or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › HDTV Software Media Discussion › Latest HiDef DVD News
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Latest HiDef DVD News - Page 624  

post #18691 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by benwaggoner
Hello all,

Hello everyone. I just wanted to make an announcement that I’m leaving Interframe Media, and joining Microsoft! They’ve just hired me as their Program Manager for Video Encoding, as part of the Professional Content Group. I’ll be doing largely the same stuff for Microsoft that I’ve been doing as a consultant for most of the last decade – making sure that users of Microsoft’s digital media technologies like WMV and VC-1 have the great tools and great support to get the best results. My initial focus will be strongly on HD. I’m thrilled by the chance to dig in and really help make pervasive HD for consumers a reality.
You do realize that by joining the other side that your comments, insight and opinions will be dimissed for no other reason than you now work for MS.

1 months ago its was "Go ahead brother...speak the truth!!"
Now it will be "Ahh...he works for MS so he's biased!!"

...when will people judge somone based upon the content of the message versus who they work for?
post #18692 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnthonyP
congrats and good luck Ben
Ditto.

But if H.264 proves to be better than VC-1, then we'll be buying those releases.

Same goes for MPEG2 at high bitrates.
post #18693 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by wco81
But if H.264 proves to be better than VC-1, then we'll be buying those releases.

Same goes for MPEG2 at high bitrates.
Sure - it'll be a rare consumer who shops on the basis of codec instead of picture quality :). My job is to help make sure that we make VC-1 so good, the workflow so good, and users so well supported that VC-1 is the easiest codec to use and enables the best looking discs.
post #18694 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by benwaggoner
Sure - it'll be a rare consumer who shops on the basis of codec instead of picture quality :).
Good luck...You were/are "the final word" here on such issues.
Quote:
My job is to help make sure that we make VC-1 so good, the workflow so good, and users so well supported that VC-1 is the easiest codec to use and enables the best looking discs.
Yes but the studios don't want the best looking discs going out just yet - they want at least one more round of selling the same movie again! :)
post #18695 of 18952
Quote:
You do realize that by joining the other side that your comments, insight and opinions will be dimissed for no other reason than you now work for MS.

1 months ago its was "Go ahead brother...speak the truth!!"
Now it will be "Ahh...he works for MS so he's biased!!"
admonish: don't worry, Ben was not pro BR enough so we were already dismissing what he had to say :)
post #18696 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by toomuchtalk
another question being ignored is why MS is so keen on iHD?

put another way, why the resistance to BD-J?

they dun have to pay for it; we, the customers, will pay extra.

a Vista HD capable PC will cost a bomb anyway. It cud make Macs look cheap
I don't know which has better functionality wrt iHD vs BD-J, but Amir has said that BD-J costs much more in royalties. It could be that such royalties would be passed to the consumer, like Apple making you pay $10 for an MPEG2 codec for the QuickTime player and Microsoft making you pay $10 to a third party for an MPEG2 codec for WMP as a way of passing the MPEG2 royalty to the consumer.

I don't know why both iHD and BD-J can't be adopted. You keep asking why Microsoft would resisit BD-J (I don't think it's any mystery that they'd prefer their own tech), but what about the reverse? Why does BDA have a resistence to iHD? iHD is pratcically free compared to BD-J, so I think the reason BDA insists on BD-J is that some members of BDA are in line to collect BD-J royalties. Wouldn't it be better to adopt the cheaper iHD in addition to BD-J and let content providers choose which one they prefer just like they're going to do with codecs? This would be a win-win solution if peeps would set aside their egos.
post #18697 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escamillo
Wouldn't it be better to adopt the cheaper iHD in addition to BD-J and let content providers choose which one they prefer just like they're going to do with codecs? This would be a win-win solution if peeps would set aside their egos.
In the BDA's defense, this would add (yet) another delay to getting players out the door. If all of the specs so far specify a Java VM to be running, everyone's already designed their interactivity solution around Java. Rewriting software to use iHD takes a finite amount of time and energy to implement, and time to market is a factor. It's not just PCs, it's any Blu-ray device which was planning on enabling interactivity, and for all I know that could be a majority of the initial offerings-- including the PS3!

