Industry Insiders Q&A MASTER THREAD [separate thread for Xbox/Add On & PS3] [Text View]

markrubin

12-25-06, 09:31 AM

Industry Insiders Xbox and PS3 Q&A thread: : Xbox and PS3 ONLY Questions to Insiders only: only Insiders may answer (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10573046&&#post10573046)

Post Questions [only questions] directed to and answered only by Industry Insiders who are asked to identify themselves as such in their sig : subject to AVS approval

Industry Insiders only may answer questions or make comments: this is the thread for chat between Insiders as well

any AVS member can post questions [only questions please] for Insiders- but we will not tolerate any bashing

AVS recognizes the special nature of Industry Insiders and values their participation: we ask all AVS members to treat them with respect

Remember: Questions only: no off topic posts: they may be removed: and only Insiders [who have been recognized by AVS moderators] may answer

Insiders: please PM Ken H and myself with your credentials: mods and only mods will make the determination of who qualifys as an insider and all such discussions will be done off line: not to be discussed here

This is a continuation of the original thread Industry Insiders Q&A Thread: only Questions to insiders please (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7970761&&#post7970761) which did not end well: any more of this and we will take strong action: Insiders are to be treated with respect:

Please help us make this a flagship thread on AVS by observing these rules

Insiders approved to post in this thread and guidelines for this list:

this list is controlled by the mods: please don't post, either here or in any other forum or thread, about the selection

- list is for this Insider's thread only: it does not apply to any other forum, thread, or post: we don't ask Insider's status outside of this thread and they are not required to ID themselves ouside of this thread
- please don't start any threads on it
-see a mistake or want to request an edit? please PM me: list will be updated frequently
-Are you an Insider who wants to post? please PM me if you are not on the list: we would love to add more

Amirm
Amir Majidimehr
Corporate Vice President, Microsoft Corporation
Consumer Media Technology Group, Mobile and Embedded Devices Division
Microsoft (HD DVD insider)
VC-1 video codec insider in BD/HD DVD

Andy Pennell
Andy Pennell
HDi Developer, Microsoft
HD DVD Insider

benwaggoner
Ben Waggoner
Program Manager for Video Encoding, Professional Content Group, Microsoft
HD DVD and VC-1 Insider with Microsoft

bkilian
Bryan Kilian
Software Development Engineer in Test HDDVD team at Microsoft
Insider with Microsoft

Cjplay
name withheld upon request
Warner Bros HD-DVD Compressionist
Compressionist
[we miss you]

DTV Tivo Dealer
Robert Zohn
President of *********************
Advanced Digital Technology Dealer
TV Broadcast RF Systems Engineer
Retailer - B&M Storefront and Online Website

FilmMixer
Marc Fishman
Re-Recording Mixer, ToddAO Studios
Studio City, CA
Film Sound and Post Production Insider

JeffWilliams
Authoring and Compression
HD-DVD/Blu-ray Insider

jimby_99
name withheld upon request
VP, Advanced Technology for Universal Music Group
Production/Release supervisor of Blu-ray, HD DVD & DVD titles
Music/Video Industry Insider

kjack
Keith Jack
Director Product Marketing
Sigma Designs
BD and HD-DVD decoder supplier
BD/HD-DVD insider

MeridianHQ
name withheld upon request
Meridian Insider
Huntingdon England

PacificDisc
name withheld upon request
Sean - PacificDisc
HD DVD & Blu-ray Replication Insider

paidgeek
name withheld upon request
Sony Pictures BD Insider
Engineer

RBFilms
Richard J. Casey
R&B Films, Ltd.
Producers Guild of America, New Media Council
HD-DVD / BD Industry Insider

RDoherty
Richard E. Doherty
Director, Technology Strategy, Microsoft

Roger Dressler
Director, Business Development
Dolby Laboratories

shore
name withheld upon request
Blu-ray and HD-DVD Insider

Talkstr8t
name withheld upon request
Blu-ray Insider
Speaking solely for myself, not the BDA
Digital Television

walkamo
Christopher Walker
Product Planning and Marketing for Blu-ray and Optical Discs
Pioneer Electronics Sr Manager
Blu-ray Hardware Insider

zambelli
Alex Zambelli
Software Development Engineer in Test
Codec Team, Consumer Media Technology Group, Microsoft
VC-1 and WMV9 codec insider with Microsoft

Industry Insiders Xbox and PS3 Q&A thread: : Xbox and PS3 ONLY Questions to Insiders only: only Insiders may answer (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10573046&&#post10573046)

scaesare

12-25-06, 10:28 AM

Can anybody shed light on a recently mentioned proposal for "Performance level 2 and level 3" definitions for HD DVD players?

sknight1

12-25-06, 10:29 AM

paidgeek

12-25-06, 01:04 PM

To any BDA Insider,

There is a lot of confusion (at least to me) regarding the different profiles utilized.

Could someone please:

Summarize what features are included in each profile.
State which currently available players (out of the box) can play which profiles.
If no player can play all profiles, state when (approx) this will occur.

Quite frankly, I am confused if I purchase a player today it *may/may not* be firmware upgradeable to play all profiles or not. I have read where a June 2007 date is when players will be available to play all profiles. Is this true?

Thank you and Merry Christmas to all.

Scott

Scott,

Please see the excerpt below from wikipedia regarding profiles and features for Blu-ray. This list appears to be accurate.

I am not aware of any players sold today that support anything beyond profile 1.0. Blu-ray requires a transition from version 1.0 to version 1.1 in June as you mention, but version 1.1 or 2.0 can be supported sooner at any player manfacturers choosing.

PS3 appears to be well positioned to support either profile 1.1 or 2.0 as it uses software as the basis of its movie playback. That said, there has been no official word from Sony Computer Entertainment regarding when or if such an update will be made available.

The BD-ROM specification defines four profiles of Blu-ray players. All video-based profiles are required to have a full implementation of BD-J. The 1st generation players are based on the BD-Video profile that does not require required support of certain features such as Picture-in-Picture, local storage, and network connections. Profiles 1.1 makes PIP, local storage and secondary audio mandatory. Profile 2 (BD-Live) adds network connectivity to the list of mandatory functions. Profile 3 is meant for an audio-only player and does not require video decoding or BD-J.

High_Def DVD

12-25-06, 02:38 PM

Now would like to have some inside information about some old news that i have read last year about the Blu-ray strategy and i qoute:

[/QUOTE]"Had entered into agreements with every studio to provide discs at either cost or below variable cost for the next five years. So, the studios were very happy to take these assurances by Sony that they would not have to pay more for the discs than they would pay for HD-DVD discs."[QUOTE]

The question that comes to my mind is: what will happen after 5 years, is the cost for BD movies going up for the consumers?

Brimstone-1

12-25-06, 03:55 PM

I have a question about movies in 3d. It's becomming more common for studios to release titles that take advantage of DLP projectors in movie theaters. In the home theater market, DLP sales are going very well and the technology is continuing to improve in quality and become more affordable.

So if a studio wanted to realease a 3d movie on HD-DVD/Blu-Ray how would this work? Would it require a totally seperate encode? Or could an option exist on the disc just to switch on "3d mode"? Does it effect file size? Are VC-1 and MPEG-4/AVC prepared to handle "3d" encoding? Can HD-DVD and Blu-Ray players even handle "3d" titles? What are the challenges?

If it does effect file size wouldn't this be a compelling reason to go with triple layer HD-DVD's?

I haven't read about this issue anywhere but with George Lucas working on a re-release of Star Wars in 3d I figure this is going to making a lot of headlines in the near future. Already we've seen "The nightmare before christmas" re-released into theaters taking advantage of 3d. And a lot of the newer CGI movies take advantage of this technology if a movie theater is equiped with a DLP projector.

sknight1

12-25-06, 06:15 PM

...but version 1.1 or 2.0 can be supported sooner at any player manfacturers choosing.

Paid,

Thanks for the quick response. I now understand that all current players are Profile 1.0, but for example, is it possible that Pioneer could provide a Profile 2.0 firmware upgrade for the BDP-HD1?

Do you know if CEs as a practice will start stating which profiles their players support -- I think it would be beneficial to the consumer for them to do so.

Thank you.

amirm

12-25-06, 07:01 PM

So if a studio wanted to realease a 3d movie on HD-DVD/Blu-Ray how would this work? Would it require a totally seperate encode?
Yes and depending on technology used for 3D, a lot more than that.

Or could an option exist on the disc just to switch on "3d mode"?
There are no explicit 3-D provisions in either format. So if one uses backward compatible systems for 3-D (e.g. red/green filters/glasses) then it would just work without switching to 3-D. Of course, the image will always be in that mode, unless alternate versions of the movie are on the same disc.

Does it effect file size?
Yes.

Are VC-1 and MPEG-4/AVC prepared to handle "3d" encoding?
Again, it depends on which technology. If you are backward compatible mode, then the 3-D aspect of the feature is transparent to the codec. If you are using explicit 3-D coding in either codec, then you are breaking compatibility with the standard and neither format will be able to handle such content.

Can HD-DVD and Blu-Ray players even handle "3d" titles? What are the challenges?
The best method is to code each video properly using its own stream and use differential coding method to save space. This, per above, requires new profiles of the codecs that do not exist in either format. So you are stuck with the traditional methods of putting both images on the same video frame and coding them that way.

If it does effect file size wouldn't this be a compelling reason to go with triple layer HD-DVD's?
Proper 3-D coding would not require substantially more storage. But that method is not available. Coding double images will take more storage but I suspect the concept will be too gimmicky to warrant format modifications to allow it.

I haven't read about this issue anywhere but with George Lucas working on a re-release of Star Wars in 3d I figure this is going to making a lot of headlines in the near future. Already we've seen "The nightmare before christmas" re-released into theaters taking advantage of 3d. And a lot of the newer CGI movies take advantage of this technology if a movie theater is equiped with a DLP projector.
There are a number of directors such as James Cameron who are pushing the envelop with 3-D production. The current target is the theater. The home version is not yet in play.

Talkstr8t

12-25-06, 07:43 PM

Thanks for the quick response. I now understand that all current players are Profile 1.0, but for example, is it possible that Pioneer could provide a Profile 2.0 firmware upgrade for the BDP-HD1? In the absence of information that the hardware support simply isn't there, yes. I think the big question mark is whether the chipsets and supporting hardware can support PiP. I believe Keith has said their chipset does indeed support PiP, so that provides some hope.
Do you know if CEs as a practice will start stating which profiles their players support -- I think it would be beneficial to the consumer for them to do so.I expect that we'll see a branding program around BD-Live content at some point, which implies players would also more clearly identify whether they're capable of supporting that content.

- Talk

Paulidan

12-25-06, 07:47 PM

I just had to respond to something that cjplay posted in his closed 'apologies' thread

I have to understand what you look for in a format as do many who read this. I've already taken a few on the chin thanks to Fettastic's Tier thread and several other posts/threads.

Dear God NO! Please do not tell me you are actually paying attention to that inane (as well as exceedingly ignorant) Tier system thread!
Besides BB, I'm not sure what you (cjplay) have worked on, but nothing I have seen so far from the HD DVD camp (with the possible exception of one import) has been what I would consider poorly encoded or compressed. The posters in the Tier thread are making evaluations and passing judgment on the actual films and the way they were shot- not the quality of the discs.
Jaggies due to 1080i original masters are one thing, but the majority of criticisms I see are of a much different stripe.

I am extremely worried that I'm gonna wake up some day and find every catalog title I love has been digitally graded, with contrast and colors pumped up in an effort to approximate the aesthetic flavor of the day and grain suppressed - all to appeal to the most ignorant segment of the consumer block.

Head Shot

12-25-06, 08:20 PM

Question for CJ

Are you giving proper merit to the Tier list?

If so, what portion of the criticism are you paying due credit?

I am asking this because I haven't been there for some time and that it had been less relevant for me.

Adam Tyner

12-25-06, 10:06 PM

Besides BB, I'm not sure what you (cjplay) have worked on, but nothing I have seen so far from the HD DVD camp (with the possible exception of one import) has been what I would consider poorly encoded or compressed.A response, worded as a question to fit the thread:

I get the impression that it takes a fair amount of TLC to get the most out of VC-1 encodes (and I'm writing that purely as a lead-in to a question, not as any sort of criticism). How are larger projects, particularly TV-on-DVD sets, approached compared to feature-length films?

I ask because I watched the fifth season of Smallville on HD DVD a week or two ago, and the discs with five episodes a piece suffered from some brief but still very distracting hiccups. I can provide exact timecode references for some of these, if you're curious. Out of 80-someodd discs, I'd never seen anything like that on HD DVD before.

Because the two discs in the Smallville set with fewer episodes didn't immediately leap out at me with similar problems, I was left wondering if it was a combination of too much material on the disc and not enough time on the part of the compressionist to coax the best out of the encoder. Interestingly, the most glaring of these issues seemed localized to one episode on each disc rather than spread throughout.

Anyway, as a TV season set fanatic, I'm just curious if this could mean anything going forward.

paidgeek

12-25-06, 11:51 PM

Now would like to have some inside information about some old news that i have read last year about the Blu-ray strategy and i qoute:

"Had entered into agreements with every studio to provide discs at either cost or below variable cost for the next five years. So, the studios were very happy to take these assurances by Sony that they would not have to pay more for the discs than they would pay for HD-DVD discs."

The question that comes to my mind is: what will happen after 5 years, is the cost for BD movies going up for the consumers?

I don't have any specific information about replication costs for BD, but if BD follows a curve anything like DVD, replication costs will be a small concern after 5 years.

paidgeek

12-25-06, 11:56 PM

Paid,

Thanks for the quick response. I now understand that all current players are Profile 1.0, but for example, is it possible that Pioneer could provide a Profile 2.0 firmware upgrade for the BDP-HD1?

Do you know if CEs as a practice will start stating which profiles their players support -- I think it would be beneficial to the consumer for them to do so.

Thank you.

I can't speak for the hardware companies ability to upgrade their players through software, I just don't know what each one is up to or what their hardware is capable of. CES is an excellent opportunity to get close to people at these companies that you would not otherwise have access to. If you can make it, I suggest you ask them directly.

paidgeek

12-26-06, 12:04 AM

Penton-Man

12-26-06, 02:02 AM

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The Closest Thing So Far……………………….

Phillips announced at CES 2006 that they plan to introduce a high-definition television that can show a “3D experience” in 2008. Since then I think they’ve been doing tests with focus groups. I don’t know what the newest status on the launch timetable is.

They have software that will look at the 2D source and create a “depth map” in real time so that consumers visualize a 3D experience from a 2D high-definition disc (encoded in MPEG2) and their TVs, at least that’s how I understand it.

________________________________________
Studio Insider

Penton-Man

12-26-06, 02:06 AM

I haven't read about this issue anywhere but with George Lucas working on a re-release of Star Wars in 3d I figure this is going to making a lot of headlines in the near future.
The way that’s being done is that a company called In-Three (in Agoura Hills, CA) has a “Dimensionalization” process by which they are using the original source material as the “left-eye” image and then creating a virtual right-eye image somehow in the post-production process.

________________________________________
Studio Insider

am1001

12-26-06, 06:10 AM

Hi Paidgeek

Thanks for your continued participation is this forum.

With the Europe release of PS3 coming in the spring, there will be many more potential blu-ray movie purchasers coming to market.

However the region coding of disks at present is very scatter gun.

Don't know if you are familair with this website but it lists those title which have region coding, and those without.

http://bluray.lindsite.dk/

A good compromise system would be for new releases to be region coded if required, but ALL catalogue releases to not have region restrictions.

According to the website, well the good news is that a majority of titles released on bluray in the states will work on european players.

Do you agree on the need for a more consistent region coding system for catalogue releases? Something that offers some flexibility for consumers, and gives consumers better access to catalogue titles. If so, can you see if we can have a clearer system where ALL catalogue releases are not region restricted. Fox, Disney, and Buena Vista, and some Sony titles which are clearly catalogue eg Dinosaur, Black Hawk Down, League of Extraordinary gentlemen, Gone in 60 seconds have region restrictions.

It would be great as the format is beginning to grow for this situation to be improved.

amirm

12-26-06, 09:10 AM

Can anybody shed light on a recently mentioned proposal for "Performance level 2 and level 3" definitions for HD DVD players?
Let me start by saying that I only have sketchy information on this as these are *new* proposals to DVD Forum regarding HD DVD. And with my folks on vacation, I am not going to pester them much for details (I stopped going to DVD Forum a long time ago so I don't always have up to date info of the not-approved things).

Anyway, as you know, there is a feature axis where HD DVD fully mandates all features. This is called profile 1. All discs and players comply with this profile.

The other proposed profiles aim at standardizing the other axis, namely performance. As you can imagine, there is a huge gulf of performance between a PC and game console, and stand-alone players. The former devices have incredible processing and graphics power to display what amounts to 1080p real-time graphics (think about how many games run at full 1080p resolution and that gives you some perspective on how much performance we are talking about, albeit in 2-D).

Needless to say, there could be infinite variations in device performance as there is today in PCs. Consoles have shown though that this huge variation is not a good thing when it comes to generating reliable performance. In the same vein, these proposals aim to create some steps that devices could try to comply with, so that content owners don’t have to target the full range of device performances.

Again, let me emphasize that these are proposals, not approved specifications. Today, all players must comply with one and only profile, as do discs. Given the close working relationship of companies involved in HD DVD development and software/hardware, the performance axis is being managed as a de-facto system, as we know what to test on, including unreleased products. Moving into the future though, these profiles may be useful, due to factors mentioned above.

Finally, it should be clear that both formats have the same considerations here as the PS3 and Samsung are pretty far away from each other performance wise. Would be interesting to hear from Talk/Paid how they are addressing this. The other thing to note that DVD Forum proceedings a pretty public so you hear about the “soup being made” in the form of proposals like this :). As such, I wouldn’t get too excited about anything until it is approved. Indeed, at some point, the entire spec for HD DVD was up for grabs!

scaesare

12-26-06, 09:41 AM

Let me start by saying that I only have sketchy information on this as these are *new* proposals to DVD Forum regarding HD DVD. And with my folks on vacation, I am not going to pester them much for details (I stopped going to DVD Forum a long time ago so I don't always have up to date info of the not-approved things).

Anyway, as you know, there is a feature axis where HD DVD fully mandates all features. This is called profile 1. All discs and players comply with this profile.

The other proposed profiles aim at standardizing the other axis, namely performance. As you can imagine, there is a huge gulf of performance between a PC and game console, and stand-alone players. The former devices have incredible processing and graphics power to display what amounts to 1080p real-time graphics (think about how many games run at full 1080p resolution and that gives you some perspective on how much performance we are talking about, albeit in 2-D).

Needless to say, there could be infinite variations in device performance as there is today in PCs. Consoles have shown though that this huge variation is not a good thing when it comes to generating reliable performance. In the same vein, these proposals aim to create some steps that devices could try to comply with, so that content owners don’t have to target the full range of device performances.

Again, let me emphasize that these are proposals, not approved specifications. Today, all players must comply with one and only profile, as do discs. Given the close working relationship of companies involved in HD DVD development and software/hardware, the performance axis is being managed as a de-facto system, as we know what to test on, including unreleased products. Moving into the future though, these profiles may be useful, due to factors mentioned above.

Finally, it should be clear that both formats have the same considerations here as the PS3 and Samsung are pretty far away from each other performance wise. Would be interesting to hear from Talk/Paid how they are addressing this. The other thing to note that DVD Forum proceedings a pretty public so you hear about the “soup being made” in the form of proposals like this :). As such, I wouldn’t get too excited about anything until it is approved. Indeed, at some point, the entire spec for HD DVD was up for grabs!

Thanks Amir.

(I really wanted to simply say "Thanks", but I'll ask a question in order to stay true to the thread...)

Would you let us know about any further devlopments on this front you become aware of, as well as encourage anybody on your team who may be attending to take back the message that, should the DVD forum do this, consumer education is paramount?

amirm

12-26-06, 09:45 AM

Thanks Amir.

(I really wanted to simply say "Thanks", but I'll ask a question in order to stay true to the thread...)
My pleasure.

