Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

HD DVD Coming Very Soon

CowboyNeal posted more than 11 years ago | from the pretty-pictures dept.

Movies 594

x mani x writes "While the DVD Forum continues quibbling over a new blue-laser based HD-DVD standard, it looks like Microsoft has been busy developing a new video compression method that can show high quality HD video at bitrates similar to current DVD's (between 5-8mbps). Proof, you say? Check out some stunning samples of this cutting edge technology. Myself and many others have watched it and most of us feel this is significantly better looking than MPEG-4/DivX HD video of the same bitrate. This technology is causing some excitement, as the T2: Extreme Edition DVD package will include a DVD containing T2 in HD, compressed with this technology. Anyone with a fast PC will be able to watch T2 in high def, no pricey blue laser player required."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I actually tried to check this out... (5, Interesting)

repetty (260322) | more than 11 years ago | (#5708982)

"We're sorry. This Windows Media 9 Series content is only available to be viewed using Internet Explorer." ...but I guess I won't.

--Richard

Re:I actually tried to check this out... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709005)

Welcome to another cycle of companies not understanding that a horde of competing proprietary "standards" repels consumers. With several hardware options and MPEG2, MPEG4 and WM9 in the arena, I guess HDTV in a can is still 3 years away from any reasonable product, let alone customer acceptance.

Re:I actually tried to check this out... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709061)

a horde of competing proprietary "standards" repels consumers

And why is that? If you want to use the media, you'll download or, in the worst case, buy the codec. I don't see Quicktime, Windows Media or other proprietary formats repelling consumers -- quite the opposite.

Re:I actually tried to check this out... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709066)

I won't use quicktime.

Re:I actually tried to check this out... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709089)

Whatever floats your boat.

I'm quite happy with Windows Media Player 9. It installs cleanly (no unpacking, scripts or stupid config-file tweaking), comes with the most common codecs and both recognizes and automatically downloads the rest.

Re:I actually tried to check this out... (1)

oliverthered (187439) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709095)

are you sure, have you checked through the source code for trojans, backdoors, spyware etc....

Re:I actually tried to check this out... (-1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709126)

If you mean that it may or may not send data back to Microsoft, yes I am aware of that. I don't care if Microsoft wants to profile my taste in music/movies.

Did you install every program on your computer by compiling it from the source and only after you've read through the entire code? The open source folk is happy to spout crap about the dangers of closed source all the while they're happily installing binaries from distribution CDs and ftp-sites. That's hypocrisy.

Re:I actually tried to check this out... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709137)

It's about who you trust. You trust Microsoft. Have a nice day.

Worry about bugs that cause problems elsewhere. (2, Insightful)

Futurepower(R) (558542) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709153)


Microsoft spying on you may not be the biggest issue. It is best to wait until all the bugs have been found before you install Microsoft software. As Steve Jobs said, "Microsoft eventually gets it right."

Re:I actually tried to check this out... (2, Insightful)

j-pimp (177072) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709155)

Yeah, but some people do look through the source code. Even if we were to assume most people looking at other peopels source code are looking for exploitable security vulnerabilities, that would still eventually lead to the general public finding out about spyware type things. Also, though not for security reasons, I've read through source code for programs I installed on my computer. My reasons were to attempt to modify source code. Sometimes I did and sent in patches, sometimes I decided not to for several factors.

Re:I actually tried to check this out... (3, Informative)

oliverthered (187439) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709169)

Well, everything's compiled from source [gentoo.org]
and personally I've looked through and fixed
All of the USB core [linux-usb.org] in the kernel, the ADSL driver [sourceforge.net] for my modem, povray [povray.org] .
I've partly gone through Arson
and looked at lots of other source (including postgres)

So, I'm sure the ADSL software is spyware free the USB core looks ok too(if a bit badly documented and buggy)
and I've never found anything bad in povray.

Re:I actually tried to check this out... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709107)

This is a demo for living room tech. People will have to buy a HD-DVD player. If there are competing HD-DVD "standards", many players won't be able to play all formats.

Initial two first thoughts on the matter ... (1, Troll)

jstockdale (258118) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709112)

"We're sorry. This Windows Media 9 Series content is only available to be viewed using Internet Explorer."

Microsoft Anticompetitive? Never!
*Randomize*
Antitrust case my ass.

