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 629  

post #18841 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by GamerGuy
This is such a huge thread. In reading much of it, it seems like it's a fued between a small group of anti-MS/pro-BDA folks (Archibael, AnthonyP, Jimbo Moran, etc.) versus a smaller group of pro-MS folks (Amir, Nataraj, etc.).

The thing that matters most to me is having the most user friendly, least intrusive/restrictive DRM format. So far, that would put me on the HD-DVD side. Everything else is just background noise to me in comparison.

Do you think BDA would really lose much studio support if they dropped the extra DRM? (greedy Fox a-holes might not like it but so what...I don't think they would drop from BDA because of it).
Too late.
BDA sold their souls for Fox support so as to kill off HD-DVD once and for all. If BDA now "dropped the extra DRM", Fox would return to neutrality which would give HD-DVD life. Not going to happen. :(
post #18842 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by nataraj
Thats why I think the CE & IT companies should come up with an elegant networked streaming solution.
What's wrong with DLNA? That's exactly what they are doing.
post #18843 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by archibael
Oh, it's entirely boring from an AVS point of view. I'll be moving to the manufacturing organization and working on test methods for high-speed serial interfaces.
Does that mean you'll be testing what you designed? :) Anyway, good luck in the new position.
post #18844 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by archibael
... that unlike you, the most important thing to me is studio participation. I could care less about the DRM, as the usage models it inhibits are not ones I am interested in anyway. And I think BD has a better chance of 100% studio participation than HD-DVD does. If HD-DVD gets 100% participation, I promise you it will be more than 2 years away at least; BD has a good likelihood of achieving this come out the gate.
I hate to single out your post but the above is a concrete example of what I suggested earlier, that many BR supporters are being shortsighted, not considering the long term consequences, so anxious are they to get HD discs no matter what strings are attached. You say you don't care about BD's extra DRM because you don't care about the usage models it inhibits. But how do you know that you won't care about those usage models in the future? You're willing to cut off your options for future expanded use for the sake of getting Fox's content two years earlier. That's your call, but I don't think it's in the longterm interests of the public at large.

To top it off, BDA didn't even have to cave in to Fox. Sony Pictures and MGM were going to be BR exclusive anyway, and there's also the PS3 to ensure BR's triumph. As BR took off, Fox would've had no choice but to join in eventually even without the extra DRM. And without that extra DRM, Microsoft and Intel would've remained neutral. But no, BDA didn't think PS3, Sony Pictures, and MGM were enough to kill off HD-DVD, so they caved into Fox's demands, selling out the long term interests of the public by curtailing the usage models of BR discs.
post #18845 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escamillo
To top it off, BDA didn't even have to cave in to Fox. Sony Pictures and MGM were going to be BR exclusive anyway, and there's also the PS3 to ensure BR's triumph. As BR took off, Fox would've had no choice but to join in eventually even without the extra DRM. And without that extra DRM, Microsoft and Intel would've remained neutral.

Bad move for BDA?

It always occurs to me why didn't HD DVD give FOX SPDC?
HD DVD even did bribe Universal for their support, right? What is the problem with more DRM? HD DVD needs FOX more than BDA does. I really don't know what HD DVD camp was thinking, HTPC users, consumer rights?
post #18846 of 18952
FOX Studio: Another view - Fox has supported D-VHS D-Theater with more titles than most. This is the only HD format with prerecorded media that is available to the consumers. It was known from the outset this format would be a niche market. I for one, greatly appreciate Fox's support of the format.

The titles I, Robot and X Men: X2 are benchmarks for picture and sound quality.
post #18847 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjack
What's wrong with DLNA? That's exactly what they are doing.
Nothing ... except where are the inexpensive products ?

