Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

Next-Gen DVD Players to Rely on HDMI?

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 8 years ago | from the wouldn't-that-just-take-the-cake dept.

169

RX8 writes "For those thinking about upgrading to either Blu-Ray or HD-DVD when they become available, you may want to think again. According to Designtechnica, the next-generation players will not support 1080i or 1080P and quite possibly not even 720P using the component video connection, it will have to use HDMI. Why? Because of copyright enforcement. Hollywood wants these new players to get rid of component video all together. So if you have an HDTV and want to use these new players, chances are you are out of luck. Neither the Blu-Ray or HD-DVD camps are officially saying anything about this yet, but early players are only showing these high resolutions using the HDMI connection."

cancel ×

169 comments

No problem (1)

ds_job (896062) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760090)

I'll just keep my money in my bank account and spend the time watching my currently owned DVDs / Videos.

Re:No problem (1)

Spacejock (727523) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760411)

These things are going to be as popular as copy-protected CDs. Just wait until the first few thousand people get home with a shiny new disc, whack it into their machine and get a crappy picture and/or a blank screen.
The joke is that the AUD$8.95 DVD is here to stay. People can hold off buying new releases until they're in the bargain bin, so what are the media companies going to release on these discs that we just have to have right now? A couple of months after release nobody cares either way.

Re:No problem (5, Interesting)

badasscat (563442) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760483)

These things are going to be as popular as copy-protected CDs. Just wait until the first few thousand people get home with a shiny new disc, whack it into their machine and get a crappy picture and/or a blank screen.

Ok, I'll bite.

I'm as anti-DRM as anybody, but statements like yours and the article submitter's are more than a little overly dramatic. It's highly likely that "the first few thousand people" who get home with their shiny new discs will have HDMI inputs in their TV's - it's difficult to buy an HDTV these days without one and has been for about the last 5 years. Even my $600 Samsung CRT HDTV has a DVI input, which is fully compatible with HDMI (HDMI is just DVI with audio, so all it takes is a cable with HDMI on one end and DVI on the other to make it work).

The earliest HDTV's only had component inputs. But with the rate HDTV's sold in the early days vs. the rate they're selling now, I'd wager that the vast majority of HDTV's in homes are HDMI-capable. Even many early adopters have probably upgraded their sets by now with larger models that perform better, have more inputs and cost a lot less. HDTV has been around for around 10 years, remember. It's not a new technology anymore.

The joke is that the AUD$8.95 DVD is here to stay.

Yeah, you don't have an HDTV, I guess. (I admit, I don't know what the HD situation is in Australia. But here in the US, it's almost difficult to buy a non-HD set anymore.)

These new formats are specifically for people with high definition displays. DVD is not good enough for those people. You're talking the difference between 720x480 (and that's assuming the disc is anamorphic, otherwise it's more like 480x360) and 1920x1080. That's a huge difference, and it's the entire reason these people bought HDTV's in the first place. If they didn't want that extra resolution, they would have just stuck with standard-def. So there is a large market for these new formats; if you spend $2,000-$3,000 on a TV, you want a format that takes advantage of it.

Standard-def formats will continue to exist, just as standard-def TV continues to exist now. It's no "joke", and you're not saying anything anyone doesn't know. 5-10 years ago you probably would have said "the joke is that VHS is here to stay" in a discussion about the new DVD format. Change doesn't come overnight. But once you see the difference 1080i or 1080p makes over standard definition TV, it's very hard to go back.

Now, all that said, I give it a matter of months before some Chinese or Taiwanese company comes out with an HD-DVD or Blu-Ray player that outputs full resolution over component. It'll be one of those "oops!" moments that the manufacturer claims was unintentional but results in a run on that particular model. Eventually, everyone will be doing it... just as happened with region codes on DVD players.

Re:No problem (1)

metamatic (202216) | more than 8 years ago | (#14761036)

DVD is not good enough for those people. You're talking the difference between 720x480 (and that's assuming the disc is anamorphic, otherwise it's more like 480x360) and 1920x1080. That's a huge difference, and it's the entire reason these people bought HDTV's in the first place. If they didn't want that extra resolution, they would have just stuck with standard-def.

As someone with a DVD player with HDMI and a Faroudja upscaler, and an HDTV with HDMI, I think you're wrong.

I wanted my TV to do DVD resolution or better and have a digital tuner, be widescreen for movies, and be flat. I ended up with an HDTV because that's what you have to get to get those things. I didn't particularly care about the ability to watch TV in HD, because the quality of US TV is low enough that the resolution is the least of its problems.