Re:I actually tried to check this out... (1)

unclethursday (664807) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709127)

Me too.

Unfortunately I recieved a corrupt IE patch many months ago which causes IE to garner all sorts of ActiveX errors, and no amount of re-patching has fixed this. As a result, IE litterally crashes my Windows 98 SE system multiple times per day if I try and use it.

So I use Netscape 7.0.2 on my Windows system.

Looks like I'm not going to check this out.

Obviously (4, Interesting)

JanusFury (452699) | more than 11 years ago | (#5708984)

Obviously this is a reason for them to port their codecs to linux; for use in HD-DVD players and set top boxes. I like the idea of being able to play HD content with the same DVD drive I have now, and just needing new software.

Re:Obviously (1)

gazbo (517111) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709131)

But that's obviously why they've created this codec. MS do everything half-assed and in a buggy fashion, right up until now when they release something that is actually stunning.

And it only runs on Windows.

Clearly the only reason they've bothered to do such a good job is to force set-top boxes to be Windows based. Remember that MS is so big and powerful that it could code anything to an amazing standard, but it chooses not to. It seems a little suspicious that they'd start now...

No way (-1, Troll)

Inda (580031) | more than 11 years ago | (#5708985)

This content requires the new
Windows Media Player 9 Series...

Not today thank you.

Patent issues (4, Interesting)

Alain Williams (2972) | more than 11 years ago | (#5708986)

What sort of patents will be on the technology I wonder, just to stop me being able to use it on my non M$ box ?

Re:Patent issues (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709156)

I'm sure it will be patented and the patents will be enforced with prejudice in favor of MS.
Why not? Money equals justice in the Republican administration. We're represented by a government that is teaching the populace that their lives are illegal. First it was just drugs, now it's speech and communication. Everyone is guilty all the time which means enforcement can take place at any time.
The police state has already happened.
Yeah, it's a rant, but fuck I'm pissed off at having to be ashamed of my country.

What's the point? (5, Insightful)

Travoltus (110240) | more than 11 years ago | (#5708987)

All the new media will have hardware copy prevention built in.

Being unable to even record your own media on these formats, will scare people away from accepting it. (Anyone remember the LASERDISC?)

(And no, this ain't intended as a troll.)

Re:What's the point? (4, Insightful)

Patrik Nordebo (170) | more than 11 years ago | (#5708997)

Remember DVD? The video format that you couldn't record to that had unprecented consumer adoptment rates? That comes with a variety of copy prevention technology (encryption, Macrovision)? Doesn't seem to have hurt it much.

Re:What's the point? (1)

Travoltus (110240) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709007)

Yes, but they have DVD-R, too. You CAN record to DVD, and the whole fuss about Apple's DVD system is you can make DVD movies, which combined with (the illegal) DeCSS.......... well, I'm quite sure you can tell they will impose far stronger copy prevention methods on this new format.

Let's see what happens when you get a format that can't be circumvented, and is coming so soon on the heels of regular DVD....

Re:What's the point? (4, Informative)

luzrek (570886) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709045)

While DVDs are effectively the "mature" version of the laserdisk technology, they did offer consumers a substantial benefit over the VHS tapes which they replaced. Namely, you got all the DVD extras for not too much more money than the VHS tape. They also offered substantially better quality than VHS tapes, and longer shelf lives, and smaller storage areas, etc. While Laserdisks offered many of the same content extras as DVDs, they were prohibitively expensive and aquard to store and use. DVDs also came out at a time when the main use of the VCR was to watch prerecorded movies from the rental store. Laserdisks came out when the main use of the VCR was to record and watch television (early time-shifting).

That said, whatever is going to replace DVDs is going to have a couple of fairly high hurdles. First, there is already a huge base of DVD players out there, many of which aren't compatable with DVD-R,DVD-RW,DVD+R, and DVD+RW (one of the things holding off widespread acceptance of DVD-burning drives). It will have to be backwards compatable with existing technology, or offer substantially greater value so that everyone replaces their DVD players. I don't think that simply offering higher resolution without additional changes will be enough to get everyone to go out and buy a new DVD player. Maybe it would if everyone had televisions which displayed pictures in greater detail than DVDs support, and routinely watched broadcasts in said higher resolution.

