. As such, they are all over HD DVD and could not possibly be more committed to the format. They are planning on releasing a ton of content this year including day and date releases for new movies yet to even come to theaters.

Perhaps they'll use the HD DVD ROM logo which is used on burners?
Does Blu-ray let people do that? Use the drive logo and leave out say, BD-J? If not, why do you ask about DVD Forum? Last I checked, your company is a member of DVD forum so you should know the rules as well as I.

Regardless, not good news for studios in terms of HD DVD minimum platform compatibility.
Well, since you keep making this illogical assertion, let's put it to rest this way. Please post here that you think HD DVD studios are going to stop using HDi interactivity because of the LG player. We will all bookmark it, and then come and revisit it when titles continue to push the envelop on interactivity :).

I mean really, no studio is going to back off from using HDi because of what LG has done. But if you think otherwise, per above, please clearly state so.

Oh, so buyers of other players get no comfort that content is tested there?
As if BD studios are testing on all the players out there? How about Descent not working on Sony/Pioneer there? Or the fact that Sony discovered well after the BD launch that Samsung player was filtering their content? What testing had they done?

To be clear, HD DVD studios do attempt to test on as many players as they can get their hands on. It is just that in case of products which we have helped create, we also do testing. This double safety net should help reduce compatibility issues.

LG has clearly confirmed no plans, now or in the future, for HDi support on this player.
They have said that this player has a short life and follow on will replace it as early as June this year.

Or, more likely, HD DVD customers looking to gracefully exit the format in favor of Blu-ray, so they want a player which will at least minimally preserve their existing investment in HD DVD titles.
You crack me up with these arguments. I hope one day I see more data from an insider here than theory after theory. But I will play.

If I am an HD DVD customer, then I already have an HD DVD player. Why would I buy another one for $1,200? And why would I need to have a new player to “preserve my investment” when I already have an HD DVD player? And one that is fully complaint with the spec? You see how flowed your argument is?

Fact is that the people who have an appetite for such an expensive player are BD customers. And they wind up getting into HD DVD camp. It is them who get an easy transition into HD DVD not the other way around. Trust me, even without interactivity, they are going to be blown away by the quality of movies like King Kong and would want to buy more. :)

Now keep this in mind: there are actually two universal players here. One stand-alone and the other PC-based. They are shipping a drive with PC software which of course, fully supports HDi. So they have added two HD DVD products to their line up, not just one. And one is fully compliant. I hope we agree that by providing the PC solution, the damage is 100% on BD side as even the above silly argument is not applicable here.

People who went to LG booth heard loud and clear that they are now completely neutral. They consider HD DVD fully capable of meeting customer needs and are there to service that. One presume that LG knows everything about BD plans yet they feel that staying the course was not wise. I can tell you that this is causing a lot of people to rethink their position.

Of course, I want nothing better for you than to not believe the above. You didn’t see LG coming, hopefully, the same would be true of others joining us. It is a lot more fun that way :).

Come on, Amir, you know this is ridiculous. A consumer will know if they have a player that supports networking (because they would have to have configured that networking). To suggest people will be upset because they buy content advertising "networked bonus content" and can't use it because they don't have a network capable player is far-fetched at best.
Oh really? How about the Pioneer then? It has a network jack, right? And you think a customer will not be surprised that said player can’t handle BD-Live content?

The LG player seems to have a network jack too. But no BD-Live support. How about those customers? Confused or not?

Ok, here's one for you. Can you please post the data from which you make the assertion that that BD has 96% of the market share in Japan?It was mentioned at the BDA press event. The data is from GFK Japan, who is a partner of NPD. 96% was several months ago, more recent numbers are said to be tracking close to 98%.

Talk,

CES is almost over and not one BD-Live player mentioned. Are we to wait until CEDIA? Were BD-Live capabilities demo'd at CES using an existing or upcoming player?

could you please place into context the comments from a toshiba engineer stating current drives could not support triple layer hddvd? IIRC, he did not even work in the drive department.Nope, he worked in Toshiba's optical drive engineering department. You may be thinking of the Toshiba IT guy in Australia who was quoted on some other matter in the format war.