Would you let us know about any further devlopments on this front you become aware of, as well as encourage anybody on your team who may be attending to take back the message that, should the DVD forum do this, consumer education is paramount?
Of course. And this is part of the system anyway as the dealings of DVD forum are a matter of public record. And if we don't publicize them, the BD members that are also DVD Forum members, will surely do the job for us :).

One caveat to above though. The work of some working groups are confidential until they get proposed up the chain and get discussed/approved/dissapproved there. Those details can not be disclosed of course until the latter stages.

paidgeek

12-26-06, 11:24 AM

deez

12-26-06, 07:26 PM

Amirm:
I realize you cannot specify what companies plan to manufacture HD DVD players but can you take an educated guess on a date when we could be seeing these players from other manufacturers??

When will we also see DTS advanced audio from HD DVD's?

Can you give us any indication when we will see new FW updates that address load times and dvi issues for first gen products?

Will Toshiba allow customer Downloading of future FW updates via an external pc for burning to cd??

amirm

12-26-06, 07:41 PM

Amirm:
I realize you cannot specify what companies plan to manufacture HD DVD players but can you take an educated guess on a date when we could be seeing these players from other manufacturers??
I am sorry but I really can not pre-announce future events with our competitors reading the thread.

When will we also see DTS advanced audio from HD DVD's?
You mean DTS lossless? If so, Studio Canal titles in Europe already used them.

Can you give us any indication when we will see new FW updates that address load times and dvi issues for first gen products?
This is for Toshiba to answer. Load times though, is unlikely to improve in a major way.

Will Toshiba allow customer Downloading of future FW updates via an external pc for burning to cd??
People have already been doing this. We have asked Toshiba to make this more official though. Hopefully they will do so.

stanger89

12-26-06, 07:58 PM

Simple question for the insiders, any insiders:

Where's Managed Copy?

ok two questions:

Is AACS ever going to be finalized?

amirm

12-26-06, 08:27 PM

Simple question for the insiders, any insiders:

Where's Managed Copy?
Having Christmas off. Probably hanging out in Hawaii or something.

ok two questions:

Is AACS ever going to be finalized?
Probably not. We don't get along with content folks. They hate the CE guys. And CE guys think IT guys are out to eat their lunch. So no, we won't have an agreement.

:D

Seriously, negotiations continue, progress is being made. But the crutch of having an interim agreement means talks keep on going, going and going...

deez

12-26-06, 08:34 PM

Thank You

jsaliga

12-27-06, 08:12 AM

Forgive me if this has already been asked. This is directed mainly at Amir but any insider who can answer this is welcome to do so.

There is currently a discussion taking place in one of the digital projector forums:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9258509&&#post9258509

The above post quotes a four year old thread that in part discusses the actual resolvable detail in D5 master tapes, and the number that was kicked around was about 800~1300 lines of horizontal resolution. I think that number came from a FAQ by Joe Kane, who never participated directly in that discussion. I don't think the question was ever settled definitively so I thought I would bring it here to the insiders.

Making obvious allowances for a wide variety of filming techniques that would impact how much apparent detail we see in the film sources we have, just how much horizontal resolution is really in the HD we are getting in HD DVD and Blu-Ray? Is it really 800~1300 lines or is it higher? If D5 master tapes only go out to 1300 lines then what is the limiting factor? Is it the D5 system, optics, or something else? If it is not a limitation of the master then under ideal conditions how much horizontal resolution are we getting in these new HD formats?

Thanks in advance for your answer.

--Jerome

BenDover

12-27-06, 08:14 AM

Let me start by saying that I only have sketchy information on this as these are *new* proposals to DVD Forum regarding HD DVD. And with my folks on vacation, I am not going to pester them much for details (I stopped going to DVD Forum a long time ago so I don't always have up to date info of the not-approved things).

Anyway, as you know, there is a feature axis where HD DVD fully mandates all features. This is called profile 1. All discs and players comply with this profile.

The other proposed profiles aim at standardizing the other axis, namely performance. As you can imagine, there is a huge gulf of performance between a PC and game console, and stand-alone players. The former devices have incredible processing and graphics power to display what amounts to 1080p real-time graphics (think about how many games run at full 1080p resolution and that gives you some perspective on how much performance we are talking about, albeit in 2-D).

Needless to say, there could be infinite variations in device performance as there is today in PCs. Consoles have shown though that this huge variation is not a good thing when it comes to generating reliable performance. In the same vein, these proposals aim to create some steps that devices could try to comply with, so that content owners don’t have to target the full range of device performances.

Again, let me emphasize that these are proposals, not approved specifications. Today, all players must comply with one and only profile, as do discs. Given the close working relationship of companies involved in HD DVD development and software/hardware, the performance axis is being managed as a de-facto system, as we know what to test on, including unreleased products. Moving into the future though, these profiles may be useful, due to factors mentioned above.

Finally, it should be clear that both formats have the same considerations here as the PS3 and Samsung are pretty far away from each other performance wise. Would be interesting to hear from Talk/Paid how they are addressing this. The other thing to note that DVD Forum proceedings a pretty public so you hear about the “soup being made” in the form of proposals like this :). As such, I wouldn’t get too excited about anything until it is approved. Indeed, at some point, the entire spec for HD DVD was up for grabs!

would it be fair to speculate that such *new proposals* are being made by/in light of ce companies now interested in developing/manufacturing hd dvd players and/or universal players?

amirm

12-27-06, 08:27 AM

would it be fair to speculate that such *new proposals* are being made by/in light of ce companies now interested in developing/manufacturing hd dvd players and/or universal players?
Let me provide an answer but warn you beforehand that it is going to confuse you if you take it too literally :). The answer is partially yes. But remember what I said before the answer and let me leave it at that :).

The other group interested in this is content owners who want to know what level of performance they can expect. This part of the answer you can read without second guessing :).

amillians

12-27-06, 08:56 AM

amirm

12-27-06, 09:26 AM

Forgive me if this has already been asked. This is directed mainly at Amir but any insider who can answer this is welcome to do so.
Indeed I think others may be able to add as much to the answer as I can.

There is currently a discussion taking place in one of the digital projector forums:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9258509&&#post9258509

The above post quotes a four year old thread that in part discusses the actual resolvable detail in D5 master tapes, and the number that was kicked around was about 800~1300 lines of horizontal resolution. I think that number came from a FAQ by Joe Kane, who never participated directly in that discussion. I don't think the question was ever settled definitively so I thought I would bring it here to the insiders.
Indeed, I also believe the original assertion came from Joe as Gary Reber asked me about the same thing a couple of years ago, in an interview for WSR regarding WMV-HD discs, attributing this claim to Joe.

Making obvious allowances for a wide variety of filming techniques that would impact how much apparent detail we see in the film sources we have, just how much horizontal resolution is really in the HD we are getting in HD DVD and Blu-Ray? Is it really 800~1300 lines or is it higher? If D5 master tapes only go out to 1300 lines then what is the limiting factor? Is it the D5 system, optics, or something else? If it is not a limitation of the master then under ideal conditions how much horizontal resolution are getting in these new HD formats?
First, let me start by saying that the link points to a high quality discussion :). I expected a bunch of guess by laymen but the quoted sections do touch on issues that could really be there. I don't want to pester Stacey over the holidays but can do so once the new year comes, to see what he had found out. So here, I can only speak to my own experience, not scientific tests which they may have run. Also note that it has been a decade since I have been involved in Telecine equipment so others may have more current experience.

So back to your question. Let’s work backward through this chain to see if we can spot where the problem spots may be.

Both HD DVD and BD encode content at true 1920 horizontal resolution. The codecs are given that resolution and barring any filtering that goes on in the encoder or player, that is what you are going to get. We know that both formats produce this resolution using test signals in VC-1 when driving 1080 displays using actual discs authored this way. So there is absolutely not the limited factor.

Next in line (putting aside DI and animations as the thread rightly mentions doesn’t have this problem) is the D-5. The D-5 tape has true 1080p resolution in both axis. Indeed, its chroma (color) bandwidth) is double what we need (4:2:2 format versus 4:2:0 we use in BD/HD DVD). While not a subject of discussion, D-5 is also a 10-bit format, providing better dynamic range than what we need, assume the scan was done at that depth (a very good assumption). There is mild DCT compression used in D-5, and more so when 10-bit mode is used. That could disturb fine texture on difficult material (something without a lot of easy segments to encode in a frame). But those would be more like artifacts, and not show up as a frequency roll off seen on a spectrum analyzer. Indeed, the compression artifacts create artificial edges which tend to push the high frequency components (false resolution) than lower it.

Next is the telecine transfer. Here we are talking about an optical scan of the film at high speed with an anti-aliasing filter required for digital recording. There are a number of telecine machines but the typical Spirit Telecine with its 1920 Luma CCD will resolve that much bandwidth, subject to roll off from its anti-aliasing filter. Put in English, the filter is not going to have a brick-wall response so it is liable to roll off high frequencies some, require some sharpening to compensate (which can create some artifacts but not frequency cut off).

Higher resolution telecine equipment exists (e.g. scanning spot CRT) to scan at higher resolution but again, the thread acknowledges that 4K scans and such, would not have this issue so we won’t go there. But suffice it to say, I hope the future is 4K scans as it solves many problems, including the filtering one just mentioned. Indeed, at the Home Theater Cruise last year, Joe said experiments he had done using 4K scans, showed that even DVDs had a better picture quality when using higher resolution scans than 1080p. He is now pushing to test 6K scans! OK, so the man really cares about picture quality :).

Now, just because the equipment scans at that resolution, it doesn’t mean the output will be at that resolution. Film is notorious for curling and it must be held flat for it to properly scan so operator care and equipment maintenance is very important to achieve the rated resolution. But I suspect the post houses doing scans for major studios have high enough skill and operational practices to avoid issues here. But someone else needs to confirm it that is closer to it than I.

Next in line is the film itself. I know from my photography world that standard 35mm film has resolution far in excess of HD formats we are talking about here. While people will argue about the cross over point between film and digital (there are a lot more to picture quality than just pure resolution) I am sure we can all agree that 35mm film has a minimum of 3X to 5X more resolution than 1080p. There is a reason Casablanca looks so good after 60 years in VC-1/HD DVD :). So we are good to go as far as the recording medium is concerned.

Now we get to where the film came from. If it is printed from other sources such as digital creations, then we have another link in the chain as that equipment could cause roll off but I really doubt it. if the film is copies of other films, then there could be some issues here. Alas, I am not at all an expert in this area and others surely would need to chime in to provide comfort, or make us concerned about these steps. And of course, whether any concerns relate to major studios producing films, as opposed to low budget productions.

So net, net, there is no reason for horizontal resolution limit here at the technological level that I can see. But others need to chime in to confirm the above with more hands on experience than I.

What I can say is that in practical experience I do not agree at all with the final assertion that a 720p display resolves all that there is in HD DVD (and presumably BD although my tests do not include that format).

When HD DVD titles first came out, I compared the picture on a 1080p LCD flat panel (Sony Qualia) and 720p HD Plasma (Panasonic). There was no doubt that the LCD had higher resolution, especially in static scenes (the LCD smears detail in high motion images due to slow response time although this is much improved these days). The Penny was definitely softer although it had other advantages over the LCD which we won’t go into here. But there was no question that there was more on the source than a 720p display can resolve. Note that I was viewing them from 1 foot away so this comment is not representative of people watching these sets at farther distances. But since we are talking about the resolution of the format, this should not be a point of contention.

In addition, we have tested the new 1080p Marantz DLP projector against the Sony Ruby using HD DVD. As you may know, the Ruby’s lens does not have high enough quality, suffering from “lateral CA” (Chromatic Aberrations – not all the colors focusing on the same plane, causing some to bleed) and poor focus control, wasting its potential to truly resolve 1080p signals. We see this in test sequences where full Nyquist limit (1920) is not resolved on the Ruby. The Marantz however, fully resolves 1080p and as such, has a noticeably sharper image than the Ruby. This is why Kevin Collins on my team, who outfitted the HD DVD truck, insisted on using it there and frankly, scuffs at anything less in our HD DVD meets :). The new Sharp DLP btw, has the same resolution when we used it in our Dallas meet.

Please note that I am not trying to put down the Ruby as that is the display I own in my house. Just that we are able to resolve even the difference between two 1080p projectors with HD DVD so there is clearly information there on the disc or we would not be able to do so. At the same time, I would be remiss without mentioning that I believe there is some false sharpening that occurs with digital displays with good lenses in that the pixel edges are sharp compared to say, a CRT display, giving the illusion of sharper images than what is there. But again, that is the subject of a different topic and does not invalid the observation that a true 1080p set provides the sharpest images from HD DVD (and presumably BD).

So where does all of this leave us? I think the chain is fully capable of resolving more than 720p. While 720p displays show the best images they have ever produced with HD DVD/BD, they can not rival the resolution of a set with 1080p resolution when driven by these formats. Indeed, I highly recommend that people who are in the market for new displays, get a 1080p set and not settle for 720p. Newer projectors with this resolution are becoming very reasonable in price (cost of 100-200 HD DVD/BDs). Note that it is criminal to get a 1080p set without 1:1 pixel mapping as that clearly lops off a good 10 to 20% resolution from the source. So shame on display vendors who still do not provide this mode :). But even with overscan, these sets outperform 720p displays.

Thanks in advance for your answer.

--Jerome

You are welcome. I hope I didn’t ramble too much :). Up early in the morning jetlagged with little to do….

jsaliga

12-27-06, 09:38 AM

Thanks Amir.

I agree that you shouldn't trouble Stacey with this over the holidays, but if he could circle back and comment after the New Year it would be greatly appreciated. :)

--Jerome

vsv

12-27-06, 09:41 AM

If authored image of HD-DVD (HVDVD_TS + ADV_OBJ) burn to BluRay disc...
It be playable on PC by WinDVD or PowerDVD ? Thanks.

scaesare

12-27-06, 10:27 AM

In the News thread, details (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9281481&&#post9281481) regarding the NEC chip used in the A2 were posted.

It appears to have a CPU core on it that is purposed to handle HD DVD interactivity: (translated) "CPU “V5500” of 64bit (654DMIPS) with, 32bit CPU of American MIPS technology (457DMIPS) it loads as an application processor. You say that it can process also the high-level application which corresponds to the browser and the data broadcast which are utilized with interactive function of digital broadcast and HD DVD."

Can anybody here discuss why the sperate Intel CPU in the A2 if the NEC chip has a CPU core designed to hande HDi?

Thanks.

chinch

12-27-06, 11:29 AM

Kris Deering

12-27-06, 12:43 PM

You mean DTS lossless? If so, Studio Canal titles in Europe already used them.

I guess the better question for Amir is when will we see decoding of DTS Lossless available in HD DVD players? Having a lossless audio track means nothing if the player or available receivers/SSPs can't decode it. Are there any plans for this support in the near future (and I mean at full resolution, not core decoding)?

The same question can be said for the BD insiders here. With Fox now supporting DTS-HD MA on all of their releases (and their MGM titles), will we ever see decoding support of these audio formats in the near future? It seems that Blu-ray players in general put a price premium on their hardware but lack the ability to do most of what they should in regards to what their format is capable of. (i.e. TrueHD, DD+, DTS-HD, native 1080p24, BD Live).

crashoveridema0

12-27-06, 01:40 PM

dear amirm,

what can we expect from microsoft at ces, what anouncments will be made because there is alot of speculation and rumors circeling around an hdmi cable for xbox 360 can you comment?

amirm

12-27-06, 02:18 PM

dear amirm,

what can we expect from microsoft at ces, what anouncments will be made because there is alot of speculation and rumors circeling around an hdmi cable for xbox 360 can you comment?
I really can't pre-announce anything. CES is soon enough anyway :).

madshi

12-27-06, 02:41 PM

It seems that with HD-DVD, many manufacturers recommend PCM to be sent over HDMI, so that menu sounds and director comments can be mixed into the sound track. Now it has just today come to my notice that Dolby Digital streams contain additional metadata like dialog normalization etc which is probably "lost" when sending PCM. What is the opinion of ya insiders about this topic?

Related question: Does the Blu-Ray side also recommend to use PCM over HDMI over bitstream? Do menu sounds and director comments (once PiP will be supported) also get mixed in dynamically, just as is the case with HD-DVD?

Thank you!

P.S: Here's an article about "dialog normalization" metadata:

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_7_2/feature-article-dialog-normalization-6-2000.html

Talkstr8t

12-27-06, 03:04 PM

Can someone--say, Talk, perhaps--illuminate the issues surrounding why The Descent won't play on either the Sony or the Pioneer decks? Or the original firmware Samsung, for that matter? How odd, considering all of those devices are fully BD-J compliant, right?I don't know what the issue is with The Descent. I've not seen any reference to this being a BD-J title, but I agree there are indications this might be a factor. Nonetheless, something can be BD-J compliant (or HDi-compliant) and still have bugs. The compliance suites can never be guaranteed to prevent every compatibility issue, but they can come very, very close as they mature. Further, there are generally allowances in the licenses for release of players before compliance tests are complete, generally requiring firmware updates to support forward compatibility.

Talkstr8t

12-27-06, 03:06 PM

The same question can be said for the BD insiders here. With Fox now supporting DTS-HD MA on all of their releases (and their MGM titles), will we ever see decoding support of these audio formats in the near future?The Panasonic is supposed to support DTS-HD MA with an upcoming firmware upgrade, and rumors have suggested the PS3 will as well.
It seems that Blu-ray players in general put a price premium on their hardware but lack the ability to do most of what they should in regards to what their format is capable of. (i.e. TrueHD, DD+, DTS-HD, native 1080p24, BD Live).The only high-def players on the market supporting 1080p24 are Blu-ray (Sony and Pioneer standalones, potentially PS3). Where is an HD-DVD supporting 1080p24? The spec doesn't even technically allow for it today.

Talkstr8t

12-27-06, 03:07 PM

Does the Blu-Ray side also recommend to use PCM over HDMI over bitstream? Do menu sounds and director comments (once PiP will be supported) also get mixed in dynamically, just as is the case with HD-DVD?Yes, locally-generated sounds get mixed as PCM, so if you are decoding offboard you may not hear these.

- Talk

amirm

12-27-06, 03:17 PM

The only high-def players on the market supporting 1080p24 are Blu-ray (Sony and Pioneer standalones, potentially PS3). Where is an HD-DVD supporting 1080p24? The spec doesn't even technically allow for it today.
Then the thousands of people who have been watching HD DVD at 48hz on the HD DVD trailer must be imagining it! And we have been showing this well before any BD player came out that could do 24p.

Good grief. I expect the BD fans to be using arguments like this, not insiders....

So once more. The spec for neither product says how you output something -- only how you decode the content on disc. It is totally up to the equipment maker to put out whatever signal they want. That is how it works with DVD players today, and the same is true of both HD DVD/BD, lest you want to tell me that the BD spec mandates whether one can have stereo analog output or not on the player....

John Mason

12-27-06, 03:23 PM

Nice to see amirm's detailed reply to jsaliga's query, which in turn links a >$3.5k FP thread where I raised the 800-1300-line effective resolution figures that sspears reported from 1080/24p master tapes several years back. With the introduction of 1080 DVDs, I'd also be interested in insiders pining this supposed limitation down. Don't believe my post (or extracts) concluded 720p displays can handle everything 1080 DVDs deliver resolution-wise. That's because the thrust of many posts I write is that 1080i/p clearly provides more resolvable detail than 720p (based on my own daily comparisons since 2000 and similar observations from others).

A summary-type post (http://archive2.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7408766&&#post7408766) written in the Blu-ray forum mentions some of the quotes and links about 1080/24p telecined master tapes. Insider Glimmie has several times posted about the wide bandwidths of HD D5 machines/tapes and telecine equipment, agreeing with what amirm outlines above. Yet as I recall, and one of the sublinks within the post just above might locate his original comment, he wrote that ~1300 lines effective resolution for a HD D5 is quite good, or a similar wording. That might be referring--it's been too long now since I reviewed the links--to effective resolution when the delivery bit rates of ~17-Mbps video payloads with MPEG-2, typical OTA/DBS/cable, are involved. As with others, I've long proclaimed 1080 DVDs as the 'savior' of 'true' HD resolutions--assuming the 'right' master tapes. Always assumed, though, with non-sampled test patterns that could be ~1920X1080 maximum resolvable lines, but typical sampled signals at 1080i/p, AIUI, have a Nyquist limit of ~1700 lines unless oversampling/downconversion is used.