Re:What's the point? (1)

turgid (580780) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709082)

Well, I still haven't bought one for entertainment. I have a data drive on my PC but trying to play DVDs under Linux is a real pain, so I've never bought any media.

Because it is much more userfriendly... (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709096)

Seriously, a DVD is vastly superior to a VHS tape in so many ways besides picture quality (no rewinding, instant jump, extras, smaller, don't deteriorate gradually). Have you looked at Asia? They already hda the (S)VCD as the standard, so DVDs have basicly flopped, even though you can buy fake DVDs for about $3. I imagine a HD-DVD format would suffer much the same problem, most people don't have or care about a huge HDTV disply. Also that FTC limit is only to go digital, not to go HD.

Anyway, if the future is Windows/WMP9/IE only, I think I'll settle for DivX anyway. Personally I don't feel that the movie _experience_ gets significantly better or worse by being in HDTV or standard DVD. A good movie is still a good movie, and a bad movie still a bad movie...

Kjella

Re:What's the point? (4, Insightful)

shepd (155729) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709130)

>That comes with a variety of copy prevention technology (encryption, Macrovision)? Doesn't seem to have hurt it much.

Yes, but unlike its cousin that was stillborn (DiVX) the DVD format's encryption was optional. Also macrovision was removable almost from day 1, making analog copies (the only ones practical for a home user at the time) very possible. This also goes for region coding.

Because the encryption is totally seamless and invisible to the end user, the end user never cared. I have never heard of a single person, apart from people using unauthorized players, who has ever bought a DVD that was unable to play a disc, assuming their player follows all the standards, due to the encryption present for any reason whatsoever (apart from region coding, which is trivial to remove on most all players, and only effects a small segment of the population).

DRM, however, is intended to be obvious. DRM will not let the consumer do everything they want to without serious limits (physical, not legal) that they will almost surely encounter. That's what's the killer, and that's what made DiVX die, and it's why this format is another waste of someone's time and effort.

Re:What's the point? (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5708998)

(Anyone remember the LASERDISC?)

nope!

Re:What's the point? (2, Insightful)

cyrax777 (633996) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709009)

LD died for a couple reasons #1 was it cost to damn much a movie was about 50 bucks and one could buy the VHS for around 25-30.

Re:What's the point? (2, Interesting)

oliverthered (187439) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709080)

and DVDs?
2 films on vhs = £5-£10,
2 films on DVD = £15-£60

Re:What's the point? (1)

klui (457783) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709164)

That's false. Laserdisc in its heyday cost around $25-$35 per title. Hardly $50/title. Only when you get into special edition boxed sets did you have to pay through the nose. My copy of the definitive edition of Star Wars was around $250.

Re:What's the point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709002)

You can copy ANYTHING... as soon as you hold the medium in your hands it's copied... :)

BTW.. in germany you have the right to make backups of anything you paid for.

Re:What's the point? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709026)

BTW.. No, you don't. You are *allowed* to make a backup, if you can. If you can't, you can't complain to anyone that this deprives you of a backup copy. The recent changes to copyright law further limit "being able to create a copy" to cases where you don't have to circumvent copy protection mechanisms to create a copy.

Re:What's the point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709179)

The point is, the majority of Americans are placed in a position where they break the law on a regular basis. That is the point. How did that happen? What are we going to do about it?

German copyright laws (1)

Gtz (18854) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709043)

The right to copy is useless with the new laws (EU-wide copyright directive just about to become national law in Germany) forbiding hard- and software that disable copy protection mechanisms. Almost all mainstream audio CDs already have copy protection, so soon it will be illegal even to make private copies of the CDs you own.

im confused. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5708994)

Is it just a completely different codec than mpeg2 but burned on a standard DVD? If so then you probably would need a special DVD player. That sucks.

Re:im confused. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709110)

Is it just a completely different codec than mpeg2 but burned on a standard DVD? If so then you probably would need a special DVD player. That sucks.

or, as the text at the top puts it (emph mine):
Anyone with a fast PC will be able to watch T2 in high def, no pricey blue laser player required.

Not supported... (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5708995)

...uhm, this isn't supported by MPlayer yet, right? So why is this news?

cool (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5708999)

Hell, I'd buy it. I hate having to watch the crappy movies they show on ABC when I wanna watch a film in HDTV. I don't really want to get DirecTV and a HD-VHS player seems a bit pointless. HD-DVD ALL THE WAY!