For eg. now I've two Moto 6412 comcast DVRs. How do I stream from one to the other ... ?
post #18848 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by toomuchtalk
Nataraj: you said MS most prob has a backup plan, right? Then, that wud mean a BD-J implementation wud b ready already. Cant have it both ways.. :eek:

If no BD-J prepared and no plan to buy a 3rd party implementation, then it comes back to my pt of MS being complacent / short-sighted.
Why exactly would the back up plan include BD-J implementation ? It could be a plan to support BR in SP1 in case BR gains popularity.
post #18849 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escamillo
Too late.
BDA sold their souls for Fox support so as to kill off HD-DVD once and for all. If BDA now "dropped the extra DRM", Fox would return to neutrality which would give HD-DVD life. Not going to happen. :(
yeah, that's a deal breaker for me...

Here's to hoping for the complete and utter failure of Blu-ray with it's extra DRM!
...same goes for HD-DVD is they ever follow suit!

Cheers and Happy New Year!
post #18850 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by Palladin
I’ve also noticed that Nat has been trying to achieve the same post counts as Amir (particularly during Amir’s more fervent spin cycles). By my count through a search, Nat has put up approximately 60 posts just in the prior two days, all in this forum. 60 posts on this subject in 2 days? I’ll bet that record even exceeds the Master.
Just some slow days .... You could possibly seem such activity if you go back and check some RPTV or Plasma threads.

In any case who are you to dictate how many posts I should post here ? You got anything say about what I post, write your comments. Anything else shows you have nothing much to say regarding the substance, so you are into your normal personal attack tricks.

Quote:
My point is simple. Based upon his record here (unlike other MS employees, such as Sspears), while hiding behind the claimed veil of not speaking for MS, Nataraj has been essentially doing so, without any accountability. The recent exchange with Talkstr8t concerning BD-J merely hit the point home for me further. So, let’s just drop the whole pretense of independence here. Why doesn’t he just openly embrace the mantle he has assumed, and move past this charade?
Because I don't ! Do you work for a BR company .. or does anyone pay you to post pro-BR or more correctly attack Amir ? Why not come out and say so ...

If I wanted to just hide, I need not have ever disclosed that I work for MS.

Just like a bunch of people here do not disclose who they work for ...

Since you are interested only in personal attacks and can't take part in a civil discussion, I'll ignore your comments from now on.

BTW, happy new year :D
post #18851 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escamillo
And why do you continue to spread the FUD, and yes I do use the term "FUD" regarding your post, that Microsoft is "holding the entire next gen of optical discs hostage" when a few posts above it's been stated that third parties can implement the BR software themselves, regardless of Microsoft's stance on BD-J? Unless you can provide solid evidence that Microsoft is doing something to block third parties from implementing BR software under Vista, then you are spreading FUD, misinformation, and disinformation.
No one is claiming they are blocking companies from implementing Blu-ray. The issue is that they are manipulating companies like HP and Dell to bend them to Microsoft's will, benefit HD-DVD, and hurt Blu-ray. If Microsoft were Sony (that is, not in a monopoly position), this would be legal, though certainly not in the consumer's best interest. As a convicted monopolist, however, this behavior is not only anti-consumer, it's illegal. The likelihood of anyone with hard evidence actually coming forward is slim-to-none, but it's pretty clear MS is acting in very, very bad faith.

Oh, and Happy New Year!
post #18852 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talkstr8t
...and hurt Blu-ray.
On what? force them to adopt MMC?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talkstr8t
...
this behavior is not only anti-consumer
Says who? MMC is anti-consumer? More competition is good for the consumer also.
post #18853 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escamillo
But how do you know that you won't care about those usage models in the future?
Any usage policy by any format is subject to change in the future.
post #18854 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by GamerGuy
yeah, that's a deal breaker for me...

Here's to hoping for the complete and utter failure of Blu-ray with it's extra DRM!
...same goes for HD-DVD is they ever follow suit!

Cheers and Happy New Year!
Why you wouldn't want either format to succeed is beyond me.