That said, a good DVD upscaled by a good upscaler is indistinguishable from the quality of a real 720p HDTV signal on my set. Maybe my 32" set is too small, or I don't sit close enough to it. When I can see film grain and fingerprints on set props on movie DVDs, I have to ask myself whether I really want more resolution.

Re:No problem (1)

Golias (176380) | more than 8 years ago | (#14761262)

That said, a good DVD upscaled by a good upscaler is indistinguishable from the quality of a real 720p HDTV signal on my set. Maybe my 32" set is too small, or I don't sit close enough to it. When I can see film grain and fingerprints on set props on movie DVDs, I have to ask myself whether I really want more resolution.

I have a 119" 720p projector, and you will be pleased to hear that the difference between HDTV (including broadcasts in native 720p) vs. well-upscaled anamorphic DVD is very, very subtle.

To be honest, I notice the "grain" of the reflective coating on my projection screen more than the pixilation of the DVD image, and I gotta be pretty damn close to the screen while looking at a nearly-all-white image (such as the backgrounds for my March of the Penguins DVD) to even preceive that.

DVD, with good upscale logic, looks DAMN GOOD on an HDTV set. Archiving it on a hard drive fills 5-8 GB without any further compression, and it was within my means to archive pretty much my entire DVD collection that way. With the emerging high-def DVD formats, that will no longer be practical, so I don't even care what protection they employ against ripping & copying, because I probably won't bother to buy them in the first place.

Re:No problem (1)

Sethb (9355) | more than 8 years ago | (#14761092)

My 53" Panasonic RPTV (cost me $1800 at the time) is less than four years old, and it didn't come with any HD inputs other than Component, and there are a whole lotta people with sets like me. Yes, I was an early adopter of HD, but if the studios think that wives are going to let their husbands replace their first generation HDTVs already, they've got another thing coming.

Though, honestly, for the majority of movies, HD doesn't have all that much WOW to it. I have HD HBO and Cinemax now, and due to the depth of focus of most things shot on film, the background is usually somewhat blurred, so it doesn't POP at you the way things shot on HD video do.

Sure, it looks better (with the possible exception of some CGI-effects-laden movies, where the HD simply shows the flaws), but not so much better that I can justify buying a new TV and a new DVD player (already have a Farjouda chipset player now). Movies that are pure CGI, such as Pixar stuff, do look great in HD though.

Re:No problem (1)

Tweekster (949766) | more than 8 years ago | (#14761238)

I would like to point out... most people are simply not buying HDTV's. Your standard plain vanilla TV is still being sold en masse. And will continue to for years to come. So what now, my new dvd player wont play on a TV a year old... Yeah that will really fly with consumers.

The real problem is HDCP (3, Informative)

Shawn Parr (712602) | more than 8 years ago | (#14761480)

DVI and HDMI can be converted back and forth very easily. It is a dongle basically.

But not all HDMI and DVI TV's incorporate HDCP, which is the copy protection system.

So even people with HD TVs with HDMI will not be able to use these new formats at full resolution unless they have a relatively new set that has HDCP, and it is compatible with whatever HDMI spec (did you know there are different specs? 1.1, 1.3?) and the HDCP spec used by the new systems.

Imagine buying a HDTV this summer, then for Christmas getting a BR player that doesn't work full quality because your set doesn't have HDMI 1.3 and whatever current version of HDCP...

This is a huge issue, and even the early adopters are getting fidgety about it. While some people may switch out their whole systems, at this point it will be a minority by far. Even on the high end hi-fi and videophile forums there is a lot of discussion of people not being happy about this.

Eventually we may run into a situation where the hardware manufacturers stop caving into the producers demands if we have a situation where even the typical early adopters will not bite.

Solution? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14760094)

buy an HDCP stripper and HDMI to component convertor. you just know some guy in China is working on one right now.

Re:Solution? (1)

gabebear (251933) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760504)

Re:Solution? (1)

MrPeavs (890124) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760547)

That one is ammong the only one in existance and as you can see, it ain't cheap. It is almost as much as the entry level Toshiba HD-DVD player.

They are hard to find because of the DMCA and as these new gen DVD players start hitting the street, look for these devices to be hunted down.

Re:Solution? (1)

gabebear (251933) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760613)

"They are hard to find because of the DMCA and as these new gen DVD players start hitting the street, look for these devices to be hunted down."