(8(I) doohhhhh (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709004)

We're sorry. This Windows Media 9 Series content is only available to be viewed using Internet Explorer.

Learn more about Internet Explorer


NO

Anyone with a fast PC.... (5, Insightful)

warmcat (3545) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709006)

''Anyone with a fast PC will be able to watch T2 in high def...

AND Windows

Re:Anyone with a fast PC.... (1)

oliverthered (187439) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709058)

Or wine [winehq.org] ,
or anything that can use microsoft codecs.

Or Linux, or MacOSX.... (4, Interesting)

dalangalma (514344) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709091)

They're porting WMP9 to linux and MacOS. Nice try.

That's misleading. (3, Informative)

tolan-b (230077) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709158)

It is being ported, but the company that are doing it seem unlikely to release it as a consumer product. They already make LinDVD (the Linux version of WinDVD suprisingly). LinDVD is available to consumers as a standalone, it's only marketed to integrators making Linux appliances, and it's looking like the WMP port will be the same.

oops... (1)

tolan-b (230077) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709165)

sorry, that should read "LinDVD isn't available to consumers". Preview button you say? Never heard of it! ;)

Re:oops... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709187)

So by a hd-dvd player that runs linux on x86

hack it to get WMP (LMP) and remove the offending copy from hd-dvd player.

Sell the unpackaged LMP without the hd-dvd player.

video libraries (5, Insightful)

Pompatus (642396) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709012)

How many people are ready to pay $30 (probably more) per movie to update their video libraries to a new media standard? It just seems too soon after dvd was adopted.

Re:video libraries (1)

khuber (5664) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709063)

How many people are ready to pay $30 (probably more) per movie to update their video libraries to a new media standard? It just seems too soon after dvd was adopted.

Anyone who wants HDTV resolution. DVD was released six years ago before HDTV standards were finished. It's a small part of the market, but it has a lot of people willing to pay for it. (Not me hehe)

-Kevin

Re:video libraries (1)

Flounder (42112) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709115)

Certain movies, I'd purchase them again to get HD resolution. Most of my collection, I'm happy with. But Lord of The Rings, The Matrix, hell yeah!

forgot to mention (1)

Pompatus (642396) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709017)

I forgot to mention, I would have read the article, but it's in CHINESE

Re:forgot to mention (0)

nexex (256614) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709120)

you mean japanese

screw them (5, Insightful)

justin_speers (631757) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709019)

Like some other posters have already pointed out, no IE, no "stunning samples".

Screw them, honestly. What arrogance. I hate their whole "all-Microsoft" strategy. Would I buy a Sony DVD player and expect it to only play CDs or DVDs from Sony? People would be outraged!

This is why I have a hard time seeing Microsoft expanding beyond the very limited PC market. That's why the whole "Trojan horse in the living room" X-Box strategy will never work. Microsoft has a stronghold over PC operating systems, and can mostly get away with stuff like this. But if they refuse to cooperate with other companies already in the living room with technology like this, they're only hurting themselves.

And since I can't see the "stunning samples" in Mozilla, I'm not so stunned.

Re:screw them (-1, Flamebait)

yatest5 (455123) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709105)

Yeah, I'm really pissed I can't play my Playstation 2 games on Linux. I really hate Sony's "all-Sony" strategy.

If you (and all the other nobwits who've put the EXACT same response) want to cut off your nose to spite your face, thats fine. Me, I browsed to the page in Phoenix, it told me to use IE, so I loaded that and hey presto.

Since I have more important things to worry about than my OS of choice, it doesn't affect me one little bit if I have to use IE to view a page, though I guess down in your momma's basement things like this can seem REAL important.

Re:screw them (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709183)

"...though I guess down in your momma's basement "

Nice troll you little pissant.

Re:screw them (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709194)

crawl off your mom,commie

Re:screw them (2, Interesting)

anarxia (651289) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709141)

This new format is not such a great idea now and it wont replace DVDs any time soon. The hardware players will be very expensive, judging from the processing power this new format requires. As for playing the videos on a PC (with Windows), 2GHz+ computers are the minority right now, so I doubt this format will become popular even as a computer-only video format in the next couple of years.