Here's to hoping for the complete and utter failure of HDDVDwith it's utter lack of protection. May all the individual backup pirates be stuck with 480i forever. ;)
post #18855 of 18952
Quote:
It always occurs to me why didn't HD DVD give FOX SPDC?
SPDC was put up for a vote at DVD Forum's steering commitee and was voted down by an overwhelming majority.

Quote:
HD DVD even did bribe Universal for their support, right?
No, Universal and Paramount signed on solely based on HD-DVD's merits(Low cost and proven yield). It was Toshiba's unwillingness to offer a cash incentive that drove Disney toward Sony. Which is about to change as Microsoft is waving cash in front of everyone nowadays

Quote:
What is the problem with more DRM?
The PC industry cannot sell their MediaCenter gears with MMC and network streaming disabled.

Quote:
HD DVD needs FOX more than BDA does.
The difference is that HD-DVD standard is controlled by DVD Forum and it won't just change its spec to satisfy single studio, even though Sony was willing to modify its BR-ROM spec for Fox(SPDC) and Warner(BD9).

Quote:
I really don't know what HD DVD camp was thinking, HTPC users, consumer rights?
It's called the matter of principle.
post #18856 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBlacklow
Like I said, it's their business decision. But if they don't want to implement both, then HD-DVD supporters can't keep on making the claim that it's all the BDA's fault for Vista not being able to play Blu-Ray out of the box. It's obvious that both sides are working on HTPC solutions with other companies, and that the only stumbling block to integrated support in Vista is refusal on the part of Microsoft.
I'm a few days behind so sorry if I'm drudging up an old battle, but I don't get the point you're trying to make here. Microsoft is *NOT* format neutral. What on earth would motivate them to create a BD player? Just because they aren't actively helping the BDA doesn't mean they are standing in their way, either. It's like demanding Sony support HD-DVD playback on the PS3.
post #18857 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by ********GA
It's called the matter of principle.
dude, from ur previous posts, you seem biased but you do seem smart too.

and u r too smart to believe the abv statement.. cheers.


Happy New Year, ALL :cool:
post #18858 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by nataraj
Why exactly would the back up plan include BD-J implementation ? It could be a plan to support BR in SP1 in case BR gains popularity.
i agree.. you are right. I was hoping for exactly that actually.. if & when BD wins, SP1 helps out HTPC lovers like moi
post #18859 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluescale
I'm a few days behind so sorry if I'm drudging up an old battle, but I don't get the point you're trying to make here. Microsoft is *NOT* format neutral. What on earth would motivate them to create a BD player? Just because they aren't actively helping the BDA doesn't mean they are standing in their way, either. It's like demanding Sony support HD-DVD playback on the PS3.
That's exactly what I'm saying. If Microsoft doesn't want to include it, that's their call. But there are some here who are claiming it's all the BDA camp's fault that Microsoft won't include Blu-Ray support in Vista, which makes no sense. That's what I was talking about.
post #18860 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjack
Does that mean you'll be testing what you designed? :) Anyway, good luck in the new position.
Hopefully, I'll have more input into the design as the guy who has to test this stuff than I did when I was Joe Random Guy with a couple of unit blocks to my name.
post #18861 of 18952
Thread Starter 
Arch, it’ll be easier for me to work my way backwards on the points raised in your post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by archibael
I personally think this has been a good thing, as otherwise we'd be getting red-laser HD-DVD-9 only: that was what was originally proposed, and it wasn't until it became clear that Blu-ray was not going away that AOD was proposed to the Forum.
We’re in absolute agreement on this one, and had the solution been HD-DVD-9, it is unlikely that we would be having this discussion, particularly at a forum inhabited by videophile enthusiasts. As we know, Toshiba and Sanyo diddled with blue laser, didn’t make much headway, and rejected it. So if not for BD, we’d be seeing nothing more than the incremental change to HD-DVD-9, which based upon most of the opinions expressed at this forum, would not be particularly desirable or represent the technological progress of choice for the next decade.