As demand rises, so will supply, which will bring the price down unless they have a way to stop these things from being produced. It's also probable that this first batch of them aren't using keys cloned from actual TVs, so these strippers are probably not going to work with actual HD-DVD/Blu-Ray players.

Re:Solution? (1)

tgd (2822) | more than 8 years ago | (#14761055)

They don't need to be hunted down -- every HDCP endpoint has its own key, and those keys can be revoked. Unless the key on one of those is a stolen Sony key or something, they'll just add it to the revokation list in the media and your very expensive box stops working.

Re:Solution? (1)

MrPeavs (890124) | more than 8 years ago | (#14761452)

Which would be hunted down... they are going to do their best to find all these and block them and even take level action if they can, depending on the countries laws where they are made and sold.

Re:Solution? (1)

TheSHAD0W (258774) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760897)

Unfortunately, that'll probably only convert an unencoded data stream. I doubt it'll convert encrypted video.

On the other hand, we may be seeing ones that'll do so in the future. They may be difficult to find, and illegal... But all it takes is one person who has one to rip the video and upload it.

Serious "LITTLE" problem? (2, Insightful)

DamnedNice (955496) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760108)

If this thing goes through, somebody's gonna come up with a little adapter box that'll convert it into S-video. That can be converted to composite / RCA. Problem solved.

"This is a major dilemma, and no one is talking about it" -- THIS is the big thing. We have to be heard to stop things like this. Sure, there's tons of conversation to follow on this thread, but we need to post elsewhere about this as well. I suggest as many people blog about it as possible. I know I will.

Re:Serious "LITTLE" problem? (2, Interesting)

Mustang Matt (133426) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760121)

Not likely as the real reason their limiting it to HDMI is because it's digital and it's encrypted.

So sure you could split the ecrypted signal into s-video or whatever other form you want, but it's not going to show the video that you want to see on the screen.

So here's my question... Analog inputs still work, but are in lower resolution. How do the analog inputs running in low res mode compare to a current generation DVD running over analog inputs?

Re:Serious "LITTLE" problem? (1)

Alioth (221270) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760252)

The serious pirates will of course take the signal from the LCD controller where it's still high quality, high resolution.

Re:Serious "LITTLE" problem? (5, Insightful)

Gadzinka (256729) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760382)

No, the serious pirates can for example buy "magic box" from countries outside of DMCA/EUCD reach, that will decrypt HDMI signal using the weaknesses found in the HDCP [wikipedia.org] before it even was implemented in a single device.

It will be just like someone at Ars Technica [arstechnica.com] wrote: your HD player sometimes won't play your legal HD content on your computer or HDTV. But it will always play illegaly downloaded HD content from the Internet -- talk about shooting yourself in a foot.

Robert

Customs (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 8 years ago | (#14761193)

No, the serious pirates can for example buy "magic box" from countries outside of DMCA/EUCD reach

Unless they'll be using it outside of DMCA/EUCD reach, they'll have to deal with customs. Or do you claim that HDCP black boxes will be smuggled like cocaine?

Re:Serious "LITTLE" problem? (1)

Golias (176380) | more than 8 years ago | (#14761318)

It will be just like someone at Ars Technica wrote: your HD player sometimes won't play your legal HD content on your computer or HDTV. But it will always play illegaly downloaded HD content from the Internet -- talk about shooting yourself in a foot.


I'm having that exact problem now with a conventional DVD that uses Macrovision's new "Ripguard" technology.

My DVD of "Cowboy Beebop Remix, Volume 4" will not even play on my Mac DVD player, however there are severall good rip programs out there which will completely bypass Ripguard and create a perfect copy of my DVD which plays perfectly on my Mac, and allows me to burn a DL DVD which will play on pretty much everything.

Re:Serious "LITTLE" problem? (1)

mrchaotica (681592) | more than 8 years ago | (#14761559)

however there are severall good rip programs out there which will completely bypass Ripguard and create a perfect copy of my DVD which plays perfectly on my Mac, and allows me to burn a DL DVD which will play on pretty much everything.
Got an example? I've been having trouble finding them for the Mac. I can make an MEPG4 with Handbrake, but I haven't succeeded in making a backup DVD.

Re:Serious "LITTLE" problem? (4, Interesting)

vnsnes (301511) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760136)

Not S-Video, but this device [engadget.com] will do the trick.