Re:screw them (3, Interesting)

nbrazil (573177) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709157)

Completely wrong. The CPU requirements here are for GENERAL PURPOSE processors. This is a far cry from the efficiency of a dedicated hardware codec. The first generation of x86 systems that could do good DVD playback in software were vastly more powerful in most ways than the chips in DVD players. Much more memory hungry, too, in that they had to run an application on a full feature OS rather than a tiny kernal pared down to just what was required for the intended task. A dedicated codec for playback of WM9 or comparable codec is going to be vastly cheaper in volume than the general purpose CPU needed to achieve the same playback in software. As it only needs to perform a very limited set of functions compared to a CPU for a desktop the requirements for transistor count and speed are immemnsely lower. There is no reason an entry level WM9 capable video player should retail for more than $250, barring features for the high home theater options. That price would drop rapidly if the sales reached any great volume.

Re:screw them (1)

nbrazil (573177) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709168)

@ GHz and faster system are now well in the cereal box prize category of bargain basement systems. Very little has been sold in the last year that wasn't that fast or faster. THat places the potential installed base of capable systems byt he time this actually is likely to be a retail product in the tens of millions. These are the sort of number most can only dream of selling into.

Format mania (5, Interesting)

6hill (535468) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709020)

So now there are two proposals for new blue-laser formats and one for an enhanced version of the current red-laser DVD, and then Microsoft adds its fingers to the pie with this new thing. I had hoped HD-DVD would not be another format debacle (Betamax/VHS, DVD-/+RW, etc.) but it seems it's going to be even worse than usual

My other worry is that the proposed HD-DVD standards are baby steps, too small to make upgrading for me cost-effective. Why add to the storage capacity of DVDs one magnitude, when you could wait two years and possibly (probably?) get a media format that will increase your storage capacity a thousandfold. Or as a pipe dream, eliminate overlapping media formats -- I'd have no need for DVDs if I could buy digital copies of what is now put on separate DVD disks, and store that content on my hard drive. Same for music CDs. It would save an awful lot of shelf space and eliminate the need to buy n separate players for n separate storage media. But of course, these things have always been geared to maximise company profits and not consumer satisfaction. Shame.

This is a great idea (1)

dalangalma (514344) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709103)

Since all you'd have to do is buy an HDTV DVD player (pretty cheap, since all that's different is the software), and they bundle in the Windows Media HD version along with the normal DVD version. That way you have a regular DVD, plays on regular machines, that also pumps out HDTV for those who have a screen that can take it. Kind of like how they have all those different surround sound choices on DVDs. THe DVD can hold it all - look at the new T2 Extreme Edition.

Conglomerate breakups (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709022)

If Microsoft continues to expand and take chunks of industry at the pace it is going, I wonder how long before it will become a modern day version of what happened to Standard Oil and AT&T???

Maybe Billy G is just compensating for other thingies that lack size in his life.

Nice to see innovation (3, Insightful)

KeyserDK (301544) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709024)

Before everyone bashes MS, let me be the first to say that this actually looks like a good and genuine innovation, nobody is pure evil :).

Now, there is an issue with regard to patents, if MS has any on this technology.

Can anyone shed light on patents policies in the DVD-forum?

Re:Nice to see innovation (1)

haraldm (643017) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709047)

nobody is pure evil :).

That's right, the world isn't just black and white (even if some Western governments like us to believe that). But some are evil, and some are more evil. M$ belongs to the latter, trying to "embrace" and modify everything they can put their hands on.

Re:Nice to see innovation (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709111)

That's right, the world isn't just black and white

Ah, nice to see that the ethically and morally corrupt concept of moral relativism is still alive and well in Europe...

I'd like to hear you justifying how Saddam's baby-torturing, let's-drop-people-in-a-plastic-shredder regime was not simply and purely evil.

Re:Nice to see innovation (1)

ChadDa3mon (642255) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709048)

Oh, I'm sure it's a great innovation, and then leave it to M$ (who is pure evil) to f*&# it all up and require MS9, IE, and Windows...... What will be a great innovation is once this is reverse engineered by some kid in his basement, and made free to all platforms.