See here (http://www.dvdtimes.co.uk/content.php?contentid=62615).

Regarding Talk's hint that there logos may be used to distinguish between the various levels of BD player, I think it might just work. Just need to get the education on it. Talk, are you able to provide further insight?BD-Video and BD-Live logos have been prepared. I don't know whether they are for content, players, or both, but will report more when I have information.

Were BD-Live capabilities demo'd at CES using an existing or upcoming player?Demo'ed using Cyberlink Blu-ray software on Dell PC's.

Can anyone categorically confirm that a disc authored in anything other than BDMV mode (which I assume means it uses BD-J and optionally whatever else is needed to reach BD-Live compliance) will still play the basic main feature content, i.e. the film, without trouble on a machine that can't do BD-Live content? Is this mandated as part of the Blu-ray specification?

Can anyone categorically confirm that a disc authored in anything other than BDMV mode (which I assume means it uses BD-J and optionally whatever else is needed to reach BD-Live compliance) will still play the basic main feature content, i.e. the film, without trouble on a machine that can't do BD-Live content? Is this mandated as part of the Blu-ray specification?It would be possible to purposely author a disc which doesn't work on non BD-Live machines. I have no idea why you'd want to, but the Blu-ray specification is for players. Software authors can basically do whatever they want. Assuming what you want to know is whether it's likely that some titles won't work on non BD-Live players, I think it's highly unlikely. I can't conceive of the value to a studio of eliminating some share of their audience.

It would be possible to purposely author a disc which doesn't work on non BD-Live machines. I have no idea why you'd want to, but the Blu-ray specification is for players. Software authors can basically do whatever they want. Assuming what you want to know is whether it's likely that some titles won't work on non BD-Live players, I think it's highly unlikely. I can't conceive of the value to a studio of eliminating some share of their audience.Thanks Talk,

I guess what I'm trying to get at is, is it part of the BD-Video, BD-ROM or whatever specification is relevant, that for commercial discs, whatever player you have at whatever spec, you are gauranteed to be able to at least play the film. If that's the case then it surely means that even though 1G players may never be BD-Live compliant, you will always be able to use them to actually watch the main feature.

I don't want to buy a player that potentially will not play a large number of discs over the next couple of years, but wouldn't necessarily mind buying one that will only not play the advanced interactive content, as even though I've attended one of Amir's and Kevin's UK sessions, I can't say I'm at all convinced personally on interactive content yet.

Also, how about some UK showcase sessions for Blu-ray? Hint, hint. ;)

Insiders, I asked Toshiba CES booth staffers about HD DVD and the color gamut/resolution enhancements in HDMI 1.3 but they coludn't tell me more than what the sign in the booth said.

Does the HD DVD format accommodate the extra color bits or the wider color space? Or is an HD DVD player only able to "enhance" the color data that was laid down on the disc (akin to the way today's players and HDTVs "improve" a 480-line red DVD by scaling)? Are the answers to those questions the same with respect to the Blu-ray format and Blu-ray players?

Will we see movies any time soon that are telecined to capture the film's colors significanty better than is done today? In other words, will those titles be made so they can look better on the TVs that use the HDMI 1.3 color features?


I also asked this question several times. Can anyone answer it?
For example, Sony just put out a 70" XBR TV with 10 bit x.v.Color. Does that TV need to interpolate the extra color bits, or does HD DVD / BluRay already have 10 bit color?
Or do we need to wait for more improvements in HD DVD / BluRay format to take advantage of HDMI 1.3 and 10 bit color?

What about on the XBOX HD DVD with its 1080p VGA out? Can that output 10 bit color if the format supports it?
O

It would be possible to purposely author a disc which doesn't work on non BD-Live machines. I have no idea why you'd want to, but the Blu-ray specification is for players. Software authors can basically do whatever they want. Assuming what you want to know is whether it's likely that some titles won't work on non BD-Live players, I think it's highly unlikely. I can't conceive of the value to a studio of eliminating some share of their audience.