But then there's sspears post (http://archive.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2498224#post2498224) regarding 800--1300 line resolution based on spectrum analysis. And, from his posts back then, I concluded the highest resolutions involved computer graphics, not telecined films. Regarding film resolution, while the very high limits of negatives are often cited, the effects of deliberate filtering and selective focusing often surely limits reaching those maximums, and the quality of prints used for telecines plays a key role. So, maybe what's needed is fresh spectrum analysis from what's considered the best of the new 1080 DVDs. -- John

Sanborn

12-27-06, 03:49 PM

Amir I hate to bother you with this question you probably can't answer - but I must.

When is the 360 addon going to have DTS ?

paidgeek

12-27-06, 04:34 PM

paidgeek - can you clarify the PS3 bluray output for 720p HDTVs since there seems to be nothing coming soon at that price...

will PS3 natively output 720p for gaming and bluray movie playback via both component and hdmi?

also will it upscale dvd movies via hdmi to 720 native?

thanks.

I can only provide a partial answer here as we have not created a detailed chart of what the PS3 does under each of the circumstances you describe. My understanding at the moment is that the PS3 does not apply scaling, but will output the native resolution of the content being played. I believe that Sony Computer may add scaling functionality through firmware updates in the future. Since virtually all "HD ready" displays can accept 480p, 720p or 1080i, they have internal scalers to map to the native resolution of the panel. The only time this becomes an issue is when the built-in scaler does not do a great job and the player can do better.

paidgeek

12-27-06, 04:39 PM

chinch

12-27-06, 05:38 PM

I can only provide a partial answer here as we have not created a detailed chart of what the PS3 does under each of the circumstances you describe. My understanding at the moment is that the PS3 does not apply scaling, but will output the native resolution of the content being played. I believe that Sony Computer may add scaling functionality through firmware updates in the future. Since virtually all "HD ready" displays can accept 480p, 720p or 1080i, they have internal scalers to map to the native resolution of the panel. The only time this becomes an issue is when the built-in scaler does not do a great job and the player can do better.
Thanks.

Most of the TVs don't accept 1080p however, so if your 1280x720p HDTV/projector accepts 1080i instead, doesn't this now require an extra level of scaling and artifact introduction...

scaling #1 bluray device from 1080p to 1080i output
scaling #2 and deinterlacing on TV/projector from 1080i to 720p

If you have a 720p projector that doesn't accept 1080p signals, and want best possible PQ, isn't this something you would want to have addressed? Anyone know if the Optoma H78/79 can accept 1080p over DVI/HDCP?

hongcho

12-27-06, 05:39 PM

This is from the "News" thread (http://avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9285146&&#post9285146). Supposedly someone was able to decrypt the HD DVD contents using the Xbox 360 HD DVD add-on and the PowerDVD.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oZGYb92isE

This guy also posted at Doom9:

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=119871

Can anyone verify if this is the real deal? If so, then all I can say is... WOW :eek:

The question goes to AmirM.

I don't know if the above claim is true (I don't have a HD DVD add-on nor a PowerDVD). But from the way the guy explains, he was able to grab the AACS decryption key in memory (I assume in RAM for PowerDVD) and was successful at creating unencrypted video object files. It seems to be a similar "attack"/vulnerability that happened with CSS for DVD.

If this is true, my guess is that the AACS updating mechanism would kick in to disable the vulnerable player (in this case, it seems to be the PowerDVD). Correct?

How would this be handled by AACS, and how quickly?

Thanks.

Hong.

amirm

12-27-06, 05:41 PM

Amir I hate to bother you with this question you probably can't answer - but I must.

When is the 360 addon going to have DTS ?
I realize there is a lot of interest in this. All I can say is that the core development work is finished but we need to roll this up in a console update and that takes a bit of time. So I appreciate your patience on this.

amirm

12-27-06, 05:44 PM

Hong, there are many mechanisms in AACS to limit exposure of the system in case of such attacks. But it is hard to comment which one is effective in this case, without more information. So let's wait to see what other data surfaces.

Penton-Man

12-27-06, 06:20 PM

John
John,
May I ask, if not too personal, was your father’s first name …..Ken ?.....as in the Ken Mason Award :) ?

Thanks

________________________________________
Studio Insider

paidgeek

12-27-06, 09:34 PM

Thanks.

Most of the TVs don't accept 1080p however, so if your 1280x720p HDTV/projector accepts 1080i instead, doesn't this now require an extra level of scaling and artifact introduction...

scaling #1 bluray device from 1080p to 1080i output
scaling #2 and deinterlacing on TV/projector from 1080i to 720p

If you have a 720p projector that doesn't accept 1080p signals, and want best possible PQ, isn't this something you would want to have addressed? Anyone know if the Optoma H78/79 can accept 1080p over DVI/HDCP?

There is no problem converting back and forth from 1080 24p, 1080 60i, or 1080 60p, provided that 24p is the original encoded format (which is 99% or more for BD movie titles). No scaling takes place to make these conversions because they simply repeat or delete redundant picture information to make the conversion. I would expect the device you have to create a 1080 60p frame in video memory, then scale to 720 60p to match the internal panels.

Having a 720p panel is a good thing when playing games that are designed for 720p, but it would be better to have a native 1080 panel for movies as virtually all movies are encoded at that resolution.

Talkstr8t

12-27-06, 10:30 PM

Then the thousands of people who have been watching HD DVD at 48hz on the HD DVD trailer must be imagining it! And we have been showing this well before any BD player came out that could do 24p.Come now, Amir, are you claiming that you are outputting the 24p HD DVD video directly from an HD DVD standalone player? If you are achieving this through an offboard scaler or via HTPC processing this doesn't count, since there's no reason to believe that the extensive processing required to convert from 60i/p output can be economically embedded in a player. Further, do you not agree that the current HD DVD spec will present issues for 24p output, such as PiP running at a different framerate? Is PiP supported at 24p in the HD DVD spec?

kdragon

12-27-06, 10:42 PM

Questions for BD insiders: When will BD+ be used on Blu-ray discs? Is BD+ already supported in the current BD players?

amirm

12-27-06, 10:45 PM

Come now, Amir, are you claiming that you are outputting the 24p HD DVD video directly from an HD DVD standalone player?
This question is unrelated to what you asserted. You said the HD DVD spec disallows 24p output. We are clearly watching 24p output from HD DVD in the trailer. So your assertion was wrong if one can watch 24p from HD DVD.

If you are achieving this through an offboard scaler or via HTPC processing this doesn't count, since there's no reason to believe that the extensive processing required to convert from 60i/p output can be economically embedded in a player.
Let me see if I get this right. The disc is 24p. The decoder generates 24p. The player outputs this in 60i after adding duplicate fields. And you think it is expensive to output the original 24p?

There is absolutely no signal processing involved in outputting 24p. It actually involves doing less work, not more.

Further, do you not agree that the current HD DVD spec will present issues for 24p output, such as PiP running at a different framerate? Is PiP supported at 24p in the HD DVD spec?
No more issues than it does in BD. If you have 60i PiP, you can butcher it to 24p at encode time in BD and never have the option of outputting it at 60i. Or you can do it in the player and give the user the choice to have optimal PiP or primary video. And with good processing, some combo of both (which can improve over time, unlike the BD approach of permanently harming the PiP).

I am sure folks can argue each side of this with the net being no advantage for either format. And if studios wanted, they could choose to author all PiP content in 24p in HD DVD just the same.

So really, your original argument was to propagate a myth. The place to do that is somewhere outside of this thread....

paidgeek

12-28-06, 12:26 AM

Questions for BD insiders: When will BD+ be used on Blu-ray discs? Is BD+ already supported in the current BD players?

SPE is not using BD+ at this time. My understanding is that BD players are BD+ compliant. We may never use BD+ unless we think we will achieve something by doing so. In any case, please remember that a legitimate user of players and content should never notice that copy protection is in use, whether it is AACS or BD+. If you are having any operational problems that you attribute to copy protection, please let me know.

Rob Zuber

12-28-06, 12:32 AM

SPE is not using BD+ at this time. My understanding is that BD players are BD+ compliant. We may never use BD+ unless we think we will achieve something by doing so.Amir claims that BD+ would be useless in the hypothetical case of AACS being cracked. Do you agree?

paidgeek

12-28-06, 12:39 AM

Amir claims that BD+ would be useless in the hypothetical case of AACS being cracked. Do you agree?

No I do not agree, but I cannot provide technical details about why I think BD+ will have teeth in the absence of AACS. The only reason for BD+ to exist is to give the studios some tools to protect content should a repeat of DeCSS happen with AACS.

Rob Zuber

12-28-06, 01:16 AM

No I do not agree, but I cannot provide technical details about why I think BD+ will have teeth in the absence of AACS. The only reason for BD+ to exist is to give the studios some tools to protect content should a repeat of DeCSS happen with AACS.Thanks for the answer. I'd love to see you and Amir discuss this further. :D

The HD-DVD supporters here have presented BD+ as something to be terrified of. What can you tell us about it?

2Channel

12-28-06, 02:02 AM

SPE is not using BD+ at this time. My understanding is that BD players are BD+ compliant. We may never use BD+ unless we think we will achieve something by doing so. In any case, please remember that a legitimate user of players and content should never notice that copy protection is in use, whether it is AACS or BD+. If you are having any operational problems that you attribute to copy protection, please let me know.

Is there a reason SPE isn't using BD+? Since the players are already BD+ compliant, and it doesn't seem like it would add cost to the discs, I would expect it to be in common use.

Talkstr8t

12-28-06, 03:13 AM

This question is unrelated to what you asserted. You said the HD DVD spec disallows 24p output. We are clearly watching 24p output from HD DVD in the trailer. So your assertion was wrong if one can watch 24p from HD DVD.Do you really believe this? How can the HD DVD spec possibly have any bearing on what you do to a signal after it's output from the HD DVD player?

The HD DVD spec requires HDCP for 1080 HDMI output, right? There are aftermarket products which can strip the HDCP from the output. Does that mean I can build a compliant HD DVD player with no HDCP output on HDMI? Of course not. Your argument that you can post-process the HD DVD output to get 24p has absolutely no bearing on whether a compliant HD DVD player can be built which supports 24p output.
Let me see if I get this right. The disc is 24p. The decoder generates 24p. The player outputs this in 60i after adding duplicate fields. And you think it is expensive to output the original 24p? No, I don't think it's more expensive to output the original 24p, assuming there's nothing in the HD DVD spec (such as what PiP framerates are allowed) which prevents you from simply outputting 24p. There are a raft of posts here, including from respected insiders, that the current HD DVD spec does not address 1080p24 output in such a way that you can build a compliant player without, at a minimum, ignoring content flags which might impact proper stream decoding (see this (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=8019525&&#post8019525) post for one of many credible references). In this (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=8838380&&#post8838380) post you acknowledge the spec doesn't fully address issues related to authoring 24p content and that it's being worked on.
If you have 60i PiP, you can butcher it to 24p at encode time in BDWhich isn't an option in HD DVD, since 24p encoding isn't allowed for PiP content, correct?
And if studios wanted, they could choose to author all PiP content in 24p in HD DVD just the same.Yes, if they wanted to author non-compliant content, and take their chances that all implementations would still handle it properly.
So really, your original argument was to propagate a myth.No, a myth suggests there is no credible basis for the claims. I've provided credible reference to my claims, unlike your first claim (that the fact you can post-process HD DVD output to 24p proves you can output 24p content directly from a compliant HD DVD player.

benwaggoner

12-28-06, 04:13 AM

No, I don't think it's more expensive to output the original 24p, assuming there's nothing in the HD DVD spec (such as what PiP framerates are allowed) which prevents you from simply outputting 24p. There are a raft of posts here, including from respected insiders, that the current HD DVD spec does not address 1080p24 output in such a way that you can build a compliant player without, at a minimum, ignoring content flags which might impact proper stream decoding
There are already software players doing 24p rendering. It works fine. It'll be good to get some "best practices" defined just to lock down what the precise player behavior should be in edge cases, but 24p playback from current HD DVD discs is absolutely doable, by a compliant HD DVD player.

Which isn't an option in HD DVD, since 24p encoding isn't allowed for PiP content, correct?
Incorrect. You can encode 24p PIP in the exact same manner as the 24p main.

Yes, if they wanted to author non-compliant content, and take their chances that all implementations would still handle it properly.
All the content would be compliant.

Can you give an example of where you think there would be a real-world playback problem, even with existing discs? I've thought about this for a while, and I'm not aware of any signifcant issues.

Richard Paul

12-28-06, 04:48 AM

There are already software players doing 24p rendering. It works fine. It'll be good to get some "best practices" defined just to lock down what the precise player behavior should be in edge cases, but 24p playback from current HD DVD discs is absolutely doable, by a compliant HD DVD player.Are there any plans for a HD DVD player to be released in the next few months that does output 1080p24? Specifically without the use of a secondary video processor to convert 1080i60 to 1080p24.

John Mason

12-28-06, 07:05 AM

John,
May I ask, if not too personal, was your father’s first name …..Ken ?.....as in the Ken Mason Award :) ?

Thanks

________________________________________
Studio Insider
Greetings. No, that's another J.M. -- John

amirm

12-28-06, 08:10 AM

No I do not agree, but I cannot provide technical details about why I think BD+ will have teeth in the absence of AACS.
In absence of AACS? Can you please confirm if BD+ is allowed to be used, without AACS present? And if AACS is required, why that is the case if BD+ can stand alone in the face of AACS being broken? I specifically like you to comment about software players in this context.

Note that his question was not whether BD+ has “teeth.” Clearly someone thinks it does although it is remarkable that despite such value in their minds, BD+ is not and has not been ready for deployment and content has been published without it. The assertion was that life is all well in BD land if AACS is broken. Can you please indicate if AACS is broken, that would be a good thing for BD format? And I am asking a business question here, not a technical one.

The only reason for BD+ to exist is to give the studios some tools to protect content should a repeat of DeCSS happen with AACS.
Let me ask you this. The hacker claims to have accessed the memory of a software player and grabbed key data to decrypt AACS content. What information do you have that would indicate BD+ code, should it exist and be running in the same software player, is immune to similar attack?

Note that I have done my best to stay away from confidential information from BDA. It is challenging to do so, and the task becomes even more complicated, having this discussion with someone who I don’t know if is exposed to full specifications for both technologies and is schooled in matters of copy protection :).

amirm

12-28-06, 08:16 AM

Are there any plans for a HD DVD player to be released in the next few months that does output 1080p24?
We won't be making any pre-announcements like this. But 24p will come just as 1080p did. The reason it is not there yet in stand-alone players is that CE companies loath to implement output formats which their own displays can not handle. They worry about customer support issues should the user set the player to 24p, and their own brand of display going blank. Yes, I know, bad logic but this is the reason you didn't see progressive 1080 support 'till now, despite many of us pushing for 3+ years now (motivated by the need to drive them with PCs btw). And here, I am talking about companies in BOTH camps.

Specifically without the use of a secondary video processor to convert 1080i60 to 1080p24.
The conversion is as simple as dropping frames from the PiP which costs nothing, or a temporal filter the likes of which is being introduced in TVs at CES which upsample video frame rate to 120Hz. So either logic is pretty straightforward to implement.

scaesare

12-28-06, 10:15 AM

This issue of 24p output has been debated elsewhere on the forum several times... ranging back to Ron's comments that Talk cited.

My question: Are the specifications for HD DVD authoring compliancy directed at the DISCS or the PLAYERS?

I maintain that discs are compliant if they are authored with permitted framerates, acceptable bandwidth parametrs, appropriate flags in the stream, etc... and that a player is not mandated in what it can do with those streams.

While there are likely player compliance specs as well (in order to sport the logo), I expect they are things like: must be able to decode <this> audio codec, must support decoding streams for max bandwidth, etc...

IOW: People are confusing what HD DVD specs mandate must be on the disc as opposed to what a player must do.

Is this correct?

amirm

12-28-06, 10:17 AM

Very correct Steve.

chad_cincy

12-28-06, 10:49 AM

I appreciate the discussion on what value BD+ has, should AACS ever be truly compromised. Personally, I am not a fan of a big brother type VM running on anything I own.

That said, I think a lot of people think that BD+ offers a layer of protection on top of AACS, i.e. both must be broken. I don't think this is correct and would like some clarification if possible. To be clear, I believe that if BD+ is implemented it is possible for it to add it's own vulnerabilities without AACS ever being compromised. Right? Is it not handed an AACS free stream? Then one could side step AACS completely if the encrytion or VM engine of BD+ proved to be more vulnerable.

Any corrections to my thinking are welcome.

amirm

12-28-06, 11:06 AM

To be clear, I believe that if BD+ is implemented it is possible for it to add it's own vulnerabilities without AACS ever being compromised. Right? Is it not handed an AACS free stream? Then one could side step AACS completely if the encrytion or VM engine of BD+ proved to be more vulnerable.

Very much correct and an astute observation :). BD+ sits on the output of AACS. At that point, AACS with all of its countermeasures is out of the picture. If BD+ subsystem is compromised, plugging that hole could be nasty. As Mark Knox once said, BD+ closes one doors, but opens many windows. :) One would need a revocation scheme just for the boundary between BD+ and AACS. And a scheme to keep it from getting broken again and again. Not fun, not fun at all to develop such things and I say this from experience :).

amillians

12-28-06, 11:29 AM

Is there a reason SPE isn't using BD+? Since the players are already BD+ compliant, and it doesn't seem like it would add cost to the discs, I would expect it to be in common use.The CPA (Content Participant Agreement) for BD+ is not yet available, so no Blu-ray content provider can legitimately use BD+ at this point in time. Further, the Eligible Code Developer Agreement isn't available either, so no third party can supply/code BD+ for use on BD-ROMs yet. The only BD+ legal done deal is the System Adopter Agreement for BD+, which is mandatory for device manufacturers and costs $20K/year.

Oh, wait, I'm not an insider. Insiders, is this correct? :)

paidgeek

12-28-06, 11:57 AM

Is there a reason SPE isn't using BD+? Since the players are already BD+ compliant, and it doesn't seem like it would add cost to the discs, I would expect it to be in common use.

It adds work, and some uses can require a portion of the disc space. We don't think additional measures are required until illegal copying is demonstrated and causing harm. Better to have tools to protect a release in the millions than in the thousands.

paidgeek

12-28-06, 12:14 PM

Very much correct and an astute observation :). BD+ sits on the output of AACS. At that point, AACS with all of its countermeasures is out of the picture. If BD+ subsystem is compromised, plugging that hole could be nasty. As Mark Knox once said, BD+ closes one doors, but opens many windows. :) One would need a revocation scheme just for the boundary between BD+ and AACS. And a scheme to keep it from getting broken again and again. Not fun, not fun at all to develop such things and I say this from experience :).

The discussions here make some assumptions about the way that AACS or BD+ work. They do not consist of one tool, but rather a collection of tools (and robustness requirements) that are designed to provide a renewable means of protecting content. It is possible for them to be used independently.

I'm sorry but I fail to understand why any discussion of copy protection techniques is appropriate here unless a consumer is having a playback problem caused by these tools.

As you would expect, both the AACS and BD+ specifications are under license and NDA, so technical discussions about how they work can easily run afoul of those agreements.

Rob Zuber

12-28-06, 12:25 PM

I'm sorry but I fail to understand why any discussion of copy protection techniques is appropriate here unless a consumer is having a playback problem caused by these tools.

As you would expect, both the AACS and BD+ specifications are under license and NDA, so technical discussions about how they work can easily run afoul of those agreements.It's technology, so those of us who aren't insiders and haven't signed an NDA are free to talk because we don't know anything. :D Some older AACS specs are public, so those of course can be discussed.

Is there anything you can tell us about BD+?

amirm

12-28-06, 12:27 PM

The discussions here make some assumptions about the way that AACS or BD+ work. They do not consist of one tool, but rather a collection of tools (and robustness requirements) that are designed to provide a renewable means of protecting content. It is possible for them to be used independently.
It is not the question of "what is possible" but what is allowed. Are you saying BD+ is allowed to be used without AACS? If you are not at liberty to say, that is fine too but please indicate so clearly.