Re:Nice to see innovation (0)

Fyl M0lo (635212) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709052)

sure but that doesn't make m$ all the sudden good software. it sounds like m$ is trying to one up linux. i can see it now....gates in his office jumping up and down HA beat THAT Linux as he punches his million dollar tux shaped punching bag

Re:Nice to see innovation (1)

OSgod (323974) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709195)

Umm...

More likely he's reviewing next week, next quarter and next years product development.

MS runs scared -- always. And they are far from stupid for a corporation. Rest for a short while and they will eat your lunch (Netscape) using legitimate business means. Of course then you'll come back and whine and attempt to break their stronghold on what used to be your market and your customer base will wonder why you became such a non-player.

MS isn't perfect. Far from it. But they learn the playing field, have time and money to try different approaches and where they want to they have the persistence to stomp on any other player in the field.

Business is domination. MS is about business. Profit plan:

1. Invest $$ in MS
2. Watch your money grow quarter over quarter
3. Know that your a part owner in a successful company that innovates technology

Bzzzt! (1, Troll)

turgid (580780) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709101)

Wrong!
Better image and video compression has been promised for years, in the shape of wavelent encoding. Such methods give a factor of 10 better compression that discrete cosine (i.e. fourier) coding as used in MPEG and JPEG with less of the blocking artifacts. I can't be bothered to read the article, because it's nothing new as usual from Microsoft. It's been done before, a decade ago by people with more brains. The trouble is they patented a load of the algorithms so there's been no Free, free or Open implementation.

Re:Bzzzt! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709160)

Where did you get that factor of 10 from? You are exaggerating by quite a bit there. And if you can't be bothered to read the article, you're not really qualified to pass judgment. It hasn't been done "a decade ago" - just because the label says Microsoft doesn't mean that the people there aren't smart. Much as I dislike the company, there are some seriously bright people at MS.
Also, the last line of your post makes no sense: MS can afford to pay for the patents, and could have done that years ago. WM9 *is* (alas) the cutting edge.

Re:Bzzzt! (1)

turgid (580780) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709167)

Dude, I'd paste up tons of references for you here, but what's the point? Google is your friend. I did quite a lot of investigation into this 5 years ago. I was planning on writing an Open Source wavelet coder but the patents got in the way.

Intel vs AMD (-1, Offtopic)

jhunsake (81920) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709031)

we recommend at least a 2.4 GHz Intel or AMD Athlon XP 2100+ or higher

What is Microsoft saying, that a AMD Athlon XP 2100+ is as fast as a 2.4 GHz Intel? If that's the case, why isn't it a 2400+?

Interesting question, but... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709062)

What is Microsoft saying...

Yeah, I wonder why they compare those two processors, but I have a more fundamental question.

Why do they try to improve the picture quality by a fraction of an order of magnitude, and not go and try to make a current technology work with lower power equipment? I think that would be much more valuable to the consumer.

Though, this would ruin the whole WinTel idea of having to buy newer hardware for the newer software for the newer hardware....

Re:Intel vs AMD (1)

GothicManSlut (587638) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709081)

besides it being offtopic, your message is a troll. 2100+ is equal or even faster than a 2.4GHz Intel is most respects.

Re:Intel vs AMD (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709109)

your message is the troll, bitch

Re:Intel vs AMD (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709149)

then yours is also offtopic, bitch

It depends (1)

KrunZ (247479) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709086)

Check this [tomshardware.com] and you will see that it doesn't make sense to say "as fast as" in general when it comes to the new processors. In the "Video-Encoding MPEG-2: Main Concept 1.3" test the Athlon XP 2100+ does the job quicker than the 2.4 GHz Intel. In the "Multimedia: PC Mark 2002" test the 2.4 GHz Intel gets a better rating than the Athlon XP 2400+.

It depends on the job.

Re:Intel vs AMD (1)

double_u_b (649587) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709114)

WHAT?? 2GHz+ computers? I bought a standalone DVD player, since I was not very pleased watching DVD on the computer, or watching it on TV with the computer on. I was not very pleased with my 10 meters cable crossing the corridor to watch DVDs on a good TV with my girlfriend. Why would I need to go back to my computer to enjoy HiRes images on a small screen, while I could enjoy mid res images on a medium size screen that satisfy me??? Why should my ear get fed up with that boring computer fan noise? Why should I use 150W to watch movies, while I could only use 55W? Why should my ugly beige box be the center of all my medias? I am satisfied with what I have now...