Or, in other words, the same reason Amir says MS won't put Blu-ray support into Vista: that ship has sailed, and significant new features will not be added because they might impact the release schedule.
post #18698 of 18952
Escamillo:
1) can you show me a $ amount for both iHD and BD-J (so I can decide how significant that difference will be)?
2) when the BDA voted in BD-J there was no iHD, MS created iHD after the fact. Players where already designed to work with BD-J and SW for them was written.
3) Yes Sun did join the BDA after BD-J was decided as one of the menu system
4) you ranted about the cost of BD-J and then you say that BR should add a menu systems that has almost the same but less capabilities. Does that really make any sense? that just increases the cost and adds no value just to make MS happy.
post #18699 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by wco81
I wasn't making an analogy between tiremaker:GM and MS:OEMs.

I was making an analogy between tiremaker:GM and MS:BDA.

MS is supplying VC-1 and AACS. They also want to supply iHD to the BDA. Actually, they're demanding that the BDA drop BD-J in favor of iHD.
Their relationship to BD obviously isn't as simple as tiremaker:GM either.

Like I said, bad analogy.
post #18700 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnthonyP
Escamillo:
1) can you show me a $ amount for both iHD and BD-J (so I can decide how significant that difference will be)?
No, I'm just repeating what Amir said.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AnthonyP
2) when the BDA voted in BD-J there was no iHD, MS created iHD after the fact. Players where already designed to work with BD-J and SW for them was written.
3) Yes Sun did join the BDA after BD-J was decided as one of the menu system
4) you ranted about the cost of BD-J and then you say that BR should add a menu systems that has almost the same but less capabilities. Does that really make any sense? that just increases the cost and adds no value just to make MS happy.
I don't know what extra functionality BD-J has, can you cite such? Even so, if a content provider has no wish to use whatever extra functionality you claim exists, why pay the more expensive BD-J royalty when they can use iHD for nearly free? Do you really want to pay an extra amount per disc as the BD-J cost is passed to the consumer when the many of the same discs could've used iHD for free?

Edit:
You say that my proposal would just increase cost and add no value just to make MS happy. First, I question your assertion that it would add no value and I contend it could make discs cheaper for the reason I stated above. But regarding your "just to make MS happy" comment, things are done to make parties happy all the time (e.g. Fox). If making MS happy would settle the issue, then why not? Why would you, as a consumer, care? Since when do consumers care about the internal software of CE devices? JVM? HA, they could implement a menu sysem on top of Apples Objective-C runtime for all I care. I'm for settling the issue and making different parties happy facilitates that.
post #18701 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by wco81
And you equate those with movies for importance to a movie-delivery medium?
Read the original posts. IT was about technical investments ...

Quote:
But as Dell has said repeatedly, when did PC companies or consumers have to rely on MS to support DVD playback, for instance?
Exactly. So why does everyone want vista to have inbuilt BR capability ?

BTW, without secure video / audio paths, there would be no hidef dvd playback on a PC. Lets see how it wll work on linux without some major (illegal) hacking ...
post #18702 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo Moran
No not evil but they are nearly bankrupt, perhaps this business model they are using leaves something to be desired.
I know this is off topic but....maybe it's because they provide health insurance for more people than any other company on the face of the earth. Health insurance in the worst market to insure in the world (the US) ...in fact they spent 2x the $ on health insurance that they spend on steel....maybe that's why they are having a bit of a problem. And they and all of the large US firms that will follow down the same road will keep having this problem until you (and the rest of us) insist that your government wakes up and joins the rest of the industrial world in having a health insurance management plan that has some reality in today’s world.....


end of off topic/
post #18703 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by dialog_gvf
History shows that an incremental quality improvement on similar form factors does not greatly influence the mass market.