Quote:
Well, I don't think Sony intended Blu-ray to necessarily be a "unified approach" to HD disks. I think they looked at the composition of the DVD Forum, realized that they'd not be able to push through a blue-laser format with their specs and technology and patents, and formed an external group, hoping to make the DVD Forum's approval irrelevant by moving quickly and decisively.
Yes and no. No question that at least part of Sony’s motivation was the politics within the DVD Forum where Toshiba and TW held a fair amount of influence, as well as a desire to re-orient the schema of patent royalties for disk technologies. Nevertheless, from what I’ve read, both of those companies were approached to become part of a new CE and studio-based consortium, but rebuffed the overtures out of their own self-interest.

I don’t think for our purposes here, there is any doubt that blue laser technology is the better method for achieving the PQ we desire, and had Toshiba and TW climbed on board in favor of the better technology, we would have seen a ‘unified’ effort toward accomplishing this goal; and as there would have been no competing alternative, those who wanted to be difficult (rhymes with sox) would ultimately be compelled to bend to the will of the majority or be left behind. IOW, there wouldn’t have been any orchestrated bluff by TW, Par & Uni to promote Toshiba’s HD-DVD, and we might already be enjoying the benefits of much Hi Def disk content, as opposed to sitting on our hands for a good portion of this new year.

Quote:
Originally Posted by archibael
I see it a little differently than you: I think MS was perfectly willing to maintain a neutral stance on the format war until BD+ came on the scene; the refusal of iHD and the other stated reasons for their hostility toward the format weren't in and of themselves sufficient to push them into moving against it. But BD+ threatened MMC, which was central to a great deal of their business model with the new disc formats (and, as far as I can tell, Intel's, too), and that was the straw that broke the camel's back. I think they intended to support AACS-only, put a lot of effort into it, and when it suddenly came out that BD+ would be something further to deal with, they went on the offensive.
But based upon the claims coming out of AACS, at least some portion of the purported delay is being attributed to the incorporation and implementation of BD+ within AACS. So what did MS actually accomplish here other than delaying the inevitable, and resurrecting a format battle that seemed on the path to some kind of resolution? Had MS hooked up with the BD, they could have influenced the course of events internally as a partner, rather than relying upon their traditional strong arm tactics arising from one individual’s strategy. I have never gotten the impression that the BD generally had any philosophical objection to MMC, but rather had to make concessions to maintain unity among the studios, in order to offset the competition. So, IMO, MS by its own course of conduct, helped to create some of the obstacles they are now railing against.

____________________________________________________
Palladin

Chance favors the prepared mind
post #18862 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by ********GA
SPDC was put up for a vote at DVD Forum's steering commitee and was voted down by an overwhelming majority.
It's interesting to note that almost a third of the votes were to abstain, much like what happened in the BDA.

Quote:
No, Universal and Paramount signed on solely based on HD-DVD's merits(Low cost and proven yield). It was Toshiba's unwillingness to offer a cash incentive that drove Disney toward Sony. Which is about to change as Microsoft is waving cash in front of everyone nowadays
I still doubt that, this late in the game, Microsoft "waving cash" will have it's desired effect, and least of all on the studios. I don't see how people are still falling for the "Microsoft dominates all business spheres" meme. To me, a software company affecting a overwhelmingly CE-based format war that hinges on support from content providers just by snapping their fingers is laughable. People are giving acceptance of Blu-Ray/HD-DVD via HTPC way too much credit here.

Quote:
The difference is that HD-DVD standard is controlled by DVD Forum and it won't just change its spec to satisfy single studio, even though Sony was willing to modify its BR-ROM spec for Fox(SPDC) and Warner(BD9).
Businesses showing adaptability in order to advance their product? Why would they want to do that? :rolleyes: Not to mention it worked. For all we know, the BDA and/or studios are assuming that all the copy protection and DRM will be a stopgap measure. But we do know that they figure (correctly) that the majority of consumers don't notice it as it happens, and furthermore don't care.
post #18863 of 18952
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escamillo
So if Toshiba shows a HD-DVD player at CES then that is automatically "FUD"? :rolleyes:
No, it will show that they have at least implemented some kind of solution to the problems they encountered. Do you even bother to read the comments of others you quote, like what I specifically stated in the final sentence directly above your comment, or was your statement intended to be pointless?