Microsoft supporting other systems? (-1, Redundant)

Bas_Wijnen (523957) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709036)

it looks like Microsoft has been busy developing a new video compression method

Anyone with a fast PC will be able to watch

Somehow I get the feeling you mean "anyone with a fast PC and a Microsoft operating system". Or am I too cynical?

CRAP!!! (4, Funny)

Flounder (42112) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709050)

That'll make the THIRD copy of Terminator 2 on DVD that I must buy!! And I thought the previous Ultimate Edition would be it. Jeezus, Terminator 2 is turning into the Evil Dead series with so many versions available on DVD.

Re:CRAP!!! (1)

Flounder (42112) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709100)

Just re-read the article. DOUBLE CRAP!! P4 1.8Ghz minimum requirements?? "Honey, I need to upgrade the computer again, gotta watch Terminator 2."

Well, hopefully my AthlonXP 1.53Ghz will be buff enough. My 2GB of RAM BETTER be enough (frigging MS bloatware!).

Re:CRAP!!! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709145)

You sir, are a moron.

T2 in HDTV quality? How? (1)

kikta (200092) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709051)

Ok, so the article says that they're going to offer T2 in "2.35:1 anamorphic widescreen transfer digitally mastered from a brand-new 1080p, 24sf high-definition digital telecine transfer." That's great and all, but how are they getting this quality? Was T2 filmed in digital? I thought something had to be filmed in the 1080p HDTV-quality to have that kind of picture. Can anyone shed some light, or are they blowing sunshine up our collective asses? Thanks.

Re:T2 in HDTV quality? How? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709067)

Film has much higher resolution than normal DVDs. If a DVD looks crappy, it's usually due to a bad transfer. Overuse of edge enhancement, frame jitter, variable brightness, lack of sharpness and bad contrast/gamma can all be avoided.

Re:T2 in HDTV quality? How? (4, Interesting)

Max Romantschuk (132276) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709073)

That's great and all, but how are they getting this quality? Was T2 filmed in digital?

Nope, I doubt it was. What they prabably are saying is that the analog masters have been retransferred into a digital format. Analog masters can have great quality and (in theory) infinite dynamic range. The resulting quality of the digital version is all about the conversion. With a better conversion a better digital version can be produced.

My guess, anyway.

Re:T2 in HDTV quality? How? (1)

sxpert (139117) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709099)

it's called 70mm film, such as the one they had at the Gaumont Italie when I saw the movie for the first time...

Yes but... (1)

archetypeone (599370) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709059)

Does this technology make Arnie read his lines better?

A big part of the equation missing (2, Interesting)

Samir Gupta (623651) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709075)

There needs to be a standard for uncompressed digital video, so devices such as video game consoles, or DVD players that play new compressed formats like this MS thing can output a direct digital stream to the TV, without having to convert to analog first. In other words, a consumer electronics version of DVI, or (HD) SDI.

Currently, all consumer digital video standards involve compression, which is the natural choice, if your source is already compressed, such as a DVD or satellite stream. BUT, if you're generating video/graphics on the fly -- OR as in the HD-DVD scenario, if you've already decompressed your video from some proprietary codec, it's senseless to (re)compress on the fly (introducing lossiness) and then decompress it again in the set.

Until such a AV interconnect standard is finalized, this MS DVD initiative will remain the province of PCs only, and those with non-PC based home theatre setups (read: the vast majority) will be left out.

MOD DOWN - Troll (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709140)

Don't encourage this shithead by modding him up. Just because someone sounds like they know what they're talking about, doesn't mean that they do.

Great (5, Funny)

Orlando (12257) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709084)

Yet an other version of the LOTR to buy....

The URLs of the samples (5, Informative)

inaeldi (623679) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709087)

I don't know if these are static or not, but they seem to work.

http://download.microsoft.com/download/b/d/2/bd2ef 814-9577-4d2e-a79e-35615ac7b13f/liquid_1.exe http://download.microsoft.com/download/b/d/2/bd2ef 814-9577-4d2e-a79e-35615ac7b13f/liquid_2.exe http://download.microsoft.com/download/3/1/a/31a2e 752-a74c-4935-a85b-3f3143cb53af/indy.exe http://download.microsoft.com/download/3/1/a/31a2e 752-a74c-4935-a85b-3f3143cb53af/pinball.exe http://download.microsoft.com/download/3/1/a/31a2e 752-a74c-4935-a85b-3f3143cb53af/snowboard.exe

Re:The URLs of the samples (-1)

inaeldi (623679) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709097)

Nevermind, they're not static.