I'm sorry but I fail to understand why any discussion of copy protection techniques is appropriate here unless a consumer is having a playback problem caused by these tools.
Welcome to AVS Forum :). We discuss everything here, all the way up to and including how a blue laser is manufactured. So this of kind of subject is very, very common around here although not as of late. A year ago we had hundreds of posts on these topics.

As you would expect, both the AACS and BD+ specifications are under license and NDA, so technical discussions about how they work can easily run afoul of those agreements.
Not in the case of AACS. See the full specs here: http://www.aacsla.com/specifications/. And note in the first pdf that it has Sony in it as one of the authors :). Usage requires a license but not the specs themselves.

BD+ data has been leaked in the past in this forum in the form of powerpoint presentations from BDA. Our resident deep throat was one of the guilty parties :). Also, CRI which provides foundation technology for BD+, has a public web site with fair amount of technical detail. See http://www.cryptography.com/.

All of the above give folks enough info to ask us pretty pointed questions. Of course, everyone must be careful to not disclose NDA info. And I have made sure of that in my posts, current and past. But because of previous disclosures, I am afraid you won’t be able to side step answering questions easily (talking from experience :)).

Schlotkins

12-28-06, 12:43 PM

Amir-

Here's a question I hope I know the answer to. As the owner of an A2, should I be concerned at all about this AACS stuff in terms of its affect on planned software releases? That's all I'm worried about.

Thanks,
Chris

High_Def DVD

12-28-06, 12:54 PM

Can the all BD players and all HD DVD players play ordinary CD's?
What about, JPEG files stored on DVD format?

amirm

12-28-06, 01:23 PM

Can the all BD players and all HD DVD players play ordinary CD's?
All HD DVD players do. My understanding is that the Sony/Pioneer BD players do not.

What about, JPEG files stored on DVD format?
I don't really know. Probably easy to look up on the web site of the companies.

amirm

12-28-06, 01:24 PM

kdragon

12-28-06, 03:29 PM

SPE is not using BD+ at this time. My understanding is that BD players are BD+ compliant. We may never use BD+ unless we think we will achieve something by doing so.Thanks PaidGeek. From your answer it seems BD+ will be used (at least by Sony) only if other measures are not effective. From the report about the hacker copying a movie using HD-DVD add-on and PowerDVD, I wanted to know if this is a good enough reason for studios to consider BD+.

BD+ has been discussed to death with not much real information; I am sorry for opening that up again! :(

However, now that the discussion as already started (:)), any useful info on BD+ is appreciated! What is the relationship between AACS and BD+?

By the way, due to internet, we the consumers want to know everything about the stuff that we buy whether it matters or not! Call us spoiled! :)

stanger89

12-28-06, 03:45 PM

BD+ has been discussed to death with not much real information;

Yeah, going through what little info we've been give (the presentation and website Amir mentioned), there's a lot of scary stuff that's possible with BD+, or SPDC at least.

What can, and can't BD+ do, and more importantly, what will and won't it be allowed to do?

Petra

12-28-06, 04:06 PM

BD+ has been discussed to death with not much real information; I am sorry for opening that up again! :(

However, now that the discussion as already started (:)), any useful info on BD+ is appreciated! What is the relationship between AACS and BD+?

By the way, due to internet, we the consumers want to know everything about the stuff that we buy whether it matters or not! Call us spoiled! :)

Considering how 'deadly' these hackers are, the lesser information about BD+ out on the public, the better.

...Heck I think that's the real flaw on this whole software security thing, everytime some smartass security experts think they have invented some hacker-proof concept, they went out and bragged about it and (some stupidly challenge the hackers *coughs*vista*coughs*) YOU WILL NEVER WIN AGAINST THE HACKERS

An even better solution is put more security layers on blu-ray and don't tell the public about it.

hmurchison

12-28-06, 04:12 PM

Considering how 'deadly' these hackers are, the lesser information about BD+ out on the public, the better.

...Heck I think that's the real flaw on this whole software security thing, everytime some smartass security experts think they have invented some hacker-proof concept, they went out and bragged about it and (some stupidly challenge the hackers *coughs*vista*coughs*) YOU WILL NEVER WIN AGAINST THE HACKERS

An even better solution is put more security layers on blu-ray and don't tell the public about it.

Wouldn't it be more prudent to simply let the process unfold the way it is intended? The attacks on Vista are disengenous. This isn't a Vista problem it's a AACS problem which is being dealt with by people that know the spec inside and out. Sony's rootkit was the last attempt at DRM that consumers didn't know about and how well did that one end up?

Schlotkins

12-28-06, 04:27 PM

There is nothing yet to worry about until the nature of this attack is more understood.

Do we have a time frame on this? I assume people are feverishy working on it now. I guess I'm just a little nervous my new A2 is going to become a paperweight.

Thanks,
Chris

paidgeek

12-28-06, 04:28 PM

Yeah, going through what little info we've been give (the presentation and website Amir mentioned), there's a lot of scary stuff that's possible with BD+, or SPDC at least.

What can, and can't BD+ do, and more importantly, what will and won't it be allowed to do?

May I ask what you find "scary"? BD+ only operates within the bounds of the player whether it is a hardware or software player. It is basically just a set ot tools that allow the content companies to run more intelligent and updateable tests and operations to make sure content is played on valid players. BD-J allows software companies to run all sorts of programs as well, but the types used for BD+ are naturally designed for protection of content.

Cyberlink makes a software player for both HD-DVD and BD. If the attack that has been posted is valid, it may well be adapted into decrypting BD content as well as HD-DVD (we are investigating). If so, it will certainly be worth considering preparations for adding BD+ to our product. The AACS companies are also going to be looking into this situation and may be able to use the provisions in AACS to fix this problem. Let's hope so, a broken security system for HD content is bad news for all legitimate users regardless of the format they prefer. The studios are all trying to build new businesses around HD content. Not having a reasonably secure format to pursue this is not good for anyone.

bkilian

12-28-06, 04:34 PM

Considering how 'deadly' these hackers are, the lesser information about BD+ out on the public, the better.

...Heck I think that's the real flaw on this whole software security thing, everytime some smartass security experts think they have invented some hacker-proof concept, they went out and bragged about it and (some stupidly challenge the hackers *coughs*vista*coughs*) YOU WILL NEVER WIN AGAINST THE HACKERS

An even better solution is put more security layers on blu-ray and don't tell the public about it.
That's called "security by obscurity" and it never works.
Paidgeek mentioned that unless the security affected playback, we shouldn't care about it. Unfortunately, a lot of home theater owners nowadays copy their movies up to a centralized server so they (a) don't have to worry about scratching their discs, and (b) can pick the movie they want to watch from a list (see Kaleidescape (http://www.kaleidescape.com/) ). Will BD+ affect their ability to do this? We know that AACS theoretically allows a copy, but what about BD+?

Forceflow

12-28-06, 04:37 PM

Cyberlink makes a software player for both HD-DVD and BD. If the attack that has been posted is valid, it may well be adapted into decrypting BD content as well as HD-DVD (we are investigating). If so, it will certainly be worth considering preparations for adding BD+ to our product. The AACS companies are also going to be looking into this situation and may be able to use the provisions in AACS to fix this problem. Let's hope so, a broken security system for HD content is bad news for all legitimate users regardless of the format they prefer. The studios are all trying to build new businesses around HD content. Not having a reasonably secure format to pursue this is not good for anyone.

Glad to hear you say these comments as I think it cuts across the spin that this harms only HD DVD. Its bad all around, but yes, if for some reason, AACS isn't able to overcome this (if even true) hurdle then it will be worse for HD DVD.

How soon do you estimate it would take for BD+ to be implemented to your products?

Will this delay any title releases as studios (particularly Sony) hold off in favor of gathering more information and preparing for stronger counter-measures?

amirm

12-28-06, 04:38 PM

Do we have a time frame on this? I assume people are feverishy working on it now. I guess I'm just a little nervous my new A2 is going to become a paperweight.

Thanks,
Chris
No time frame. But there is not a thing that is going to happen to your A2. It has and will continue to playback all the movies you are interested in.

kdragon

12-28-06, 04:49 PM

bkilian,

Are you aware of the proposed/rumored profiles for HD-DVD? If true, is it related to reducing HDi performance or increasing it from current specs? Is this about new class of players or is it about classifying the players within the current specs? Any info outside of the NDA is appreciated.

Petra

12-28-06, 05:14 PM

That's called "security by obscurity" and it never works.
Paidgeek mentioned that unless the security affected playback, we shouldn't care about it. Unfortunately, a lot of home theater owners nowadays copy their movies up to a centralized server so they (a) don't have to worry about scratching their discs, and (b) can pick the movie they want to watch from a list (see Kaleidescape (http://www.kaleidescape.com/) ). Will BD+ affect their ability to do this? We know that AACS theoretically allows a copy, but what about BD+?

please enlighten me, why such obscurity would never work? and this is an honest question from an average person.

If the hackers are using any measure to break into system, why couldn't the protectors go to any distance to protect the content, including not advertising their defense mechanism.

PeterTHX

12-28-06, 05:20 PM

Unfortunately, a lot of home theater owners nowadays copy their movies up to a centralized server so they (a) don't have to worry about scratching their discs, and (b) can pick the movie they want to watch from a list (see Kaleidescape ).

Um. A "lot"? Maybe in 5-10 years. But a great majority do not.

Paidgeek: BD+ is one extra measure, what about BD-ROM Mark?

admonish

12-28-06, 05:35 PM

Post Questions [only questions] directed to and answered only by Industry Insiders who are asked to identify themselves as such

Industry Insiders only may answer questions or make comments: this is the thread for chat between Insiders as well

any AVS member can post questions [only questions please] for Insiders- but we will not tolerate any bashing

AVS recognizes the special nature of Industry Insiders and values their participation: we ask all AVS members to treat them with respect

Remember: Questions only: no off topic posts: they may be removed: and only Insiders [who have been recognized by AVS moderators] may answer

Insiders: please PM Ken H and myself with your credentials: mods and only mods will make the determination of who qualifys as an insider and all such discussions will be done off line: not to be discussed here

This is a continuation of the original thread Industry Insiders Q&A Thread: only Questions to insiders please (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7970761&&#post7970761) which did not end well: any more of this and we will take strong action: Insiders are to be treated with respect:

This should be a flagship thread on AVS, and we will not allow any trouble

:)

let's strive to keep this thread just Q/A as there are plenty of other places to debate a topic

stanger89

12-28-06, 05:51 PM

May I ask what you find "scary"?

In short? The fact that it's essentially a Java VM with no known restrictions.

BD+ only operates within the bounds of the player whether it is a hardware or software player.

Based on this:
http://securityevaluators.com/eval/spdc_aacs_2005.pdf

There are a few scary things:
Discovery returns various information about the device, including details of attached components (e.g., devices connected to the digital output ports).
An additional trap (TRAP_DiscoveryRAM) provides content code with access to specific areas of player RAM external to the VM memory area.
In addition to Discovery, the Interface provides content code with a variety of routines that code may use to control the underlying device. This includes (but is not limited to) traps that initiate media reads; establish Internet connectivity; run native code; perform decryption with device or title keys; and generate device-signatures.

Just seems to open way to many Windows into the device. Call it a blunder or malicious, but the XCP fiasco has shown how little regard the content industry has toward the integrity of their customers devices, it's shown how far they will go to "protect" their content.

It is basically just a set ot tools that allow the content companies to run more intelligent and updateable tests and operations to make sure content is played on valid players.

And Java could be called a set of tools to allow people to make useful programs, but it can do all sorts of terrible things too.

BD-J allows software companies to run all sorts of programs as well, but the types used for BD+ are naturally designed for protection of content.

And it's specifically because they are designed for content protection, that they can (apparently) access the underlying device (what happens if I update my video drivers to a version after the disc is released?), to control the underlying device (I don't want the security system on a disc running my PC), to run arbitrary native code (with native code, all bets are really off).

It seems BD+ could easilly be used to do something XCP like (if not worse), so my question is, what is BD+ allowed to do? Are there restrictions on what it's allowed to do?

And since we've gone down the whole DRM/CP path, to insiders on any side, what do you think of Microsoft's The Darknet and the Future of Content Distribution (http://msl1.mit.edu/ESD10/docs/darknet5.pdf) paper, the talk given to Microsoft's Research Group about DRM (http://www.dashes.com/anil/stuff/doctorow-drm-ms.html), and the idea that DRM is inherently flawed because it gives the end user everything necessary (the key, the cypher, and cyphertext) to decode the content?

RobertR1

12-28-06, 06:08 PM

Amir,

I'd assume a software update if/when the hole is found and patch will be presented to all HD DVD players will fix the exploit(one of the good things about having mandatory ethernet connections)? You can clearly "force" the update by authoring future content in a way it does a proper version check. Ofcourse, this would also provide you with automatic protection on current titles that could be exploited.

paidgeek

12-28-06, 08:39 PM

Can you please indicate if AACS is broken, that would be a good thing for BD format? And I am asking a business question here, not a technical one.

What information do you have that would indicate BD+ code, should it exist and be running in the same software player, is immune to similar attack?

I do not think that having AACS hacked is a good thing for BD.

BD+ is dynamic whereas, for all practical purposes, AACS is static. With BD+, it should be possible to at least make it inconvenient to illegally copy content if/now that, AACS has been hacked. The virtue is clearly that we don't have to figure out every possible counter move to BD+ in advance, the implementers can modify their use of BD+ as often as required to get to an acceptable level of nuisance to keep copying from becoming common practice.

paidgeek

12-28-06, 08:49 PM

That's called "security by obscurity" and it never works.
Paidgeek mentioned that unless the security affected playback, we shouldn't care about it. Unfortunately, a lot of home theater owners nowadays copy their movies up to a centralized server so they (a) don't have to worry about scratching their discs, and (b) can pick the movie they want to watch from a list (see Kaleidescape (http://www.kaleidescape.com/) ). Will BD+ affect their ability to do this? We know that AACS theoretically allows a copy, but what about BD+?

BD+ is not intended to interfere with approved managed copy functionality, when it is eventually finalized...

paidgeek

12-28-06, 08:55 PM

Glad to hear you say these comments as I think it cuts across the spin that this harms only HD DVD. Its bad all around, but yes, if for some reason, AACS isn't able to overcome this (if even true) hurdle then it will be worse for HD DVD.

How soon do you estimate it would take for BD+ to be implemented to your products?

Will this delay any title releases as studios (particularly Sony) hold off in favor of gathering more information and preparing for stronger counter-measures?

I'm not sure how long it will take us to start using BD+. We have not given this much thought, but it will likely be up for discussion when everyone is back from the holidays.

I doubt that the lack of BD+ on our titles at this moment will affect our release schedule in any way.

We have added necessary functionality into the Blu-print authoring tools to support BD+ and these have been tested. This is at least one obstacle out of the way.

paidgeek

12-28-06, 08:56 PM

Um. A "lot"? Maybe in 5-10 years. But a great majority do not.

Paidgeek: BD+ is one extra measure, what about BD-ROM Mark?

BD-ROM mark is part of BD security used with AACS. It exists to help avoid mass piracy from illegal replicators.

paidgeek

12-28-06, 09:04 PM

In short? The fact that it's essentially a Java VM with no known restrictions.

Based on this:
http://securityevaluators.com/eval/spdc_aacs_2005.pdf

There are a few scary things:

Just seems to open way to many Windows into the device. Call it a blunder or malicious, but the XCP fiasco has shown how little regard the content industry has toward the integrity of their customers devices, it's shown how far they will go to "protect" their content.

And Java could be called a set of tools to allow people to make useful programs, but it can do all sorts of terrible things too.

And it's specifically because they are designed for content protection, that they can (apparently) access the underlying device (what happens if I update my video drivers to a version after the disc is released?), to control the underlying device (I don't want the security system on a disc running my PC), to run arbitrary native code (with native code, all bets are really off).

It seems BD+ could easilly be used to do something XCP like (if not worse), so my question is, what is BD+ allowed to do? Are there restrictions on what it's allowed to do?

And since we've gone down the whole DRM/CP path, to insiders on any side, what do you think of Microsoft's The Darknet and the Future of Content Distribution (http://msl1.mit.edu/ESD10/docs/darknet5.pdf) paper, the talk given to Microsoft's Research Group about DRM (http://www.dashes.com/anil/stuff/doctorow-drm-ms.html), and the idea that DRM is inherently flawed because it gives the end user everything necessary (the key, the cypher, and cyphertext) to decode the content?

We have seen that failed implementations of security that inconvenience the legitimate consumer have serious consequences for the content provider. Do you really think that even if it was possible, bad BD+ code would not have far worse consequences for the company who distributed it than for the consumer?

Rob Zuber

12-28-06, 10:31 PM

amirm

12-28-06, 10:38 PM

Question for Amir: If a user connects a BD or HD-DVD drive to a Windows Vista PC, and plays an AACS protected movie (which does not have the Image Constraint Token set), will the PC allow 1080p output over the VGA port? Assume the PC is using all properly licensed hardware and software.

I'm wondering if ICT is the only parameter that matters in this case.
There is no dependency here on Vista as the operating system makes no policy decision on its own. It is totally up to the application running on it, to make that determination.

But answering your question in general, PCs fall in the category of computing devices and as such, can utilize 1080p over VGA. This would be the same on XP and Vista. And yes, ICT would be the only constraint here.

nataraj

12-28-06, 11:27 PM

We have seen that failed implementations of security that inconvenience the legitimate consumer have serious consequences for the content provider. Do you really think that even if it was possible, bad BD+ code would not have far worse consequences for the company who distributed it than for the consumer?

Here are some questions about BD+.

I had posted these questions about BD+ in a PC environment some months back. I've asked several related questions about BD+ over the past year or so - and have not got any definitive replys. Can you answer them ?

BD+ means there is a little program in the disc which runs when I play the movie from the disc. It is a different program on every disc (possibly). We don't know what it can do. We don't know what all it can read from the PC. We don't know whether it can collect some info and send it over the net. We don't know whether it will declare my HTPC hacked ... and send that info over internet. I don't want to cross my fingers and pray everytime I put a new disc in my HTPC.

BD+ has an inherent problem. For it to be trsuted we need to know its limits :

1. Whether it can write anything into my PC. Hopefully not.

2. What can it read from my PC ?

3. Can it send info over internet. Hopefully not.

The problem is, if the limits are well defined and available to public - hackers will get some info on how to defeat BD+.

stanger89

12-29-06, 12:23 AM

Oh and one more question regarding BD+.

4. You say it's not being used on BDs at the moment. When it is, will those BDs on which BD+ is used, be marked as such?

lymzy

12-29-06, 02:19 AM

BD+ is not intended to interfere with approved managed copy functionality, when it is eventually finalized...

Is the fix up table fuction of BD+ happening during the decoding in realtime or before the decoding? If the fix process has to be done in realtime, how could it not interfere with managed copy? Thanks.

kjack

12-29-06, 03:19 AM

Is the fix up table fuction of BD+ happening during the decoding in realtime or before the decoding? If the fix process has to be done in realtime, how could it not interfere with managed copy? Thanks.I would imagine that it would be implementation dependent. We just happen to do the BD+ processing in real-time on our security CPU, before the A/V decoding.

HighDeff

12-29-06, 04:09 AM

Amir, why isn´t it possible, to play back WMV9HD, in the HD-DVD players sold now.??

Isn´t it just a small FW update, or.??

markrubin

12-29-06, 08:18 AM

Post Questions [only questions] directed to and answered only by Industry Insiders who are asked to identify themselves as such in their sig : subject to AVS approval

Industry Insiders only may answer questions or make comments: this is the thread for chat between Insiders as well

any AVS member can post questions [only questions please] for Insiders- but we will not tolerate any bashing

AVS recognizes the special nature of Industry Insiders and values their participation: we ask all AVS members to treat them with respect

Remember: Questions only: no off topic posts: they may be removed: and only Insiders [who have been recognized by AVS moderators] may answer

Insiders: please PM Ken H and myself with your credentials: mods and only mods will make the determination of who qualifys as an insider and all such discussions will be done off line: not to be discussed here

This is a continuation of the original thread Industry Insiders Q&A Thread: only Questions to insiders please (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7970761&&#post7970761) which did not end well: any more of this and we will take strong action: Insiders are to be treated with respect:

Please help us make this a flagship thread on AVS by observing these rules

:)

Insiders: reminder that you need to check in with Ken H and myself before you post as an insider: once confirmed, you wil be asked to add it to your sig

Thanks and Happy New Year

amirm

12-29-06, 09:03 AM

Amir, why isn´t it possible, to play back WMV9HD, in the HD-DVD players sold now.??