Cassette v. DCC
CD v. SACD/DVD-A

And, VHS v. Betamax was arguably a rush to lower quality.

Why is it so easy for you to imagine HD discs being an exception?
I've always been argueing the same thing ... you got my post wrong.
post #18704 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBlacklow
Both ATI's cards (here's the specs page for the low-end X300) and nVidia's (according to the General Manager of Multimedia for NVIDIA) are, as of the cards introduced early last year, HDCP-capable.
Yes, thats what I was saying. But what does HDCP ready mean ? Has anyone got it working with HDCP ... or for that matter, how do we even test that now ?

Quote:
Well, I plan on getting a PS3 anyway (and 360 as well), since I'm a gamer, but a BR-equipped Mac Mini with FrontRow would definitely get me motor running, especially at $500. Given Apple's current pricing scheme, that's not likely, but even at $1000 it would enough to make me consider buying a Mac.
I saw a MacMini ad for less than $500. Hopefully they won't price their BR ones for $1000. At that price, I'd rather go back to upgrading my HTPC or buy a CE BR recorder.
post #18705 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escamillo
Even so, if a content provider has no wish to use whatever extra functionality you claim exists, why pay the more expensive BD-J royalty when they can use iHD for nearly free? Do you really want to pay an extra amount per disc as the BD-J cost is passed to the consumer when the many of the same discs could've used iHD for free?
If you don't know how much iHD costs, how can you say it's free? Just because it's bundled with Vista doesn't mean no one will pay royalties for it And if it's in CE devices, then it definitely won't be free.
post #18706 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToddD
....maybe it's because they provide health insurance for more people than any other company on the face of the earth. Health insurance in the worst market to insure in the world (the US) ...in fact they spent 2x the $ on health insurance that they spend on steel....
Any links ? I'd like to read more about it ... thanks.
post #18707 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBlacklow
If you don't know how much iHD costs, how can you say it's free? Just because it's bundled with Vista doesn't mean no one will pay royalties for it And if it's in CE devices, then it definitely won't be free.
Amir has stated iHD will be part of the pool and will cost just cents.
post #18708 of 18952
Quote:
Yes, thats what I was saying. But what does HDCP ready mean ? Has anyone got it working with HDCP ... or for that matter, how do we even test that now ?
I don't know if there are any applications that currently use HDCP, but the capability's there, presumably to futureproof products for Vista PVP compliance. If there are any Blu-Ray or HD-DVD HTPC solutions being shown at CES, we might get more info.
post #18709 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by nataraj
Amir has stated iHD will be part of the pool and will cost just cents.
For PCs, yes. But do we have any word on CE devices? It's important to note that Microsoft and HP's complaints about royalties are only about PC drives, which at this rate will still be the minority of next-gen players.

ETA: On a somewhat related note, lossless audio for both formats (in this case, DTS) is being shown off at CES. That may not mean a lot, but IIRC, none of the lossless audio solutions will work over SPDIF (optical or coaxial) connections, due to limited bandwidth. Supposedly HDMI is the only connection able to do so, which would mean that an combined A/V solution would be the only way to use the full capabilities of either format on an HTPC. According to that FiringSquad article I linked to, one of the Sony Vaios already does that, but I don't know of any current consumer-level video or audio cards that have HDMI.
post #18710 of 18952
post #18711 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by robena
You were saying that progressive is better for broadcast, trying to justify your 480p advocacy.
That was not me ... it was Tom.

Quote:
I'm saying that given that 1080p is not possible for broadcast, and the choice being between 480p, 720p and 1080i, for film sourced material 1080i is better.
If an assumption of 1080p not possible is made (even 1080p24fps is not possible ?) ... then I agree.

My question has a different background ... when lack of 1080p inputs over hdmi is discussed, people repeatedly claim that it is not needed since 1080i can be perfectly dinterlaced.
post #18712 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBlacklow
For PCs, yes. But do we have any word on CE devices?
AFAIK, its for any device - PC or CE. They will all be using the same IP pool.