I second what Ian_S said. Talk, remember what happened with the rabbit mode in the Matrix. At least 20 different machines could not play the DVD back then. A few of them were upgradeable by CDs supplied by the vendors. But others could not, and the players had to be sent back to the manufacturers, sometimes for weeks. And there were a number of 1st gen or low-cost machines which couldn't be modified at all, where the vendors kind of said: sorry, tough luck.

OSes can be booted in safe mode. What we care about is if there's a lowest-common denominator playability, in case hell breaks loose and everything else fails.

As if BD studios are testing on all the players out there? How about Descent not working on Sony/Pioneer there? Or the fact that Sony discovered well after the BD launch that Samsung player was filtering their content? What testing had they done?

I realize this question was not directed at me, but I can answer it. The Sony press release (which you can read here (http://news.sel.sony.com/en/press_room/consumer/home_audio_video/blu-ray_disc/release/26539.html)) which was released before the player was available to purchase, clearly states that the player would not play BD-J content until an update was made available in 2007. No need to test the disc on the Pio or Sony, everyone already knew that the disc wouldn't work on those machines yet before they were even sold.

When we talk to companies who want to put these players in the car, they immediately rule out BD but think HD DVD can be made to work although that is also challenging.

If they both use a blue laser with the same basic technical specs, why would this be the case?


BTW, I have yet to have a Warner insider explain the omission of the Dolby True HD tracks on various BD titles when present on the HD DVD. The current going theory is that the inclusion of the DD core for BD might have increased the bit-space requirement past the 25GB limit. Confirmation? Will WB committ to lossless audio represented equally on both formats title for title? This discrepency is more-than-frustrating for audiophiles.

If they both use a blue laser with the same basic technical specs, why would this be the case?Also, doesn't Blu-ray spin slower to get the same bitrate off disc due to the higher density?

What on earth is the point of HD in cars? Unless you have a stretch hummer with a 42inch screen, what possible benefit could HD bring to ICE?? I'm totally missing the point on that one.
BTW, I have yet to have a Warner insider explain the omission of the Dolby True HD tracks on various BD titles when present on the HD DVD. The current going theory is that the inclusion of the DD core for BD might have increased the bit-space requirement past the 25GB limit. Confirmation? Will WB committ to lossless audio represented equally on both formats title for title? This discrepency is more-than-frustrating for audiophiles.Even more so when they do it on BD50 based titles where clearly space CANNOT be the issue surely? Is it simply a case of the authoring toolset used by Warner doesn't support the use of PCM or TrueHD? I'd be surprised by the former as it is a mandatory codec for BD players so presumably would be mandatory in any authoring toolset?

Different question, but in the Broadcom 7411D spec, it states that it is dual stream capable. What does that mean? Does it mean it can decode two independent video streams or something else?

Anyone in the HD-DVD camp care to comment on this (http://avzombie.com/blog/2007/01/10/meridian-refutes-hd-dvd-hardware-announcement/)?

I have to say I was suprised by the announcement as both Meridian and Arcam (another UK audiophile brand) have consistently stated in the UK hifi press that they don't see either HD format as viable for them yet, and have generally condemned the format war...

If they both use a blue laser with the same basic technical specs, why would this be the case?


BTW, I have yet to have a Warner insider explain the omission of the Dolby True HD tracks on various BD titles when present on the HD DVD. The current going theory is that the inclusion of the DD core for BD might have increased the bit-space requirement past the 25GB limit. Confirmation? Will WB committ to lossless audio represented equally on both formats title for title? This discrepency is more-than-frustrating for audiophiles.

there are no longer any known warner insiders posting on avs.

btw, insiders in the loop on this, how are the efforts to get warner to allow cjplay to post here agagain coming along...any progress?

to Amir
thankyou for your reply about the lasers.
It was as I thought
denass

Will disc production constraints play a role in format war in near term future?

300 new titles this year for each format is likely to max out the available capacity.

Assuming that it's faster and cheaper to convert existing DVD lines into HD production and more expensive and slower to increase BR50 capacity.

How are both camps to cope if the formats gain mass market traction this year?