Isn´t it just a small FW update, or.??
Yes, it requires extra software as only the video codec is compatible with HD DVD decoder. Also, getting the DRM functionality working there is non-trivial as unfortunately, a few discs used internet activation, making them difficult to play.

Rob Zuber

12-29-06, 12:27 PM

amirm

12-29-06, 12:30 PM

If the AACS LA decides to revoke a key for some reason, is there a requirement (or at least an expectation) that the revocation be announced publicly, including details of affected hardware and software?
I don't think public flogging is one of the terms in AACS agreement :). But I could be wrong.

The process involved notifying the equipment/software maker, telling them what is wrong, and giving them sufficient notice to right the situation. I would imagine that they would then inform their customers of the remedy, and such data then becomes public fairly easily.

benwaggoner

12-29-06, 12:33 PM

Amir, why isn´t it possible, to play back WMV9HD, in the HD-DVD players sold now.??

Isn´t it just a small FW update, or.??
WMVHD is an almost entirely different format, with the only real overlap being VC-1 support (Main Profile in WMVHD, Advanced Profile in HD DVD).

But the file system, muxing, interactivity, DRM, file wrapper, audio codecs etcetera are very different. The hardware in a HD DVD player is capable of decoding everything, but it would need a whole new software layer to do it all.

bjonni

12-29-06, 01:16 PM

Amir or benwaggoner,

A couple of weeks ago people complained about how DD+ tracks sounded when played on the 360 add-on. Some just thought the volume was lower and others said it sounded like some sort of dynamic range compression was taking place. You (amir) said in a post that your team was investigating these reports and it was then assumed by a lot of posters in the HD DVD player forum that a fix will be included in the update that will add DTS output. Maybe I have missed a post with all the details, not hard to do here especially during the holidays, so I wonder if either one of you could clarify:

Did you confirm that there is a problem with DD+ audio tracks on the 360 add-on?

If you did, will it be fixed by the update that adds DTS output?

Thanks,
Patrik

paidgeek

12-29-06, 01:26 PM

Is the fix up table fuction of BD+ happening during the decoding in realtime or before the decoding? If the fix process has to be done in realtime, how could it not interfere with managed copy? Thanks.

Please see the response from the insider at Sigma. All video stream processing has to happen prior to the decoder, so this should not cause any problems for managed copy.

benwaggoner

12-29-06, 01:33 PM

A couple of weeks ago people complained about how DD+ tracks sounded when played on the 360 add-on. Some just thought the volume was lower and others said it sounded like some sort of dynamic range compression was taking place. You (amir) said in a post that your team was investigating these reports and it was then assumed by a lot of posters in the HD DVD player forum that a fix will be included in the update that will add DTS output. Maybe I have missed a post with all the details, not hard to do here especially during the holidays, so I wonder if either one of you could clarify:

Did you confirm that there is a problem with DD+ audio tracks on the 360 add-on?

If you did, will it be fixed by the update that adds DTS output?

I haven't heard anything definitive on this, and all the people I'd ask are on vacation until next week. I'll post when I get something back.

nataraj

12-29-06, 02:29 PM

If the AACS LA decides to revoke a key for some reason, is there a requirement (or at least an expectation) that the revocation be announced publicly, including details of affected hardware and software?

To add to this - IIRC, there is a stiff penalty if the security of a player is compromised. Would the current "break" penalize PowerDVD makers ... ?

kdragon

12-29-06, 03:46 PM

John Haghighi

12-30-06, 03:00 PM

Paidgeek,

Any chance we'll see Bram Stoker's Dracula on BD? If so please make sure it doesn't turn out like TFE, the Superbit was great on DVD.

bkilian

12-30-06, 05:14 PM

I asked this yesterday to bkilian. Could any other insider answer this?

Are you aware of the proposed/rumored profiles for HD-DVD? If true, is it related to reducing HDi performance or increasing it from current specs? Is this about new class of players or is it about classifying the players within the current specs? Any info outside of the NDA is appreciated.

I am just trying to figure out impact of this on my near future PC upgrade (if you can believe that).I'm not privy to any performance levels other than level 1. Level 1 describes the minimum performance required by a player to be able to play any disc.
You can get the Level 1 document from the DVD forum website (http://www.dvdforum.org/images/HD_DVD-Video_Guideline20060828.pdf) (PDF). If they make more levels, I suspect they would change things like the minimum required persistent storage, or the size of the pixel buffer or filecache. I doubt you need to worry about it when planning your next PC upgrade.

diogen

12-30-06, 05:33 PM

...IIRC, there is a stiff penalty if the security of a player is compromised. US$8 million to be exact
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060307-6331.html

Discussed here (http://archive2.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=653732).

Diogen.

paidgeek

12-30-06, 11:38 PM

Paidgeek,

Any chance we'll see Bram Stoker's Dracula on BD? If so please make sure it doesn't turn out like TFE, the Superbit was great on DVD.

I am sure this title will be available on BD at some point. We have already had some brief discussions with Mr. Coppola's office and they have expressed interest in participating in the preparation and release.

John Haghighi

12-31-06, 12:31 AM

WMVHD is an almost entirely different format, with the only real overlap being VC-1 support (Main Profile in WMVHD, Advanced Profile in HD DVD).

But the file system, muxing, interactivity, DRM, file wrapper, audio codecs etcetera are very different. The hardware in a HD DVD player is capable of decoding everything, but it would need a whole new software layer to do it all.

Glad to hear it's possible, when can we expect it on the 360?

I wouldn't be worried about the few titles that don't work. I think it would be good to support it on the 360 since it's an MS format and some of us wanting HD early on bought titles.

tkmedia2

12-31-06, 01:05 AM

If available, would be neat to see the odd alternate TV cuts of Bram Stokers Dracula.:D

Neo1965

12-31-06, 02:32 AM

efralope

12-31-06, 03:31 AM

Question to HD DVD insiders:

Is there a target date for Twin Format (hybrid discs with both HD DVD and DVD on one side) disc releases in the US, or is Combo going to be the only option major studios use?

Question to Blu-ray insiders:

Is there a time-frame for when hybrid DVD/Blu-ray discs will be released? Andy Parsons has mentioned that they would be out to combat the COMBO discs from the HD DVD group and I believe Disney was touting them as a key feature so kids could play them in their bedroom, but there hasn't been much news lately...

Thanks

TomsHT

12-31-06, 11:14 AM

Is there any public email address that us members here can email CJplay?

eXgo

12-31-06, 11:44 AM

Is there any public email address that us members here can email CJplay?

That would be cool. but have you seen enemy of the state? ;)

BenDover

12-31-06, 11:47 AM

Has it yet been determined exactly what feature/aspect of The Descent is causing the issues on various BD players?

Is there a firmware patch being readied to fix the Sony unit? (and given the similarities, etc., the Pioneer unit?)

Robert George

12-31-06, 01:27 PM

Has it yet been determined exactly what feature/aspect of The Descent is causing the issues on various BD players?

BD-J

kdragon

12-31-06, 03:04 PM

I'm not privy to any performance levels other than level 1. Level 1 describes the minimum performance required by a player to be able to play any disc.
You can get the Level 1 document from the DVD forum website (http://www.dvdforum.org/images/HD_DVD-Video_Guideline20060828.pdf) (PDF). If they make more levels, I suspect they would change things like the minimum required persistent storage, or the size of the pixel buffer or filecache. I doubt you need to worry about it when planning your next PC upgrade.Thanks for the document and your comments. I didn't read this doc before. I think apart from total bandwidth (~200M pixels/s) for pixel buffer, I have no doubt about other requirements (even if increased significantly). How does this pixel buffer access bandwidth apply to a graphics card? Anyway, a modern graphics card should have much more bandwidth for this, I think. If you have more thoughts on this aspect, I would appreciate it. Just for understanding.

markrubin

12-31-06, 03:21 PM

Post Questions [only questions] directed to and answered only by Industry Insiders who are asked to identify themselves as such in their sig : subject to AVS approval

Industry Insiders only may answer questions or make comments: this is the thread for chat between Insiders as well

any AVS member can post questions [only questions please] for Insiders- but we will not tolerate any bashing

AVS recognizes the special nature of Industry Insiders and values their participation: we ask all AVS members to treat them with respect

Remember: Questions only: no off topic posts: they may be removed: and only Insiders [who have been recognized by AVS moderators] may answer

Insiders: please PM Ken H and myself with your credentials: mods and only mods will make the determination of who qualifys as an insider and all such discussions will be done off line: not to be discussed here

This is a continuation of the original thread Industry Insiders Q&A Thread: only Questions to insiders please (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7970761&&#post7970761) which did not end well: any more of this and we will take strong action: Insiders are to be treated with respect:

Please help us make this a flagship thread on AVS by observing these rules

:)

One more call for Insiders who wish to post here to send us your credentials: this may be the last chance you have THIS YEAR :D

Seriously we need any insiders to check in with us ASAP

benwaggoner

12-31-06, 04:37 PM

Glad to hear it's possible, when can we expect it on the 360?
I don't know that this is something that is being explicity worked on. The GUI is certainly something that the 360 doesn't have support for.

That said, I imagine some titles that allow a the WMV file to play in WMP could let the 360 stream the WMV via its MCE functionality.

I haven't tried it yet, although I do have some WMVHD discs in my office...

More broadly, it's important to understand that WMVHD was an interim effort - HD DVD is now Microsoft's technology of choice for HD content on optical disc.

paidgeek

12-31-06, 04:51 PM

To paidgeek,

In the BD for Tony Bennett, I noticed inconsistent PQ between several clips. The two segments with Streisand and Aguilera had substantially lower PQ than the other segments, and I thought the one done with Krall one was the best segment I've seen in a long time.

What could cause this effect? Is it just an issue with lighting? Were they shot using different cameras and different film?

Any update on Starship Troopers production?

TIA.

The Tony Bennett master has video from a number of different camera and video formats. This is why the picture is not always consistent. Be assured that Sony Music is very interested in creating high quality HD material for future BD releases and we have had numerous discussions with them on how to optimize future productions.

No news on Starship Troopers yet.

dlb99

12-31-06, 09:06 PM

BenDover

12-31-06, 09:31 PM

Question to paidgeek,

Another regions question (us Aussies are stuck in Region-B unfortunately, I'm not happy at all about that). You have mentioned that SPE will take the attitude that catalogue titles will be region free whilst new titles will be region coded.

Eventually however new titles become old titles in the fullness of time. What will happen with respect to the region code. In a utopian world once a theatrical window closes (worldwide) then a new title becomes in-effect a catalogue title.

Can/will SPE remove region code from titles that used to have region codes once an appropriate time passes (e.g manufacture new region free instances)?

I suspect this will all be too hard (once a region code is applied I suspect that movie will never be region-free). Just asking though.

Dennis.

P.S. Others will be interested to note that I am currently talking to the Australian Consumer and Competition Commision about Blu-ray region coding. I hope to persuade them about the anti-consumer nature of Blu-ray region coding, stay-tuned ;)

couldn't the players be "instructed" to treat the title as region-free once the "theatrical window closes" through the magic of these new formats?

John Haghighi

01-01-07, 05:59 AM

I don't know that this is something that is being explicity worked on. The GUI is certainly something that the 360 doesn't have support for.

That said, I imagine some titles that allow a the WMV file to play in WMP could let the 360 stream the WMV via its MCE functionality.

I haven't tried it yet, although I do have some WMVHD discs in my office...

More broadly, it's important to understand that WMVHD was an interim effort - HD DVD is now Microsoft's technology of choice for HD content on optical disc.

I understand HD DVD is the technology of choice, however Microsoft has a track record of providing backwards compatability, I expect this to be the case with WMVHD. If it can work being streamed from a connected PC, that's fine, as long as it works, however I'd hate to see this overlooked.

Jeff Williams

01-01-07, 03:46 PM

paidgeek

01-01-07, 04:14 PM

Question to paidgeek,

Another regions question (us Aussies are stuck in Region-B unfortunately, I'm not happy at all about that). You have mentioned that SPE will take the attitude that catalogue titles will be region free whilst new titles will be region coded.

Eventually however new titles become old titles in the fullness of time. What will happen with respect to the region code. In a utopian world once a theatrical window closes (worldwide) then a new title becomes in-effect a catalogue title.

Can/will SPE remove region code from titles that used to have region codes once an appropriate time passes (e.g manufacture new region free instances)?

I suspect this will all be too hard (once a region code is applied I suspect that movie will never be region-free). Just asking though.

Dennis.

P.S. Others will be interested to note that I am currently talking to the Australian Consumer and Competition Commision about Blu-ray region coding. I hope to persuade them about the anti-consumer nature of Blu-ray region coding, stay-tuned ;)

A 12 month window is allowed for region coded titles. This means after a title is released with region coding, it cannot be manufactured with region coding after 12 months pass from the first sales. This is something of a nuisance for the studios because they have to provide a new cutting master for re-orders of catalog product. It is also a motivator to avoid using region coding unless it is really beneficial for a particular title (protecting a theatrical window).

paidgeek

01-01-07, 04:16 PM

couldn't the players be "instructed" to treat the title as region-free once the "theatrical window closes" through the magic of these new formats?

Network connected players could provide some function like this, but they won't be a the norm for a while. It is potentially a problem to require the user to connect the player in order to lift the region coding.

paidgeek

01-01-07, 04:19 PM

paidgeek,

From one insider to another, does Sony have any BD-J resources available to the authoring community? It would be great to have a basic framework to build on. Microsoft has provided quite a bit of HDi support, but Sony doesn't seem to want to share BD-J. I have studios asking if I can do BD-J and unfortunately I have to answer no. If you can provide any help, it would be much appreciated.

Thanks,
Jeff

A conference run by Mark Johnson was recently held that addressed this very topic. An SPE engineer gave a presentation on how Blu-print is being adapted to BD-J authoring. Please PM me with your contact information and we will get you a copy and additional support.

mrwilson

01-01-07, 04:45 PM

A 12 month window is allowed for region coded titles.

Then why not come up with a way for the Region Code to Expire after 12 months? Maybe you can do that with BD-J.

amirm

01-01-07, 04:52 PM

Then why not come up with a way for the Region Code to Expire after 12 months? Maybe you can do that with BD-J.
Helping fellow insider a bit :), there are two reasons:

1. You would need something we call "secure clock." That is, a time/date function on the player that is tamper proof. As otherwise, user would mess with it, completely defeating the purpose of region coding. One method to do this is to use a network time for authentication although this is just a the tip of the iceberg as far as what you have to do (the whole transaction must be secure which is very difficult to do in open systems like a PC). The second method is through PC connection. Music players which implement our DRM do it this way (to manage music subscription), again with a ton more logic than meets the eye.

2. Patent fee concerns. Despite the fact that people call AACS and BD, "DRM", in reality, they are not. They are forms of copy protection which is a simpler class of system than a DRM. Once you enter the domain of a true DRM with flexible rights as would be the case here, you open yourself up to claims from folks who are known to charge you pretty good penny for their patents :). Folks are not liable to want to cross that line, and get these people involved.

trbarry

01-01-07, 07:15 PM

Helping fellow insider a bit :), there are two reasons:

1. You would need something we call "secure clock." That is, a time/date function on the player that is tamper proof. As otherwise, user would mess with it, completely defeating the purpose of region coding. One method to do this is to use a network time for authentication although this is just a the tip of the iceberg as far as what you have to do (the whole transaction must be secure which is very difficult to do in open systems like a PC). The second method is through PC connection. Music players which implement our DRM do it this way (to manage music subscription), again with a ton more logic than meets the eye.

Another way to do it might be to put an encrypted "newest date seen" on all discs. This would effectively be a softare update saying the studio has admitted it is, say, at least 2008 and thus all expired region coding might be ignored. Thus the user has only to buy any new disc to open up previously marketed region protected movies. Fairly confusing to explain, but it might get the job done and prompt some new purchases in the process.

Heck, BD+ might be able to do this if they really wanted to. ;)

- Tom

ChrisW6ATV

01-01-07, 07:55 PM

paidgeek

01-01-07, 08:02 PM

I am happy to learn of the region-coding time limit. If a "new version" of a title was released, like a Director's Cut or even the same edit but with DTS when the previous version had Dolby/PCM, for example, would that "reset the clock" and allow a region code on the new release? Thank you for your time.

My understanding is that the 12 month restriction only applies to the identical disc. If a slightly different version is released, then it could be region coded.

dlb99

01-01-07, 08:25 PM

A 12 month window is allowed for region coded titles. This means after a title is released with region coding, it cannot be manufactured with region coding after 12 months pass from the first sales. This is something of a nuisance for the studios because they have to provide a new cutting master for re-orders of catalog product. It is also a motivator to avoid using region coding unless it is really beneficial for a particular title (protecting a theatrical window).

Thank you for the response paidgeek.

Hmmm, very interesting. I had never heard of this mandate with respect to Blu-ray titles. Hopefully the nuisance value does achieve the desired result (no region code to begin with).

However, this will also be confusing. Example, I'm in Australia, I order "Click" 12-months+1-day after it's North American release. Which version will make it's way down to me, region-coded or region-free? Labelling becomes very important here. Hopefully SPE/Fox/Disney work on this such that consumers can realize whether they are purchasing a region locked or region free title (including us Internet shoppers).

However I will say this 12-month tops region lock model is much less bad than what I had assumed would be a permanent region lock for certain titles.

Just another wrinkle, good in a way, also potentially confusing as well (two versions of the same title).

You learn something new everyday, thanks again.

Dennis.

dlb99

01-01-07, 08:28 PM

My understanding is that the 12 month restriction only applies to the identical disc. If a slightly different version is released, then it could be region coded.

Any company which resets the clock for a title that did not contain significant changes will look very evil. Example title-X now comes with a second non-English track (no other changes are contained). Hopefully that does not occur.

Dennis.

gooki

01-01-07, 08:36 PM

However I will say this 12-month tops region lock model is much less bad than what I had assumed would be a permanent region lock for certain titles.

Personally i'd rather see a permenant region lock on the discs so more effort is put into cracking players than the above example. Because as you described you may endup having a nightmare trying to trace down a region free disc.

Azumi

01-02-07, 05:47 AM

space2001

01-02-07, 08:02 AM

markrubin

01-02-07, 08:39 AM

Post Questions [only questions] directed to and answered only by Industry Insiders who are asked to identify themselves as such in their sig : subject to AVS approval

Industry Insiders only may answer questions or make comments: this is the thread for chat between Insiders as well

any AVS member can post questions [only questions please] for Insiders- but we will not tolerate any bashing

AVS recognizes the special nature of Industry Insiders and values their participation: we ask all AVS members to treat them with respect

Remember: Questions only: no off topic posts: they may be removed: and only Insiders [who have been recognized by AVS moderators] may answer

Insiders: please PM Ken H and myself with your credentials: mods and only mods will make the determination of who qualifys as an insider and all such discussions will be done off line: not to be discussed here

This is a continuation of the original thread Industry Insiders Q&A Thread: only Questions to insiders please (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7970761&&#post7970761) which did not end well: any more of this and we will take strong action: Insiders are to be treated with respect:

Please help us make this a flagship thread on AVS by observing these rules

:)

Happy New Year

Insiders: Please check in with us by PM if you have not already done so

Thanks :)

Kosty

01-02-07, 09:22 AM

I don't know if this questiong has been answered and I can't find it through all of the 10 diffrent threads about AACS.

If AACS Key has actually been hacked.

and the Keys get revoked. Does that mean all the disc out there now will be useless in players.

So for example I own Batman Begins and the key Gets hacked then Warner Revokes the key. Then I updtae my player or a new title that I buy revokes the BB key.

Does this mean my copy is gone and I can't play it any more.
(this will really piss off customers if its the way it works.) Got this info from thedigitalbits.com.

Thanks See this link with a quote from Mark Knox. The disc can always be read by good players. The revoked player can always play the old discs but not newer discs until being updated with new keys.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9301138&&#post9301138

dialog_gvf

01-02-07, 02:01 PM

1. You would need something we call "secure clock." That is, a time/date function on the player that is tamper proof. As otherwise, user would mess with it, completely defeating the purpose of region coding.