Re:Serious "LITTLE" problem? (1)

nbert (785663) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760285)

I wish I had mod points for parent.

But as the article about the DVIMAGIC device points out, this will very likely be added to the key revocation list and it will not even affect any "legitimate" uses, because afaik Spatz only produces the DVIMAGIC and the key was officially obtained by them, so it's not like the key is stolen from some big TV producer.

Re:Serious "LITTLE" problem? (1)

Ossifer (703813) | more than 8 years ago | (#14761389)

It's very likely key revocation lists will be used to force consumers to purchase new equipment , paying new HDCP licensing fees, etc.

I don't think you get it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14760448)

RCA composite / S-Video are 480i signals. If all you're getting out of your next gen DVDs is 480i, there's no point to upgrade from first gen DVDs. Also, the next gen DVD players definately will support 480i output through legacy connections. What they WON'T support is high quality component connections. If you bought an expensive 1080p TV with component inputs, it won't do you any good at all; you'll have to buy a new more expensive TV with component connections and smart DRM.

Re:Serious "LITTLE" problem? (1)

fyonn (115426) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760665)

If this thing goes through, somebody's gonna come up with a little adapter box that'll convert it into S-video. That can be converted to composite / RCA. Problem solved.

I've no doubt that the next gen dvdp's will have RCA (as in composite) and svideo output's on them when they ship anyway. but those output's don't support high def anyway, so they don't care.

There are already boxes that take a HDCP encrypted DVI input and spit out a an unencrypted DVI output, and that's much better.

The thing is, this isn't news. haven't we all* known that this would be the case for quite some time? I certainly have and my standard gen dvd player even has a HDCP supporting DVI output and all HDTV's sold recently should have HDMI or hdcp supporting DVI ports for ages.

dave

* where all = all the people who have been following HD/HD-DVD/Blu-ray in any sense

I'll be the first to say it... (3, Insightful)

Dance_Dance_Karnov (793804) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760116)

This will do nothing to discourage the pirate, and will only serve to annoy and alienate paying customers.

Re:I'll be the first to say it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14760143)

HDMI is already a dead duck... and this will do nothing to prevent stuff being ripped. Geeks on slashdot understand this (or certainly should) -- and so does the content industry.

What it will do is further condition customers into accepting restrictions, and msot importantly force HDMI into television, further extending the legal fingers (and consequently conttol) of the content industry deeper into the consumer electronics industry.

Re:I'll be the first to say it... (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760334)

Exactly, the pirates don't care about getting the 1080p version anyway. It takes too long to transfer over the internet. pirates don't care about resolution. that's why you see tons of cam versions on the internet which are such bad quality that it's laughable. They'll just copy the low res signal coming out of the component cables, or stick to copying the DVD versions, which with the way this tech is going, will be available for a very long time to come.

Re:I'll be the first to say it... (1)

jZnat (793348) | more than 8 years ago | (#14761369)

I guess you're too young to know this, but real movie pirates are selling physical DVDs at low prices. It's like high quality bootlegging. These people are making good money off of this, yet all this BS DRM isn't going to stop them in the least. People who upload ripped movies and shit aren't pirates; they're copyright infringers at most. They're not even making money off of said movies at least 99% of the time...

Re:I'll be the first to say it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14760367)

They just don't care. They're not after pirate, they just want people to change their TV set

Re:I'll be the first to say it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14760703)

To that I add, this is a big shit sandwich, and every paying consumer's going to have to take a bite.

This is ribiculious... (4, Insightful)

Manip (656104) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760120)

What are these copyright protection schemes trying to accomplish? ... 99% of consumers *don't* copy their DVDs, 99% of consumers *don't* upload their DVDs to the internet ... But do you know who this hardware will affect? 99% of consumers.

The last 1% of consumers who do backup / upload will continue to do so regardless of the protection. All it takes is a single producer to have a accidental backdoor (see X-Box exploits via a game).

Further more why are they protecting the extra quality so vigorously? From what I've seen you have get non-HD pictures without any kind of protection, but for HD you need all this crazy stuff... But who is crazy enough to upload a full quality HD movie on the 'net?

I think the copyright holders are going to KILL psychical media far faster than it otherwise would and push consumers towards platforms like iTunes for their video.