Re:The URLs of the samples (3, Informative)

inaeldi (623679) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709123)

Oh, ok, the urls do work. For some reason when I posted them, it put a space in the path. You just have to get rid of the space.

Re:The URLs of the samples (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709151)

Fat lot of good an "EXE" file is on my Mac. Screw Microsoft.

Re:The URLs of the samples (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709172)

Fat lot of good a Mac will ever be to play these.

They require a P4 1.8 Ghz. Unless you're buying a shiny new dual proc Mac, you're hosed.

Looks like wintel just strided ahead in the media curve.

Re:The URLs of the samples FIXED (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709193)

http://download.microsoft.com/download/b/d/2/bd2ef 814-9577-4d2e-a79e-35615ac7b13f/liquid_1.exe

http://download.microsoft.com/download/b/d/2/bd2 ef814-9577-4d2e-a79e-35615ac7b13f/liquid_2.exe

http://download.microsoft.com/download/3/1/a/31a 2e752-a74c-4935-a85b-3f3143cb53af/indy.exe

http://download.microsoft.com/download/3/1/a/31a 2e752-a74c-4935-a85b-3f3143cb53af/pinball.exe

http://download.microsoft.com/download/3/1/a/31a 2e752-a74c-4935-a85b-3f3143cb53af/snowboard.exe

And you can rename them to .zip to unzip without the stupid .exe hassels.

5-8 mbit? (5, Insightful)

daBass (56811) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709104)

My DVD player can show the current bitrate and 3-4 seems more like it. No wonder this miracle compression algorithm works miracles at 5-8!

Re:5-8 mbit? (1)

klui (457783) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709184)

What title is it? My R2 copy of Macross hovers anywhere from 8-10Mb most of the time.

Yeah right... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5709146)

This will become as popular as wmv files...

Most everyone avoids wmv because they suck due to being incompatable with everything but the microsoft player, are riddled with DRM (and I'll bet you $1000.00 that this "new" codec is full of DRM)and just overall suck.

If it is not a standard and is not OPEN it's crap and nobody cares.

hell Real has a codec that will do HD impressively.. but everyone hates real more than microsoft.

Just downloaded it.. (3, Informative)

sivann (322011) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709166)

I just got the video playing. I have a 1.7Ghz P4, the cpu goes to 100% and the frame rate is below 1 frame/3 seconds in wmplayer9/win2k. Besides that, the quality is very good, but there is nothing astonishing with it. The video is at 6MBps, and if you consider that most mpeg-4 and divx content is encoded at 900Kbits then I don't see the breakthrough. BTW video size is said by researchers in most video conferences in the field that is going to be reduced at most 100% in the next 10 years. So don't expect much from the future. As for the HD-DVD, 1080i is still low (but close) compared to 35mm film.

Spiros Ioannou
--
Image Video & Multimedia Systems Lab.
Department of Electrical & Computer Eng.
National Technical University of Athens

Re:Just downloaded it.. (1)

Neil_London (663792) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709180)

Reduced by 100%, eh? I look forward to watching 0bps video streams in 2013...

No, I don't think so (3, Insightful)

ThoreauHD (213527) | more than 11 years ago | (#5709188)

Media providers are waking up to the fact that Microsoft is going to screw them. No matter how good it is(and this ain't that good), is it worth it when you pay per client connect, per server connect, per play, per minute, per bandwidth compression size, per my foot in their asses...

It's not worth it. Set top boxes, microdevices, PVR, et. al are using linux now. They haven't even settled on a HDTV standard yet, not to mention the fact that only .5% of the population can view a DVD in HDTV quality.

I now give my Swamee prediction:

By the time we can actually see the difference, a better open compression will have emerged. Because most people will have access to the tech. As it is now, nobody does.

So, I wish Microsoft luck. I'm sure some companies will let greed drive them to use their spiffy crackable DRM.. until they realize they just lost all of their unborn children and future to them. But, it'll be fun to watch.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?