Wouldn't the same companies that do the security chips to hold the keys also be able to do one that included a clock? That should be extremely cheap.

The thing is, I doubt the player makers would be spending much time on designs centered on restricting the usefullness of their devices. They'd like it as wide open as possible, and are forced to add the complexity and costs as demanded to get the content support.

Gary

kjack

01-02-07, 02:26 PM

Wouldn't the same companies that do the security chips to hold the keys also be able to do one that included a clock?And some of us do. :) But as Amir pointed out earlier, that opens another can of worms.

paidgeek

01-03-07, 12:17 AM

I have a question to Paidgeek on the subject of supplementals in standard def:

I watch Blu-ray movies on a PS3, and from the perspective of my player, virtually all of the supplements in SD are totally useless and unwatchable as the PS3 doesn't upscale nor does it de-anamorphize 16:9 SD content.

Instead of worrying whether BD players can or will upscale one day, I was wondering why the Studios don't take the stand to artificially upscale to 1080 all the 480/576 original content, and put it on the disc? In Europe, some HDTV channels use this approach to broadcast SD material and the results are quite good.

I have a similar question on present movies which will be released day-and-date. Is Sony Pictures (and the other Studios too) making the appropriate steps to ensure that, from now on, all the supplementals must be shot (makings of...) or telecined (deleted scenes...) directly in HD?

Thank you for your answer!

I am not sure why you are having trouble with the SD added value. Can you play a regular DVD in your player and get a correct picture? Most monitors will give you the opportunity to set the screen format when presented with widescreen SD video. To confirm this, we tested the PS3 while switching back and forth to the SD AV on one of our current titles using the Qualia 004 projector.

It is possible to upscale as you suggest, but it will require using up considerably more disc space with no improvement in picture quality. In cases where SD material is mixed with HD, this is already done, but if the added value is isolated, we will get better disc economy by keeping the compression SD.

SPE is definitely concentrating on only HD added value going forward. The cost and availability of shooting in portable HD formats is now reasonable, so this makes a lot of sense.

Paul_Seng

01-03-07, 12:24 AM

paidgeek, you may have answered this already. Does the PS3 output 1080P/24P? If not, will it ever? I would really like to try this and so far the best I can output my PS3 is 1080P/60hz.

thanks

paidgeek

01-03-07, 01:01 AM

paidgeek, you may have answered this already. Does the PS3 output 1080P/24P? If not, will it ever? I would really like to try this and so far the best I can output my PS3 is 1080P/60hz.

thanks

At this time, the PS3 does not output 24p. I cannot say if it will with firmware updates. Sony Computer is very careful about announcing future capabilities and they have not made clear whether this will be added or not.

addogg

01-03-07, 11:37 AM

amirm

01-03-07, 01:01 PM

Amir or Benwaggoner - any news on this??

There's a few people over at avforums desperate for some news!

Thanks in advance.
I am sorry. It has been hard to get this answer, with holidays and such. I just pushed some more and will announce here as soon as I am able.

Appreciate your patience. I know there is a lot of interest in this news.

addogg

01-03-07, 01:36 PM

ok thanks! :D

skogan

01-03-07, 02:00 PM

amirm

01-03-07, 02:11 PM

Microsoft People :)

How well are the HD titles on Xbox live selling in comparison to their optical format counterparts? If you happen to have any information on that handy it would be appreciated. If not, I understand.

Thanks.
This is hard to answer because in one case we have the stats (Xbox marketplace) and in the other, we do not (HD DVD disc sales). Short of doing surveys in the future, I am afraid we won't have the answer.

In general, both avenues seem to have their satisfied customers.

BrynRhys

01-03-07, 02:27 PM

This is hard to answer because in one case we have the stats (Xbox marketplace) and in the other, we do not (HD DVD disc sales). Short of doing surveys in the future, I am afraid we won't have the answer.
Amir,
Is it your statement that the retail intelligence companies do not track title sales by UPC and are therefore unable to provide these numbers? Because that does not comport with their product offerings.

Or is it your statement that Microsoft has not purchased this kind of intelligence and does not plan on doing so?

Also, will there be any statements from MS or the HD DVD forum regarding sales ratios or totals at CES as there was previously with the 3:1 statement?

Thanks!

skogan

01-03-07, 02:37 PM

amirm

01-03-07, 04:49 PM

Thanks anyway. I like the XBL service a lot.
Thanks for the feedback. You know, it might be useful to have a thread here to discuss the service. I will then try to get an Xbox person to monitor in addition to looking at it myself.

Azumi

01-04-07, 09:23 AM

I am not sure why you are having trouble with the SD added value. Can you play a regular DVD in your player and get a correct picture? Most monitors will give you the opportunity to set the screen format when presented with widescreen SD video. To confirm this, we tested the PS3 while switching back and forth to the SD AV on one of our current titles using the Qualia 004 projector.

Paidgeek, the problem is that my Fujitsu plasma (as well as a number of other sets on the market) disallows all kind of zooming features when in HDMI input mode. So in short, any kind of SD content that goes through the HDMI mode - whether it's from a DVD or Blu-ray - will have a huge amount on black bars on top/bottom, as well as left and right. Moreover, the 16:9 SD content isn't de-anamorphized.

So you see where the problem is. The SD content is a tiny window in a sea of black bars, and there is absolutely no way to zoom in.

We had the same problem with the French's Canal+ HD set-top box. The C+ engineers had to allow zooming within the set-top box with a firmware upgrade to overcome this issue.

The only way around would be to connect the PS3 in YUV (which doesn't have any zooming constraits), but frankly this would add another layer of complexity in my install, not to mention that we don't know if and when you guys are going to kill 1080p in YUV with the ICT contraint.

It is possible to upscale as you suggest, but it will require using up considerably more disc space with no improvement in picture quality. In cases where SD material is mixed with HD, this is already done, but if the added value is isolated, we will get better disc economy by keeping the compression SD.

All I can suggest, is that the Studios make a little market research to estimate the % of sets where zooming in unsupported in HDMI. If upscaling takes too much disc space, then you have to make sure that the PS3 gets a upscale mode, or at least a dumb zooming mode in a future upgrade.

SPE is definitely concentrating on only HD added value going forward. The cost and availability of shooting in portable HD formats is now reasonable, so this makes a lot of sense.

Great news!

BENN0

01-04-07, 10:16 AM

Any comment from insiders on the recent announcement from LG?

amirm

01-04-07, 10:41 AM

Any comment from insiders on the recent announcement from LG?
While the impact of Universal players in the market is unknown, it is wonderful to see HD DVD users have another option for playback of their content. With LG being the second BDA founding member to support HD DVD (after Thomson), we hope this is the sign of things to come :).

The other observation to note is that more and more companies are starting to accept that there will be two formats, and accomodating them accordingly. This is evident from Warner doing the same with their BD+HD DVD compatible discs, helping retailers with inventory concerns.

Azumi

01-04-07, 10:42 AM

Any comment from insiders on the recent announcement from LG?

I'd love that too, but I kind of guess that nobody right now would want to go on the record on that ;)

But since there's nothing wrong in asking, here it goes:

- I'd like to know if LG has the legal provisions to launch a universal player right now, or if their announcement is just a excuse to leverage some other claims (like easing the pricing on royalties, or calling both sides to settle on a unified format).

And while we're at it, I have a similar question on Total HD :

- Do the executives of the major retailers (Wal-mart, Best Buy, Amazon...) really think that a THIRD HD format is actually a good idea, or they're afraid that this is only going to add another layer of confusion and alienate the mainstream consumers even more?

Go ahead, industry pros, answer if you dare... :D

TomsHT

01-04-07, 11:10 AM

Is there any info that can be announced to the use and limitations of these new Total HD disks?

amirm

01-04-07, 02:18 PM

I'd love that too, but I kind of guess that nobody right now would want to go on the record on that ;)
Oh, not too hard for me to comment. But you know me, I live dangerously. But I will avoid the word "pig" and other farm animals just to be on the safe side :D.

I'd like to know if LG has the legal provisions to launch a universal player right now, or if their announcement is just a excuse to leverage some other claims (like easing the pricing on royalties, or calling both sides to settle on a unified format).
My understanding is that they have been working on this project for a while. So if they are bluffing, that is a very expensive way to do it.

And while we're at it, I have a similar question on Total HD :

- Do the executives of the major retailers (Wal-mart, Best Buy, Amazon...) really think that a THIRD HD format is actually a good idea, or they're afraid that this is only going to add another layer of confusion and alienate the mainstream consumers even more?
Based on limited info I have, they seem to like it. After all, Total HD is a product built just for them as it saves them shelf space.

Of course, the above is much less of an issue for e-tailers.

Go ahead, industry pros, answer if you dare... :D
How did I do? :)

Kosty

01-04-07, 02:19 PM

Is there any info that can be announced to the use and limitations of these new Total HD disks? Or their capacity or any other feature limitation?

Wasn't the proposal having a single Blu-ray layer (25GB) and dual HD layers (30GB) on the disc with the laser being able to shine through the Blu-ray laser to focus on the HD DVD layers?

Some of the HD DVD capacity was lost IIRC leaving about 25 GB usable for each format.

amirm

01-04-07, 02:22 PM

Is there any info that can be announced to the use and limitations of these new Total HD disks?
The obvious and notable impact is that these discs lose the SD DVD compatibility and replaces it with BD. SD compat can be brought back in but would need to be on the same side (as in the recent announcement from memorytec).

I don't have enough data yet to know if the BD side can be BD-50 or just BD-25. Somehow I doubt that Sony/MEI will be producing such discs and without them, it is hard for me to see where the BD-50 support comes from. But this is pure cojecture on my part.

sknight1

01-04-07, 02:33 PM

I don't have enough data yet to know if the BD side can be BD-50 or just BD-25. Somehow I doubt that Sony/MEI will be producing such discs and without them, it is hard for me to see where the BD-50 support comes from. But this is pure cojecture on my part.

Is the HD single or dual layer; ie is it HD-15 or HD-30?

Thanks!

amirm

01-04-07, 02:37 PM

Is the HD single or dual layer; ie is it HD-15 or HD-30?

Thanks!
My guess is that it is HD DVD-30 but have no confirmation yet. When I get that, will let you all know.

The reason for my guess above is that every replicator knows how to make 15 and 30 HD DVDs so the issue I talked above, is not in play here.

chad_cincy

01-04-07, 02:46 PM

I'm a little confused. If the BDA cannot come up with a feasible BD/DVD hybrid solution, how can Warner come up with a BD/HD DVD solution; Which is essentially the same thing?

And will the cases be a purplish color (blue and red mixed)?? :D

amirm

01-04-07, 03:27 PM

Your attitude about this whole thing is very telling, coming from a Microsoft hd-dvd insider/spokesman, and it's also very disappointing. It shows how you really feel about the position of hd-dvd in the scheme of things. Allow me to explain.
Just a kind note that this thread is for Q/A only and not commentary of this sort. Feel free to continue in the format war thread and I will happy to join you there for follow up. I will chime in once since you voiced your opinion here.

I imagine most of the Blu-ray supporting companies take dual format players and discs as "bad news for Blu-ray". They feel this gives hd-dvd a stay of execution, and delays indefinitely the coup de grâce in the format war. Blu-ray knows it has the momentum and support to win this war, and dual format is not necessary.
I agree that BD companies seem to have a bad reaction to such news. But I do not agree it is for the reason you mention. Fact is that the companies that have been talked about to do universal players, are currently BD-only. To the extent they build playback equipment which supports HD DVD, universal or not, is something that doesn't reflect positively on them. And of course, it chips away at the level of exclusive support they have.

Sure, a year ago, they thought they were set to have an easy win. But I am sure they are no longer that confident that they can wipe out HD DVD.

Your comments here and in other threads show clearly that you feel dual format is "good news for hd-dvd".
Then you misunderstood my comments. Even here I have been guarded about the prospects of universal discs and players and was clear that the future impact is unknown. Unlike BD companies however, we see nothing wrong with companies choosing to support two formats. We simply are not as exclusive about these things as others are.

We help companies for example, to publish BD discs with VC-1. Likewise, if a company wants to build a universal player, we don’t rain on their parade, or make it hard for them to do so. Indeed, if they need our help, we will offer it on the HD DVD side.

But again, there is good news here for HD DVD consumers in that they will have more playback choices. I am not going to deny that this is a positive for the format.

Just like a company on the verge of bankruptcy, suddenly the buy-out from a former competitor is great news for the employees. It's better than a pink slip. Hd-dvd gets some life support.
Well, that is your opinion and I respect that. But neither format is on “life support” and saying so, ignores the good progress already made, to establish these formats in the eyes of enthusiasts and early adopters.

What's more annoying is that this supports my theory that Microsoft supported the hd-dvd format instead of the technically superior Blu-ray format just to throw a wrench in the works.
Well, again, I appreciate that this is your theory. It does not reflect reality however. We see many reasons why HD DVD is superior to BD and I have talked about them at length in this forum.

Microsoft stayed neutral in the format war for almost two years. So our choice was very deliberate. If we wanted to just screw things up, we could have done that day 1. We did not. I dare say no company has educated itself about the two formats before making its selection than we have. You can see that from the breadth of topics which we participate in.

what reason could you have chosen to support hd-dvd so stubbornly other than to complicate and confuse the format transition in an effort to sabotage it?
Please don’t ask me to summarize thousands of posts I have made in this forum in this one answer :). Bottom line is that HD DVD has succeeded against all odds, because it has strong merits. The market has validated this, as have a number of reporters who have acknowledged the amazing showing of HD DVD so far.

The only benefit to having two formats for what is essentially the exact same thing lies on the side of greedy corporations who get licensing fees out of it. Us end users get nothing but confusion out of it.
First, the format war was started by traditional CE companies such as Sony, MEI, Philips and Toshiba. Microsoft was a later entry and well after the whole book was mostly written. So yes, companies protect their interest and make business decisions. But please don’t put us in a different light, especially in this situation. If there needs to be a settlement, it starts with the named companies above, getting rid of their differences. But since they have not, each company gets to evaluate what they think is right, and putting their weight behind that choice.

Second, we do not see our role as the company that goes out and helps kill one of the formats. Yes, you are not alone in wishing that we had not joined up on the HD DVD side so that the format would go away. But if you want that outcome, you, as consumers, would have to do it by voting with your pocketbook. Please don’t this responsibility on our shoulder. As long as people are super satisfied and want HD DVD in the market, that will be the force that you have you fight, not our selection to also support the format.

dialog_gvf

01-04-07, 03:42 PM

My understanding is that they have been working on this project for a while. So if they are bluffing, that is a very expensive way to do it.

I'm right that the words "HD DVD player" appear on the Xbox 360 add-on box, right?

Is there any confirmation LG is planning to release a full out player, rather than merely an optical drive?

Gary

Kocheese99

01-04-07, 03:58 PM

First time posting in this thread and i'm not sure if this has been asked before. This is for all the insiders.

What i'm wondering is just how important is CES to BR and HD? I've been going through AVS and DVDtalk and both are going crazy in anticipation for this event. I'm curious to know if the major companies consider this a MAJOR event like everyone on the boards is? Or is CES not THAT big of a deal to them?

Thanks for any input you guys can give.

markrubin

01-04-07, 06:51 PM

amirm

01-04-07, 06:56 PM

I'm a little confused. If the BDA cannot come up with a feasible BD/DVD hybrid solution, how can Warner come up with a BD/HD DVD solution; Which is essentially the same thing?
Good observation :). What BDA failed to do was to put the SD and BD layers on the same side. Our assumtion of the solution by Warner is that it is a flipper design, with the BD on one side and HD DVD on the other. Still challenging to produce mind you, but not nearly as much as the abandoned design by JVC/BDA.

And will the cases be a purplish color (blue and red mixed)?? :D
You know that is funny because I was thinking of the same thing :). My imaginary solution was a white color as in peace. :)

amirm

01-04-07, 06:58 PM

Is there any confirmation LG is planning to release a full out player, rather than merely an optical drive?

Gary
Yes, this is a real machine, not just a drive.

amillians

01-04-07, 07:30 PM

Question: is it fair to claim a title supports PiP if there's only one video stream being decoded?

amirm

01-04-07, 07:32 PM

Question: is it fair to claim a title supports PiP if there's only one video stream being decoded?
Not in my book. PiP is "Picture in Picture" so there has to be two "P"s :).

Who is the guilty party so that we go and talk to them?

dialog_gvf

01-05-07, 01:58 AM

Good observation :). What BDA failed to do was to put the SD and BD layers on the same side. Our assumtion of the solution by Warner is that it is a flipper design, with the BD on one side and HD DVD on the other. Still challenging to produce mind you, but not nearly as much as the abandoned design by JVC/BDA.

When I suggested a back to back approach for BD combos quite some time ago, didn't you say there is an issue with the hitting the needed tolerances with a thinner (0.5mm?) substrate?

Any word whether this is something for non-key titles, or whether Warner intends an accross the board approach?

Gary

amirm

01-05-07, 02:06 AM

When I suggested a back to back approach for BD combos quite some time ago, didn't you say there is an issue with the hitting the needed tolerances with a thinner (0.5mm?) substrate?
Probably so. This is still a challenging disc to manufacture, even though it is not as bad as the BD combo where both layers are on the same side. Putting aside the difficulties of making the discs, their yields go down yet again from the BD process which as we know, is not that great compared to HD DVD/DVD. You take a working BD disc and by the time you glue something to the other side, you are going to ruin some, reducing yields even more.

And of course, every bad disc means a production HD DVD disc needs to be thrown away, rather than just a blank BD disc. Put another way, the “blank” now costs as much as an HD DVD-30.

Any word whether this is something for non-key titles, or whether Warner intends an accross the board approach?

Gary
I don't have definitive data to share at this point unfortunately.

UxiSXRD

01-05-07, 03:03 AM

You know that is funny because I was thinking of the same thing :). My imaginary solution was a white color as in peace. :)

White... err clear is already being used by the PS3 games (I always thought the blue Blu-ray would have been more appropriate myself, but that's neither here nor there).

I oppose the hybrids/combos on general principle, though, as I can only see the prices of such being higher. I've avoided a couple HD-DVD's I kinda want because of the pricing (over $30 = no deal unless it's a must-have A-list title like Star Wars or LOTR or something and there are no titles out right now that I put in that category).

Question for any of the Microsoft / Xbox types... would it be possible that a future update to the 360 could include a bitrate meter/codec display like the PS3? That feature just has huge geek appeal to a computer geek like myself. :D

Talkstr8t

01-05-07, 03:37 AM

Any comment from insiders on the recent announcement from LG?From my take, this is an unfortunate, though not unexpected, development. I foresee a few possible scenarios:

LG, HP, and probably a few others release universal players. They are more expensive than single-format standalones, but if properly implemented still appeal to a specific segment of the HT population. Blu-ray still ultimately wins the format war due to its still-significantly greater vendor and studio support, but it takes a few years longer for a single format to emerge, resulting in slower overall consumer adoption, higher prices due to lower volumes, fewer titles, etc.

In this scenario the only beneficiaries are those who bought universal machines, in that they can still use them as Blu-ray players after HD-DVD is gone.

Universal players become the most popular option, and most vendors ultimately offer them (as most DVD burners today support both + and - formats). Both formats persist in the marketplace indefinitely. The studio allegiances don't change much from today; there's little value in publishing in both formats if most people have players which can support either. Blu-ray remains a preferred publishing format due to higher capacity, BD-J, and the number of PS3's which can play Blu-ray but not HD-DVD discs.

In this scenario Toshiba and Microsoft benefit because HD-DVD doesn't perish, but studios lose because those who support both formats have to author everything twice. Consumers lose because all players are now burdened with much higher royalty costs and complexity, leading to higher prices, less feature innovation, and more bugs. Consumers also lose because it will take longer for prices of universal players to drop to levels where J6P is willing to buy in, so overall high-def format adoption continues to lag. Retailers lose because they continue to have to devote more shelf space to duplicate titles (from neutral studios).

Universal players are slow, buggy, and expensive, and as a result see little adoption and have little impact on the format war. Blu-ray continues to pull ahead quickly with 2G players, millions of PS3's, and an increasing advantage in title count, and by the end of 2007 is the undisputedly dominant format with HD-DVD's days clearly numbered.