Quote:
According to that FiringSquad article I linked to, one of the Sony Vaios already does that, but I don't know of any current consumer-level video or audio cards that have HDMI.
I expect to see a whole lot of new audio/video cards and receivers geared towards hidef dvd. I guess there are a whole lot of companies waiting to make some money ...
post #18713 of 18952
Good news (if realized) for Pixar fans of the Blu-ray variety...
Disney, Pixar reportedly close to renewal
post #18714 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToddD
I know this is off topic but....maybe it's because they provide health insurance for more people than any other company on the face of the earth. Health insurance in the worst market to insure in the world (the US) ...in fact they spent 2x the $ on health insurance that they spend on steel....maybe that's why they are having a bit of a problem. And they and all of the large US firms that will follow down the same road will keep having this problem until you (and the rest of us) insist that your government wakes up and joins the rest of the industrial world in having a health insurance management plan that has some reality in today’s world.....


end of off topic/
Unions caused their financial problems. I'd rather they and ten others like them went bankrupt before I would support socialized medicine in the US. ---my end of OT response

To Escamillo: You are right, I don't care how the CE devices work as long as it performs it's designed function. I also don't care how much a BD royalty costs either for the same reason, it doesn't matter in the end.
post #18715 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by nataraj
BTW, without secure video / audio paths, there would be no hidef dvd playback on a PC. Lets see how it wll work on linux without some major (illegal) hacking ...
There's nothing about protected path which links it to Microsoft products; most of the lockdown is done in the hardware. Linux could be made to work fairly easily with this hardware (as easily as Windows, anyway), but it would probably be a Linux-derivative most Linux people would not recognize or enjoy, as it would have to employ many of the same techniques opponents decry in Palladium.

I think the best (i.e. most successful while still being lawful) method for Linux to stay involved would be a hardware card which does the secure stuff off-software. If Intel stock were doing much better, I might be tempted to spin off my own company and provide such a solution. :D
post #18716 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by benwaggoner
I think you've wildly misinterpreted Tom's statement. He was talking about a PROGRESSIVE system, where you encode a base stream at 480p, and then use additional data for how to upsample to a higher resolution from that.
Ben's got it right. Building on a progressive base layer was/is fundamental to what we did at Microsoft Research and at Panasonic Audio Video Research Labs ("PAVCAL"). I can find the Panasonic paper if you want.

Also, 480P shot with good lenses, with an oversampling camera, far exceeds the modulation transfer function of many dumb-ass 1080i camera shoots.

If you are going to compare numbers know what with you shooteth and understand the MTF. I suspect that most don't understand the latter.
post #18717 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by nataraj
If an assumption of 1080p not possible ... then I agree.
The term "1080p" is incompletely specified unless you add the framerate and the field/frame cadence. "1080p" may typically mean either 1080/24P or 1080/60P with 3:2 (or 1080/48P for that matter), all of which are very different things. If you are going to use technical terms please use them correctly.
post #18718 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaaaa0
Their relationship to BD obviously isn't as simple as tiremaker:GM either.

Like I said, bad analogy.
Ask Firestone and Ford how simple the relationship would be.

Oh MS would like to be more than a supplier but in reality, that's all they are.
post #18719 of 18952
nataraj
Quote:
Yes, thats what I was saying. But what does HDCP ready mean ? Has anyone got it working with HDCP ... or for that matter, how do we even test that now ?
nvidia:
Integrated 165 MHz TMDS transmitter (DVI 1.0 compliant / HDMI interoperable and HDCP ready)


Yes, just like my HDTV is "HD ready" which means I had to buy a tuner or use a cable/satellite box. I ain't buying it.
With all of the hdcp problems with stb's and switchers and the like, why would I believe this will work?
post #18720 of 18952
Despite the bickering, etc. I must say that this is an amazing thread! Thnx to all posters...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HDTV Software Media Discussion
This thread is locked  
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › HDTV Software Media Discussion › Latest HiDef DVD News