Quote:
Wow, talk about a bad "winner". Why don't you just take your BR victory with grace instead spewing adhominen diatribes (e.g. calling Amir "Fudmaster Flash") against those who lost? And why do you continue to spread the FUD, and yes I do use the term "FUD" regarding your post, that Microsoft is "holding the entire next gen of optical discs hostage" when a few posts above it's been stated that third parties can implement the BR software themselves, regardless of Microsoft's stance on BD-J? Unless you can provide solid evidence that Microsoft is doing something to block third parties from implementing BR software under Vista, then you are spreading FUD, misinformation, and disinformation.
Guess you’re a firm believer in the concept that you can never have enough drivel. :rolleyes: What exactly have I “won†here? Oh, and would a road map help to make clear that the point about MS’s approach to the format war, and the passing reference to BD-J were separate and distinguishable? Of course, BD implementation by third-parties is not an obstacle. Maybe it will help if I simplify it for you: The format ‘war’ would no longer exist BUT FOR the intervention and machinations of MS. Their only unique contribution to this technology is AACS which can easily be transferable to content downloading, which they would greatly prefer anyway as a means of content distribution, as it puts it in their environment of choice in any case. Their stake in next gen HD disks per se, is negligible in comparison.

_________________________________________________
Palladin

Chance favors the prepared mind
post #18864 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escamillo
I hate to single out your post but the above is a concrete example of what I suggested earlier, that many BR supporters are being shortsighted, not considering the long term consequences, so anxious are they to get HD discs no matter what strings are attached.
I'm afraid I don't see any more long-term consequences to Blu-ray which cannot be problematic for HD-DVD as well. Feel free to enlighten me.

Quote:
You say you don't care about BD's extra DRM because you don't care about the usage models it inhibits. But how do you know that you won't care about those usage models in the future?
Again, I don't think I'm cutting off my options. ROM Mark prevents me from playing pirated disks. Whoopie. I'm so upset. BD+ will prevent me from running on a hacked player. My solution: don't hack the player. The BDA has even said they support MMC... I'm failing to see what in the world you think BD+ will enable compared to HD-DVD.

I bought DVD long before CSS was hacked. I see this as no different.

I can totally respect people who hate all DRM unequivocally, or even just "draconian" DRM, even when I don't agree with them. But to accept AACS and HDCP, and then shriek about Blu-ray because BD+ and ROM Mark are "inhibitory"... that confuses me greatly.

Quote:
You're willing to cut off your options for future expanded use for the sake of getting Fox's content two years earlier. That's your call, but I don't think it's in the longterm interests of the public at large.
[rant]I'm not in this for the public at large. The public at large isn't buying my equipment, nor even supporting movies I like, and would probably prefer to have cropped movies from shite-looking low-bitrate downloads to put on their 2-1/2 inch video iPod screens.
[/rant]

I'm sorry we disagree on priorites. But I've done a lot of thinking on this, and have yet to change my mind.
post #18865 of 18952
Intel's big foray into convergence:

http://biz.yahoo.com/bizwk/051230/b3966001.html?.v=1

Any box that goes into the living room must be small and quiet. No loud fans. But it must also be cheap. Even if Intel could deliver on the first two, can it deliver on the third?
post #18866 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by Palladin
Yes and no. No question that at least part of Sony’s motivation was the politics within the DVD Forum where Toshiba and TW held a fair amount of influence, as well as a desire to re-orient the schema of patent royalties for disk technologies. Nevertheless, from what I’ve read, both of those companies were approached to become part of a new CE and studio-based consortium, but rebuffed the overtures out of their own self-interest.
Well, of course they did. "We've established a new group where you don't hold the same positions of power you did in the old group and don't own any of the patents! Come and join it!"