In this scenario Toshiba, Microsoft, and Universal lose because the format they exclusively backed goes away. LG and HP lose because of the dollars they spent developing and marketing unsuccessful universal players. Everyone else wins because the sooner we have a single format the faster consumer adoption we'll see leading to more titles and lower prices.

Per thread rules, insiders are welcome to comment here, but non-insider follow-up should probably be addressed elsewhere (perhaps the Format Battle thread? I haven't yet browsed to see if other more appropriate threads have been created).

- Talk

High_Def DVD

01-05-07, 09:20 AM

What about Component video output? I believe the studios can encode their discs with an image constrait flag with downconvert output resolution to 960x540.
Or is it to be an must have HDMI equipped High-def TV situation?
Many HDTV owners lack of DVI and HDMI inputs.

Ja Phule

01-05-07, 11:17 AM

BenDover

01-05-07, 11:21 AM

Amir,
With news of the 2nd gen xbox 360 including hdmi output, can you tell us if it will output decoded dolby truehd via pcm?

http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/05/the-second-xbox-360-revealed-codename-zephyr/

will it have an integrated hd dvd drive?

anyone want to buy a 2-month old xbox 360 and hd dvd addon ? :D (mods, j/k)

amirm

01-05-07, 11:23 AM

What about Component video output? I believe the studios can encode their discs with an image constrait flag with downconvert output resolution to 960x540.
This is true although no studio has set the flag in either format. And some do not believe in using this option at all.

Or is it to be an must have HDMI equipped High-def TV situation?
Many HDTV owners lack of DVI and HDMI inputs.
It is true that HDMI equipped sets are not impacted this way. So if you are buying a new set, I of course recommend that you get one with HDMI.

For now though, studios understand the role early adopters play in making these formats take off and are not setting the flag. Years down the road they might but buy then, you will hopefully have a player and TV with some form of HDCP protection (which HDMI does).

Rob Zuber

01-05-07, 11:35 AM

So will the new version of the XBOX integrate an HD-DVD drive. Feel free to make news here, Amir. :D

amirm

01-05-07, 11:54 AM

I am not going to comment on unnannounced things guys. You know that already. So please don't keep asking. But feel free to discuss in other threads....

amirm

01-05-07, 12:07 PM

From my take, this is an unfortunate, though not unexpected, development. I foresee a few possible scenarios:
Thanks for reflecting on the news Talk. I am relieved that my read of the BD company reactions to this news being negative was not out of line at least wrt to your views.

Two question though per your gracious offer: :)

They are more expensive than single-format standalones,
Can you clarify if you mean it is more expensive to build or that they would retail at higher prices? I am specifically curious to know if you are saying that they will retail for more than current BD players listing for >$1,000.

Second question I have is whether you could reassure people here that there will be no retaliation against LG for building HD DVD compatible products. In other words, will they have to take the drafty seat from now on next to the bathroom, or can they keep sitting where they are in BDA :). Do you expect their role to change in BDA as it did with HP no longer representing the BDA marketing activities?

BTW, as a professional courtesy in return, I just want to make it clear that you should not feel obligated at all to answer these questions. This is a forum for non-insiders to ask questions and us asking each other much sharper questions must allow for the privilege of being ignored :).

Thanks!

Kosty

01-05-07, 12:18 PM

Talk or Amirm

Would you agree that another possible scenario is that hybrid players cannabalize the high end Blu-ray player sales and not affect the lower priced HD DVD players at all? If that is the case wouldn't that be very bad for Blu-ray?

If the fact of their existence encourages Blu-ray studios to go neutral or Universal and Warner to release more HD DVD titles and also encourages consumers to buy more HD discs in general. But since more HD DVD players will be on the street, the more things would accelerate for HD DVD.

Isn't this just as valid as your other scenarios?

amirm

01-05-07, 12:31 PM

Talk or Amirm

Would you agree that another possible scenario is that hybrid players cannabalize the high end Blu-ray player sales and not affect the lower priced HD DVD players at all? If that is the case wouldn't that be very bad for Blu-ray?
Obviously the ability to play two formats is an extra feature that stand-alone products from either formats do not have. So if priced the same, and the stand-alone products do not differentiate themselves in other ways (such as price that you mention), they are liable to take a sales hit.

If the fact of their existence encourages Blu-ray studios to go neutral or Universal and Warner to release more HD DVD titles and also encourages consumers to buy more HD discs in general. But since more HD DVD players will be on the street, the more things would accelerate for HD DVD.
To be clear, what helps HD DVD is that these previously BD-only players, now play HD DVD (and their companies support HD DVD). The fact that they are universal players or not, is hard to predict wrt to views of studios. Yes, HD DVD is cheaper and easier to make so all else being equal, that is helpful for HD DVD. But I don't want to overstate the role of universal players in this respect. It is the increased installed base of HD DVD players which is helpful. If this is the point you are making, then yes, I agree.

joshd2012

01-05-07, 12:41 PM

TomsHT

01-05-07, 12:44 PM

In regards to the Total HD discs

I thought Sony is the only ones replicating and has rights to the actual BD50 discs. Can other companies make them on there own with out any say from the BDA/Sony? I cant picture Sony producing or allowing there BD50s being bundled with an HD DVD side

Does this violate any rules or patents to package something like a Blu-Ray title that goes against the standards approved by the DVD Forum for high def with an actual HD DVD title that was approved by the DVD Forum?

High_Def DVD

01-05-07, 12:50 PM

Speaking of HP, what was the reason for them to join HD DVD camp and why not BD only?

amirm

01-05-07, 12:54 PM

Amir,

Assuming, as you mention, that these combo players increase HD DVD install rates, doesn't it also do the same for Blu-ray - but at a higher rate? Assuming (as you will probably agree) that HD DVD has a larger install base at this point, and those who are currently supporting HD DVD will begin supporting Blu-ray as well via purchase of second player or combo player (and vice versa), doesn't Blu-ray have the most ground to gain, and thus a higher percentage of gain in sales? This is of course assuming that people see these dual format players as an end to the war and an adoption of both formats.
Well, yes and no :).

To the extent before this news LG was only going to make BD players, and then they go and make universal players with BD+HD DVD, obviously the only net gain here is for HD DVD. In addition, I see little impact on the mass HD DVD market which is made up of less than $400 products today (360 and discounted Toshiba). Universal players will not play in that circle for a long time and by the time they do, stand-alone HD DVD products will be even cheaper than they are.

The bigger impact though, is that when a company learns to make HD DVD products, and builds up intellectual property around it, then they are liable to also release HD DVD-only products if they choose to do so or the market dictates (say, HD DVD continues to make headway and they want to compete at the lower price levels mentioned above). Look at HP. A year ago they went neutral but the only products in the market eventually turned out to be HD DVD because this technology is more readily available to them and they see a better opportunity in HD DVD so far.

And of course there is the impact on the studios when they see that CE companies in BDA are starting to also support HD DVD.

But yes, universal products are always a bit of a wild card and that they could have negative impact in certain scenarios. My prediction is that in the short to medium term, the positive impact far outweighs the negative for HD DVD.

joshd2012

01-05-07, 01:11 PM

Amir,

Thanks for answering my question. Though, a cheerful scenario based on hardware isn't difficult as HD DVD could only gain (Toshiba wasn't going to start making Blu-ray or Combo players).

benwaggoner

01-05-07, 01:24 PM

joshd2012

01-05-07, 01:43 PM

Given the greater authoring, mastering, and replication costs for BD, and the fractured installed base for advanced features, why would a studio remain BD-only once they decided that market for HD DVD titles was going to be comparable to that of BD for a sustained period? Due to higher one-off and per-disc costs, BD's promise of greater profitability per title required a much higher installed base.

Ben,

Do you have cost estimates for current HD DVD and Blu-ray replication? I keep hearing about these costs differences from many people, but have yet to see the hard data backing it up.

To answer your question (not sure if it was aimed at me), a studio would remain Blu-ray for the potential PS3 market (as you indicated) and because dual format players remove the need to make a switch at this point. Assuming dual format players catch on as the norm (why wouldn't they at this point with both formats here to stay), the minority of the standalone market share over the next 5 years will only support a single format, with the majority supporting both. Is a studio really going to invest the time and money to switch formats when the majority of people will buy it regardless?

benwaggoner

01-05-07, 02:12 PM

Do you have cost estimates for current HD DVD and Blu-ray replication? I keep hearing about these costs differences from many people, but have yet to see the hard data backing it up.
I've never seen non-subsidized quotes for BD-50 replication. Only Sony has it, and they're subsidizing it to a degree only they know.

To answer your question (not sure if it was aimed at me), a studio would remain Blu-ray for the potential PS3 market (as you indicated) and because dual format players remove the need to make a switch at this point. Assuming dual format players catch on as the norm (why wouldn't they at this point with both formats here to stay), the minority of the standalone market share over the next 5 years will only support a single format, with the majority supporting both. Is a studio really going to invest the time and money to switch formats when the majority of people will buy it regardless?
But because implementing a full HD DVD player is so much cheaper (remember BD-Live is the HD DVD-competitive spec for BD, and we don't even have a ship date for a single model yet), we're much more likely to see BD standalone players add HD DVD support than vice versa. If MSRP based on COGS for a dual player should be $1100, with stand-alone BD players at $1000 and HD DVD at $500, it makes a lot more sense to HD DVD only players, and hybrid players, than for anyone other than Sony to make a BD-only player.

So, for players used for movies (stand alone players + HD DVD accessories + (PS3 * movie use rate)), I expect HD DVD will mantain and even grow its real-world lead. Plus HD DVD will also have a title advantage (PIP, advanced audio, rich interactivity) for the foreseeable future, which will be compelling to studios as well.

BenDover

01-05-07, 02:18 PM

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)

Talkstr8t

01-05-07, 02:54 PM

Can you clarify if you mean it is more expensive to build or that they would retail at higher prices? I am specifically curious to know if you are saying that they will retail for more than current BD players listing for >$1,000.Clearly it will be more expensive to build, this is indisputable. We'll know the retail price in a few days, but given that they have apparently announced a PC combo drive for $1200, I have a hard time believing a full player incorporating a similar drive (though no Blu-ray burning capability) would be substantially less. LG is also probably not in a position to subsidize the player since they receive little if any revenue from the format outside of selling the players themselves.
Second question I have is whether you could reassure people here that there will be no retaliation against LG for building HD DVD compatible products. In other words, will they have to take the drafty seat from now on next to the bathroom, or can they keep sitting where they are in BDA :).Seating is mostly alphabetical, so I don't expect that to change!
Do you expect their role to change in BDA as it did with HP no longer representing the BDA marketing activities?Leadership positions of the various task forces and committees are voted on by the full board. Clearly (and appropriately) some voters are likely to weigh a company's commitment to the success of Blu-ray as a factor in whether to support a given candidate for a leadership position. Would you consider this "retaliation"? To use your example, I would certainly consider a BDA statement from an HP spokesperson in support of Blu-ray (especially relative to HD-DVD) to be less credible when other HP spokespeople are on the record in support of HD-DVD.
BTW, as a professional courtesy in return, I just want to make it clear that you should not feel obligated at all to answer these questions. This is a forum for non-insiders to ask questions and us asking each other much sharper questions must allow for the privilege of being ignored.As long as it's understood that I'm posting my personal opinions, not formal BDA position statements, I can conceive of few questions for which I'd hesitate to respond!

- Talk

Talkstr8t

01-05-07, 03:05 PM

Would you agree that another possible scenario is that hybrid players cannabalize the high end Blu-ray player sales and not affect the lower priced HD DVD players at all? If that is the case wouldn't that be very bad for Blu-ray? I think this only happens if the high-end Blu-ray players don't have features justifying their price, in which case lower-cost Blu-ray players or the PS3 would eventually do the same thing (cannibalize the high-end market). To my knowledge LG isn't known for particularly high-end A/V equipment. The market segment willing to spend $1K+ on a piece of HT gear is going to carefully way video processing, advanced codec support, build quality, and other features which high-end standalone players are more likely to support than an LG universal player. Given the far greater complexity and cost of making dual formats work relative to single formats, something's gotta give, and in the short term I suspect it will be features like 1080p24, HDMI 1.3, high-quality DVD upscaling, 7.1 analog output, startup/load time, etc. If LG can get the price to within, say, $300 of an entry-level standalone player and doesn't obviously sacrifice performance relative to those players I think they could do fairly well, at least as long as both formats seem to be viable in the marketplace. I would expect the high-end standalone players on both sides to continue innovating in order to justify a premium price point.
If the fact of their existence encourages Blu-ray studios to go neutral or Universal and Warner to release more HD DVD titles and also encourages consumers to buy more HD discs in general. But since more HD DVD players will be on the street, the more things would accelerate for HD DVD.It might increase the number of HD-DVD households relative to if a consumer had bought a standalone Blu-ray player, but it increases the number of Blu-ray households by the same amount. There is still no additional incentive for a Blu-ray exclusive studio to release on HD-DVD when doing so would mean eliminating the PS3 households as a target market. Therefore, I don't see why the existence of universal players provides any incentive for Blu-ray studios to go neutral.

BenDover

01-05-07, 03:06 PM

Clearly it will be more expensive to build, this is indisputable. We'll know the retail price in a few days, but given that they have apparently announced a PC combo drive for $1200, I have a hard time believing a full player incorporating a similar drive (though no Blu-ray burning capability) would be substantially less. LG is also probably not in a position to subsidize the player since they receive little if any revenue from the format outside of selling the players themselves.Seating is mostly alphabetical, so I don't expect that to change!
Leadership positions of the various task forces and committees are voted on by the full board. Clearly (and appropriately) some voters are likely to weigh a company's commitment to the success of Blu-ray as a factor in whether to support a given candidate for a leadership position. Would you consider this "retaliation"? To use your example, I would certainly consider a BDA statement from an HP spokesperson in support of Blu-ray (especially relative to HD-DVD) to be less credible when other HP spokespeople are on the record in support of HD-DVD.
As long as it's understood that I'm posting my personal opinions, not formal BDA position statements, I can conceive of few questions for which I'd hesitate to respond!

- Talk

are you saying that LGE doesn't have any IP in the various standards that are licensed for both formats: AVC, VC-1, MPEG-2, HD DVD, BD??

Talkstr8t

01-05-07, 03:12 PM

In regards to the Total HD discs

I thought Sony is the only ones replicating and has rights to the actual BD50 discs. Can other companies make them on there own with out any say from the BDA/Sony?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.

Talkstr8t

01-05-07, 03:15 PM

Speaking of HP, what was the reason for them to join HD DVD camp and why not BD only?This has been speculated upon at length in the past; search the archives for a full history. In a nutshell, the pro-Microsoft camp would suggest that HP realized that HD-DVD had advantages over Blu-ray and they were missing a market opportunity by not also supporting that format. The anti-Microsoft camp would suggest that Microsoft execs leveraged their relationship with HP execs to "convince" them to support HD-DVD.

chinch

01-05-07, 03:26 PM

Therefore, I don't see why the existence of universal players provides any incentive for Blu-ray studios to go neutral.
I don't either on it's own. But coupled with other factors it can and might contribute greatly to diminish or eliminate the enthusiasm of certain exclusive studios to be exclusive.

let me ask this in hopes of an honest answer (amir is welcome too)...

what timeframe and scenario would it take in your mind for Fox and/or Disney to go "neutral"?

Talkstr8t

01-05-07, 03:27 PM

Following up on the effect of dual-format players, I also see it as a good thing for HD DVD.

The one practical thing BD has had going for it is the promise of a huge player installed base due to PS3 and greater CE support. This has lead to things like more studio support, etcetera. Certainly, no BD title has demonstrating any real advantage over HD DVD titles, while HD DVD is delivering a better average experience due to better mandatory features.I think the higher proportion of Blu-ray titles with lossless audio is one example of where the higher capacity is resulting in a better experience for Blu-ray titles. One might also attribute the recent spate of very high quality MPEG-2 releases to Blu-ray's higher maximum bandwidth, demonstrating greater flexibility for future titles (lower encoding costs, etc.). HD-DVD has certainly demonstrated a broader range of interactivity, but I would argue that, other than broad PiP support (a short-term issue), this is due largely to Microsoft's support of the studios in implementing that interactivity, not a lack of player capability on the Blu-ray side.
Given the greater authoring, mastering, and replication costs for BD, and the fractured installed base for advanced features, why would a studio remain BD-only once they decided that market for HD DVD titles was going to be comparable to that of BD for a sustained period?I don't think the assumption that the market for HD DVD titles will be comparable to that of BD is valid due to the vastly higher number of PS3's in the market than standalones of either format. Even if only 20% of PS3 owners watch Blu-ray discs the Blu-ray only installed base will likely be higher than the HD DVD-only and combo combined base for several years to come.
A lot of what momentum BD had was because of the promise of an early slam dunk, and with that no longer in the cards, HD DVD's other advantages become much more relevant.This viewpoint disregards the likelihood that Blu-rays advantages will become apparent to the market over the next few months. The broader studio support is likely to result in more Blu-ray than HD-DVD titles being available in the very near future; The increased quantity of BD-50 releases is resulting in better content (lossless audio, uniformly high quality encoding, more bonus features), the studios are starting to get a handle on releasing BD-J features, and the 2g players are likely to all support BD-Live (as almost certainly would any combo players, since they'd have to support network connectivity and PiP per the HD-DVD spec).

Talkstr8t

01-05-07, 03:29 PM

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...

2)why were some encoded as both 720p and 1080p? (i downloaded the 1080 of course)I can answer this one. A 1080p download would offer no increased PQ to the viewer on a 720p monitor (probably the majority of HD sets). Why force the user to download 2x the bits if they can't see them?

Talkstr8t

01-05-07, 03:35 PM

what timeframe and scenario would it take in your mind for Fox and/or Disney to go "neutral"?I don't see Fox going neutral under any circumstance other than a massive Blu-ray collapse. Among other factors, they are far too invested in the additional content protections present in the Blu-ray spec.

I think Disney is probably slightly less opposed to support HD-DVD, but would be unlikely to do so until/unless it's clear that HD-DVD is going to remain in the marketplace for the foreseeable future. As long as the emergence of a single format is a reasonable scenario, I think they'll continue to support what they see as the stronger format, a format whose capabilities are also better-suited to Disney's interests in making use of more storage and providing more advanced interactivity.

Talkstr8t

01-05-07, 03:36 PM

are you saying that LGE doesn't have any IP in the various standards that are licensed for both formats: AVC, VC-1, MPEG-2, HD DVD, BD??I can't say that they have no IP, but to my knowledge they aren't one of the dominant IP holders. I very much doubt they are positioned to earn enough revenue from generic format royalties to offset the cost of subsidizing hardware.

- Talk

Talkstr8t

01-05-07, 03:43 PM

But because implementing a full HD DVD player is so much cheaper (remember BD-Live is the HD DVD-competitive spec for BD, and we don't even have a ship date for a single model yet), we're much more likely to see BD standalone players add HD DVD support than vice versa.What evidence is there that implementing an HD DVD player is any cheaper, let alone "so much" cheaper, than implementing a Blu-ray player? The fact that the HD-A2/XA2 are still using a standalone Pentium core rather than the SoC which most of the Blu-ray machines are using coupled with Dr1394's comments certainly suggests HD DVD players will be no less expensive than Blu-ray players to manufacture.

hrerikl

01-05-07, 03:44 PM

From my take, this is an unfortunate, though not unexpected, development. I foresee a few possible scenarios:
- Talk

Talk,

Won't salespeople be able to use the promise of combo players to combat the fear of obsolesence of their media library from entering either market.

e.g.
"Salesperson--Don't worry about who wins this format war. In the future combo players will be dirt cheap and you will still be able to play all the movies you buy today. So go ahead and enter the market today with a PS3 or XBOX addon or other cheap single format player and start buying buying discs for them. You don't have to worry that your disc collection will be obsoleted when your universal player comes down in price. "

I know that I am less inclined to "rent instead of buy until their is a winner" for my PS3 and my HDA1 knowing that in the future I will likely have multiple cheaper universal players around my house. What am I missing? Isn't this a reason that people migh adopt both HD formats quicker?

Erik

chinch

01-05-07, 03:45 PM

I don't see Fox going neutral under any circumstance other than a massive Blu-ray collapse. Among other factors, they are far too invested in the additional content protections present in the Blu-ray spec.

I think Disney is probably slightly less opposed to support HD-DVD, but would be unlikely to do so until/unless it's clear that HD-DVD is going to remain in the marketplace for the foreseeable future. As long as the emergence of a single format is a reasonable scenario, I think they'll continue to support what they see as the stronger format, a format whose capabilities are also better-suited to Disney's interests in making use of more storage and providing more advanced interactivity.
thanks...

can i ask your personal thoughts/guess as to the likelihood if any STUDIO, including Warner itself, would consider Total HD discs for a majority of HD optical releases in the next 18 months?

amirm

01-05-07, 03:54 PM

Clearly it will be more expensive to build, this is indisputable.
BD discs are also "more expensive to build [replicate]. And this is indispuatable too. Yet BD proponents say if it does not impact retail prices of the discs, who cares. Are you now using that same argument yourself?

We'll know the retail price in a few days, but given that they have apparently announced a PC combo drive for $1200, I have a hard time believing a full player incorporating a similar drive (though no Blu-ray burning capability) would be substantially less.
I am glad you realize that the $1,200 price is for a combo *recorder* drive being sold at retail. It is not the cost of the drive for their internal divisions, using read-only OPUs.

LG is also probably not in a position to subsidize the player since they receive little if any revenue from the format outside of selling the players themselves.
If they price the player at say, $1,200, are you saying they would have to sudbsidize it to get there? If so, why?

Clearly (and appropriately) some voters are likely to weigh a company's commitment to the success of Blu-ray as a factor in whether to support a given candidate for a leadership position.
Clearly :).

Would you consider this "retaliation"? To use your example, I would certainly consider a BDA statement from an HP spokesperson in support of Blu-ray (especially relative to HD-DVD) to be less credible when other HP spokespeople are on the record in support of HD-DVD.
No, I don't consider this retaliation.

As long as it's understood that I'm posting my personal opinions, not formal BDA position statements, I can conceive of few questions for which I'd hesitate to respond!

- Talk
I wish it was so easy to disown one's comments this way on this forum. But you and I are neck deep in this thing and if folks want to hold you accountable for something you say here, they certainly feel justified in doing so. Just my opinion :).

benwaggoner

01-05-07, 04:00 PM

I think the higher proportion of Blu-ray titles with lossless audio is one example of where the higher capacity is resulting in a better experience for Blu-ray titles. One might also attribute the recent spate of very high quality MPEG-2 releases to Blu-ray's higher maximum bandwidth, demonstrating greater flexibility for future titles (lower encoding costs, etc.). HD-DVD has certainly demonstrated a broader range of interactivity, but I would argue that, other than broad PiP support (a short-term issue), this is due largely to Microsoft's support of the studios in implementing that interactivity, not a lack of player capability on the Blu-ray side.
My take on Blu-ray titles using PCM is because BD lacks a mandatory audio codec other than PCM that's better than AC-3. PCM was used on BD-25 titles, where there manifestly wasn't sufficient capacity for them, especially in conjunction with MPEG-2.

Sony's continuing use of MPEG-2 and PCM is a good proof that run-time capacity isn't the killer app, since a HD DVD-30 with VC-1 and TrueHD will offer longer runtime than a BD-50 with MPEG-2 and PCM.

I don't think the assumption that the market for HD DVD titles will be comparable to that of BD is valid due to the vastly higher number of PS3's in the market than standalones of either format. Even if only 20% of PS3 owners watch Blu-ray discs the Blu-ray only installed base will likely be higher than the HD DVD-only and combo combined base for several years to come.
Hopefully we'll have public numbers to discuss soon.

I'm quite optimistic there will be more people watching HD DVD on Xbox 360 than BD on PS3 for some time to come, and that HD DVD will be extending its market share lead in non-console players.

This viewpoint disregards the likelihood that Blu-rays advantages will become apparent to the market over the next few months. The broader studio support is likely to result in more Blu-ray than HD-DVD titles being available in the very near future; The increased quantity of BD-50 releases is resulting in better content (lossless audio, uniformly high quality encoding, more bonus features), the studios are starting to get a handle on releasing BD-J features, and the 2g players are likely to all support BD-Live (as almost certainly would any combo players, since they'd have to support network connectivity and PiP per the HD-DVD spec).
It'll be quite a while before BD-Live players that deliver equivalent interactivity to existing HD DVD can be a given. So the market for discs with advanced features is going to be even more skewed towards HD DVD.

benwaggoner

01-05-07, 04:03 PM

joshd2012

01-05-07, 04:15 PM

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

What are these BD-Live equivalent features that HD DVD players are doing now that Blu-ray players are not? This is a serious question as I am only aware of downloading firmware as an implemented feature (something PS3 does).

benwaggoner

01-05-07, 04:20 PM

What are these BD-Live equivalent features that HD DVD players are doing now that Blu-ray players are not? This is a serious question as I am only aware of downloading firmware as an implemented feature (something PS3 does).
The big ones are:

Picture-in-picture support
Mandatory advanced audio codec decode and mixing
Content with internet access

For example, the features required to play an early HD DVD title like "Bourne Supremacy" won't be mandatory in BD players introduced before this summer

joshd2012

01-05-07, 04:35 PM

The big ones are:

Picture-in-picture support
Mandatory advanced audio codec decode and mixing
Content with internet access

For example, the features required to play an early HD DVD title like "Bourne Supremacy" won't be mandatory in BD players introduced before this summer

I see. Picture in picture is no big deal - The Descent does this already with BD-Java. But this content with internet access intrigues me. With Bourne Supremacy, what extra information can you download about the movie that isn't on the disc?

amirm

01-05-07, 04:36 PM

What evidence is there that implementing an HD DVD player is any cheaper, let alone "so much" cheaper, than implementing a Blu-ray player? The fact that the HD-A2/XA2 are still using a standalone Pentium core rather than the SoC which most of the Blu-ray machines are using coupled with Dr1394's comments certainly suggests HD DVD players will be no less expensive than Blu-ray players to manufacture.
You are forgetting a little detail called the blu-laser drive. The BD OPU (optical pick up) is more expensive if it can read DVDs and CDs. Now, it does not explain the >$1,000 pricing for BD players but this is an important factor.

As to Ron's comment, I know for sure that his assumptions regarding HDi graphics architecture is completely wrong, if that is the point you are talking about. He is taking the sample reference model in HD DVD interactivity spec, as blue-print on how to design real HD DVD interactivity hardware. That is like someone reading the MPEG-2 spec, and taking the same encoder to make BD movies. A reference schematic is a way to provide a hypothetical way to implement something, as to avoid ambiguity in the spec. It has no bearing on how you build a real product (or folks would not give it away :)). Real products use much more optimized solutions with a completely different architecture.

amirm

01-05-07, 04:38 PM

I see. Picture in picture is no big deal - The Descent does this already with BD-Java.
It does? How does it do it "with Java"? Did Talk say that they encode two versions of the movie, one with PiP and one without? If so, do you really want to have any extra space for BD-50 be used this way, to cover up the fact that the player can't decode two video streams that even a $400 Toshiba player can?

Talkstr8t

01-05-07, 04:40 PM

Won't salespeople be able to use the promise of combo players to combat the fear of obsolesence of their media library from entering either market.

e.g.
"Salesperson--Don't worry about who wins this format war. In the future combo players will be dirt cheap and you will still be able to play all the movies you buy today. So go ahead and enter the market today with a PS3 or XBOX addon or other cheap single format player and start buying buying discs for them. You don't have to worry that your disc collection will be obsoleted when your universal player comes down in price. "Only if the consumer buys into the premise that combo players will become dirt cheap and ensure the survival of both formats. But if they're willing to accept that premise they might be equally likely to accept the premise that Blu-ray's vendor and studio advantage, or HD-DVD's price advantage, will ensure their format of preference will ultimately prevail.

Talkstr8t

01-05-07, 04:43 PM

can i ask your personal thoughts/guess as to the likelihood if any STUDIO, including Warner itself, would consider Total HD discs for a majority of HD optical releases in the next 18 months?I have no insider information on TotalHD discs, but if they can be replicated at similar costs as single-format discs, then I see no reason they wouldn't quickly move to that format. That's a big "if", however, and is an unlikely assumption. More likely the studios will probably have to weigh the current costs, how quickly they are likely to drop, production capacity, consumer dislike for flipper discs, etc. as factors. My guess is other studios won't adopt the format in any meaningful way in the next year.

chinch

01-05-07, 04:48 PM

I have no insider information on TotalHD discs, but if they can be replicated at similar costs as single-format discs, then I see no reason they wouldn't quickly move to that format. That's a big "if", however, and is an unlikely assumption. More likely the studios will probably have to weigh the current costs, how quickly they are likely to drop, production capacity, consumer dislike for flipper discs, etc. as factors. My guess is other studios won't adopt the format in any meaningful way in the next year.
thanks. assuming pricing/mfg is ok in 1-2 years could you see SONY shipping discs in this format or would politics interfere?

Talkstr8t

01-05-07, 05:07 PM

BD discs are also "more expensive to build [replicate]. And this is indispuatable too. Yet BD proponents say if it does not impact retail prices of the discs, who cares. Are you now using that same argument yourself? Not a relevant comparison. It will always be more expensive to build a combo DVD+VCR than to build the cheapest DVD or VCR. That doesn't mean it will always be cheaper to build a DVD disc than a VCR tape (or vice versa). Analysts have predicted that the new methods invented to replicate Blu-ray discs (PTM, if I recall correctly, but this isn't an area of expertise for me) have promise in eventually reducing costs below that of red laser DVD. Even if they don't go that far, it's certainly plausible that Blu-ray media costs will closely enough approach those of HD DVD that retail costs will be unaffected.
If they price the player at say, $1,200, are you saying they would have to sudbsidize it to get there? If so, why?At $1200 I don't think it's a given that they'd be subsidizing the bill of materials, though they'd clearly be subsidizing the amortized R&D costs (as are all Blu-ray and HD-DVD vendors at this point). Nonetheless, I don't think a $1200 player is going to have much impact in the market, especially from a vendor who has little-if-any presence in the market segment which a $1200 player implies. I think the player's got to be $799 MSRP or less to be a factor (given that none of the high-def players, HD-DVD or Blu-ray, retailing for more than $599 have sold enough units to be a long-term factor, either).
You are forgetting a little detail called the blu-laser drive. The BD OPU (optical pick up) is more expensive if it can read DVDs and CDs. Now, it does not explain the >$1,000 pricing for BD players but this is an important factor.Perhaps, but we lack concrete evidence as to whether a)the higher PS3 volumes have created economies of scale around the OPU, or b)the high PS3 volumes actually make this worse due to scarcity of demand, or c)the added cost of a BD OPU relative to an HD-DVD OPU is no greater than the added cost of a dedicated HD-DVD CPU versus a Blu-ray SoC solution. The only datapoints I've seen which you could possibly use to compare bare drive cost would be the iSuppli $125 PS3 BD drive estimate versus the HP $249 HD-DVD PC drive add-on retail cost, which we could estimate to be 2x the bill of materials, also suggesting a $125 drive cost. The PS3 drive is a slot loader, which probably costs more than a tray. Nonetheless, there is very flimsy data generally available at this point. Unless you're willing to share the data you undoubtedly have with regards to the cost of a bare HD-DVD ROM drive, this is all I have to go on.
As to Ron's comment, I know for sure that his assumptions regarding HDi graphics architecture is completely wrong, if that is the point you are talking about. He is taking the sample reference model in HD DVD interactivity spec, as blue-print on how to design real HD DVD interactivity hardware. Real products use much more optimized solutions with a completely different architecture.Perhaps in time, but today's HD-DVD players are designed with way more CPU cycles than are the equivalent Blu-ray players, and since Blu-ray has higher mandated bitrates HDi would be the apparent reason for higher CPU requirements. I appreciate you may expect further optimization to eliminate this delta, but the fact remains that today's HD-DVD players are being built with more silicon than are today's Blu-ray players (PS3 excepted for obvious reasons).
Picture in picture is no big deal - The Descent does this already with BD-Java.It does? How does it do it "with Java"? Did Talk say that they encode two versions of the movie, one with PiP and one without? If so, do you really want to have any extra space for BD-50 be used this way, to cover up the fact that the player can't decode two video streams that even a $400 Toshiba player can?Given that Blu-ray can use the exact same primary encode which has to fit in 30GB for HD-DVD, why not make use of the extra 20GB which Blu-ray offers? Sure, you can use a secondary audio/video stream to do it with far fewer bits, but as I've posted elsewhere encoding a second copy gives you far more flexibility in terms of number of PiP windows, shape and size of that window, supporting commentary as part of the primary audio track, etc. The bottom line is Blu-ray's capacity advantage offers the studio more flexibility in building their final product, and allows developers to think "outside the box" in terms of how to use the basic format's capabilities.

- Talk

Talkstr8t

01-05-07, 05:26 PM

I'm quite optimistic there will be more people watching HD DVD on Xbox 360 than BD on PS3 for some time to come, and that HD DVD will be extending its market share lead in non-console players.I don't know of any way we're going to be able to prove or disprove your first point, other than looking at overall media sales, since there's no objective way to determine what percentage of PS3 owners are using it for Blu-ray short of a comprehensive market survey.
It'll be quite a while before BD-Live players that deliver equivalent interactivity to existing HD DVD can be a given. So the market for discs with advanced features is going to be even more skewed towards HD DVD.I would argue The Descent has already bridged that gap, BD-Live or not. And the PS3 could have a firmware upgrade tomorrow which makes it fully BD-Live compliant. I expect great gains in interactivity in the coming year for both formats, but moreso for Blu-ray.
For example, the features required to play an early HD DVD title like "Bourne Supremacy" won't be mandatory in BD players introduced before this summerI don't think this is true. As shown by The Descent, PiP is possible regardless of support for secondary audio/video, and bookmarks are supported on all players (persistent storage, not to be confused with local storage, is mandatory). The existence of nearly a dozen distinct player implementations (creating a far more complex test matrix) coupled with the relative immaturity of BD-J authoring tools is why BD interactivity currently lags HD-DVD, and as I've said I believe you'll see that gap narrow significantly in the coming months.

crussader

01-05-07, 05:30 PM

The big ones are:

Picture-in-picture support
Mandatory advanced audio codec decode and mixing
Content with internet access

Shouldn't "In Movie Experience" and "U-Control" be added to this list?

Talkstr8t

01-05-07, 05:36 PM

thanks. assuming pricing/mfg is ok in 1-2 years could you see SONY shipping discs in this format or would politics interfere?Same dynamic as Fox. Not unless Blu-ray is clearly dead in the water.

Talkstr8t

01-05-07, 05:41 PM

Shouldn't "In Movie Experience" and "U-Control" be added to this list?IME and U-Control are just Warner and Universal's branding for the user interface making use of some of the elements Ben referenced. As I said, Warner could fully implement IME on most of their Blu-ray titles today if they saw fit to do so (albeit with increased storage requirements since secondary video isn't currently available on some players).

Mark Zimmer

01-05-07, 05:43 PM

This probably will sound trivial, but I think it has broader implications, so please hear out my question.

The Digital Sin porn sampler HD DVD played fine in my HD-A1 with firmware 1.3. After upgrading to 2.0, it no longer plays at all, nor is it recognized as an HD DVD.

My questions:
1. What changed in the firmware so that the player no longer recognizes what was apparently a compliant HD DVD under 1.3? If an HD DVD insider needs one of the samplers as a test disc to check this, mine (which obviously no longer plays) is available.
2. Have any other HD DVDs wound up out of spec in this way? As far as I know there haven't, but then again it's mostly the large and more wired studios releasing thus far too. More importantly, are the smaller studios being informed of any firmware changes that they need to take into account to keep their initial releases from going out of spec through firmware changes? How about disc authoring and replicating facilities?

benwaggoner

01-05-07, 05:56 PM

I don't know of any way we're going to be able to prove or disprove your first point, other than looking at overall media sales, since there's no objective way to determine what percentage of PS3 owners are using it for Blu-ray short of a comprehensive market survey.
Now that the holidays are over, I'm sure we'll be seeing some numbers worth arguing about soon enough. It's a conversation I expect to enjoy.

I would argue The Descent has already bridged that gap, BD-Live or not. And the PS3 could have a firmware upgrade tomorrow which makes it fully BD-Live compliant. I expect great gains in interactivity in the coming year for both formats, but moreso for Blu-ray.
I don't think this is true. As shown by The Descent, PiP is possible regardless of support for secondary audio/video, and bookmarks are supported on all players (persistent storage, not to be confused with local storage, is mandatory). The existence of nearly a dozen distinct player implementations (creating a far more complex test matrix) coupled with the relative immaturity of BD-J authoring tools is why BD interactivity currently lags HD-DVD, and as I've said I believe you'll see that gap narrow significantly in the coming months.
Given the big compatibilty issues with the Descent, I think a black eye for Blu-ray. And it's a painful demonstration of how having such a low common denominator of fuctionality means for content authors.

And even if stuff gets better in new players, are the first generation of players and their owners going to be abandoned?

Painful choices ahead for BD vendors and content publishers.

PSound

01-05-07, 05:57 PM

Can an insider comment on "The Descent" and how it does PiP? The "hints" here are that it does not use true PiP.

If that is true, exactly how is it achieving it?

Talkstr8t

01-05-07, 06:13 PM

Can an insider comment on "The Descent" and how it does PiP? The "hints" here are that it does not use true PiP.

If that is true, exactly how is it achieving it?I've never seen a definition of "true PiP" so I don't know if it qualifies, but it's true that it does not require secondary video hardware support. See the discussion in the Format Battle thread starting here (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9368148&&#post9368148) and continuing for a few pages.

amillians

01-05-07, 06:21 PM

What the hay...

PiP in The Descent is not PiP as you think of it, it's just playing another A/V stream, one where the PiP window has been authored/recorded over the film (a second copy of the film, in other words). That's why it's a BD50...they have used the extra space to get around the fact that no Blu-ray players yet fully support "real" PiP (where a second stream is overlayed on top of the main stream).

From an end user perspective, it's not obvious, but from an elegance standpoint, it's kind of like saying a disc/player supports subtitles but it has to have a second copy of the film on disc with the subtitles burned in, vs. just overlaying subtitle text on the video stream. A lot of wasted space to overcome legacy player limitations, in other words.

Ooops...need to ask a question...need to ask a question...Insiders, am I right? ;)

EDIT: I see Talk beat me to it.

EDIT EDIT: I see this is already common knowledge know...looks like Keith spilled the beans, or at least refused to clean them up.

benwaggoner

01-05-07, 06:29 PM

This probably will sound trivial, but I think it has broader implications, so please hear out my question.

The Digital Sin porn sampler HD DVD played fine in my HD-A1 with firmware 1.3. After upgrading to 2.0, it no longer plays at all, nor is it recognized as an HD DVD.

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.

Jeff Williams

01-05-07, 06:31 PM

The existence of nearly a dozen distinct player implementations (creating a far more complex test matrix) coupled with the relative immaturity of BD-J authoring tools is why BD interactivity currently lags HD-DVD, and as I've said I believe you'll see that gap narrow significantly in the coming months.
Talk,

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.

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.

Sony is not the only one replicating BD-50. I've held BD-50s from a replicator far, far away from Sony's replication plant.

My questions:
1. What changed in the firmware so that the player no longer recognizes what was apparently a compliant HD DVD under 1.3? If an HD DVD insider needs one of the samplers as a test disc to check this, mine (which obviously no longer plays) is available.
2. Have any other HD DVDs wound up out of spec in this way? As far as I know there haven't, but then again it's mostly the large and more wired studios releasing thus far too. More importantly, are the smaller studios being informed of any firmware changes that they need to take into account to keep their initial releases from going out of spec through firmware changes? How about disc authoring and replicating facilities?

Do you know if the disc as AACS on it? If it doesn't, with a few files from the disc I may be able to narrow down why it doesn't work any longer.

From what I have seen, only one other has had this issue. It was a release in Europe called Elephant Man. It worked on firmware versions earlier than 2.0 only. I believe they fixed the issue and re-released it. As for authoring and replication, it pretty much up to them to get the latest spec revisions to keep things up to date.