Like I said, I think the great schism has done more good for everyone than had it not occured. But I don't necessarily lay the blame on Toshiba and Warner for being obstructive, when it seems to me that they were deliberately being snubbed because of their insistence on HD-DVD-9.

Quote:
But based upon the claims coming out of AACS, at least some portion of the purported delay is being attributed to the incorporation and implementation of BD+ within AACS. So what did MS actually accomplish here other than delaying the inevitable, and resurrecting a format battle that seemed on the path to some kind of resolution? Had MS hooked up with the BD, they could have influenced the course of events internally as a partner, rather than relying upon their traditional strong arm tactics arising from one individual’s strategy.
Actually, if you've ever read anything about parliamentary politics, it can sometimes be easier to influence decisions by being in an external "spoiler" role rather than as a part of a major party, and that's why MS retained their independence in this up until the last minute. If you're in the group, you have one vote, and any others you can convince of your rightness. If you're outside the group, you can offer competitive ideas which might steal market share from the group, and thus impel them to include them as well in order to co-opt you. In MS's case, it didn't work, as Sony had too much to gain and not enough to lose, but it's not a bad strategy if you can get it to work.

In all, it's not a terribly useful argument to have, except in a purely philosophical sense, and at this point I'll just agree to disagree with you on this.
post #18867 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by archibael
Again, I don't think I'm cutting off my options. ROM Mark prevents me from playing pirated disks. Whoopie. I'm so upset. BD+ will prevent me from running on a hacked player. My solution: don't hack the player. The BDA has even said they support MMC... I'm failing to see what in the world you think BD+ will enable compared to HD-DVD.

I can totally respect people who hate all DRM unequivocally, or even just "draconian" DRM, even when I don't agree with them. But to accept AACS and HDCP, and then shriek about Blu-ray because BD+ and ROM Mark are "inhibitory"... that confuses me greatly.
i Say, well said archibael
post #18868 of 18952
Quote:
Originally Posted by wco81
Intel's big foray into convergence:

http://biz.yahoo.com/bizwk/051230/b3966001.html?.v=1

Any box that goes into the living room must be small and quiet. No loud fans. But it must also be cheap. Even if Intel could deliver on the first two, can it deliver on the third?
Wow. Fun article. First of all:

I miss Andy Grove. He was such a cool boss (even if he was only my boss like twenty times removed).

Probably one of the best I've read on the shakeup with the new shift in focus and leadership.

As for the "small + quiet + cheap"... well, I can answer for the chip part: of course we can. Whether we can deliver "cheap" from the platform perspective or not is a great question, and until after CES, even I won't know for sure.
post #18869 of 18952
Thing I heard about Grove was that he had a cubicle like everyone else and that he liked regimented work schedules, meaning it was expected you'd be in work by 8 AM. If the latter was true, that's a pretty unique thing in Silicon Valley.

BTW, is it only technophiles or the media who believe there's a battle for the living room? I'm a skeptic when it comes to convergence:

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=27040

But it sounds like Intel is betting a big part of the company on it.
post #18870 of 18952
By the way:

A Happy New Year, to all. May 2006 bring you each what you desire:

May it bring us all a high-def disk format which we can use in the ways we see fit. Except for pirates, who hopefully will rot in hell.

May it bring a downloadable movie system which will somehow miraculously scale to high-def rez and be cheap enough to fit into everybody's living room.

May it bring cheap set top boxes and home-theater PCs which will seamlessly allow transfer of all content, great and small, throughout the home.

And most of all... may you all have a good time arguing about it until we find out for sure... and beyond!

:)


'Course, I'm not sure we'll get any of that, but those are my holiday wishes.
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