Re:This is ribiculious... (3, Insightful)

jonwil (467024) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760223)

Copy protection is (increasingly) designed to stop the casual copiers.
For example, the people who borrow a CD off a mate and rip it to their MP3 player instead of buying the CD.
Or the people who record episodes of TV shows with a DVD recorder instead of buying the DVD box set.
Or the people who buy a new computer with a new version of windows or office or some other software package and decide to install it on all their other computers as well.

Re:This is ribiculious... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14761228)

Copy protection is (increasingly) designed to stop the casual copiers.

Some portion of the casual copiers get frustrated at not being able to do what they want with what they own (yes, own), and resort to downloading to get an unencumbered copy. Once they've done that a few times, they start to wonder why they buy it in the first place, and start skipping that step.

Re:This is ribiculious... (1)

ObsessiveMathsFreak (773371) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760319)

It's not about controlling that 1% of consumers. It's about reinforcing the idea of THIS DVD IS BELONGS TO THE STUDIO NOT YOU", in the minds of the other 99%.

These restrictions are required to keep people fearful of the mighty power of the studios, to spook them into not downloading films and music. "If they can do this to the TV makers, just think what they can do to me!"

Re:This is ribiculious... (1)

mshurpik (198339) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760739)

HDMI is scary because five-channel component is still brand new for most people. We're talking about people who may not even care if their previous set was in stereo. Now turn around and these people are getting 8-10 RCA's run up the inside of the wall, which equates to massive bandwidth and professional quality. The industry's reaction? To treat RCA like crack. Imagine sitting on someone's living room floor, crimping RCA cables and trying to explain how the're illegal and won't work. It's embarrassing for everyone.

The replacement HDMI cable is fragile and it falls out of the plug. It costs $50 to $200 and can't be homemade. Thus, nobody wants to touch an HDMI cable. Nobody likes them - the customers, the vendors, the installers. Granted, they're more convenient - IF they don't break. They're like the smelly condoms of the entertainment world.

             

Re:This is ribiculious... (1)

adawg (690742) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760353)

Indeed, I think part of the studios' strategy is to kill off physical media. Didn't Gates recently say that this will be the last ever format war before everything is distributed electronically?

Re:This is ribiculious... (3, Insightful)

pla (258480) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760397)

All it takes is a single producer to have a accidental backdoor

HDCP includes key revocation lists. One backdoor will work for all content predating the discovery of a flaw, but as soon as you try to play something newer with the compromised device added to its list, you lose the ability to play content dependant on the compromised device (even older content - CRLs/KRLs apply retroactively).

That might well make you wonder what happens when someone like Sony or Toshiba eventually accidentally release a device with a flaw... Would Hollywood have the balls to make a million TVs go black with one stoke of their magic red pen?


Though, on re-reading your comment, it occurs to me you may have meant something different - That once a compromise occurs, you can use it to transcode all earlier content, making revocation irrelevant? On that, I would agree with you, with one slight problem - Storage and playback. Sure, you could keep a few of your favorite movies on your HDD, but HD movies eat a LOT of bytes. And even then, you could only play it back on your computer, since any standalone device capable of playing it would bring you back to the HDCP problem you wanted to get around in the first place.

Re:This is ribiculious... (1)

mattermite (100724) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760543)

The key revocation lists are the scariest part of all of this for everyone involved, it seems. What does happen when Toshiba, for exmaple, makes a device with a flaw, or perhaps their product isn't flawed but it's broken due to a fundamentally flawed protection system? If Hollywood has an itchy trigger finger and decides to use the key revocation, I would suspect that Toshiba would be liable to consumers for all of the devices affected (if not they really should be.) This puts Toshiba in a very difficult position, particularly if the system is flawed, their liability (and potentially a very large one) is in the hands of Hollywood.

Would any such company be comfortable putting themselves in this position, particularly after someone's already taken a hit for it? Furthermore, without knowing the specifics of how the key revocation works, it's at least concievable that someone might figure out how to encode these lists in media of some type. You could find one day that you've put a disc into your DVD player that's added every key in existence to the player's list because someone thought it would be amusing. Or some media file on the internet did the so when you tried to watch it, and now your monitor doesn't work right anymore (though that's hardly out of the realm of possiblity now.)

Re:This is ribiculious... (1)

jZnat (793348) | more than 8 years ago | (#14761397)

I'm sure they'll waive liability in some obscure enclosed EULA that wouldn't hold up in court.

Re:This is ribiculious... (1)

gabebear (251933) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760562)

Key revocation lists are definately not the magic bullet to stop pirates. If the key for any popular TV becomes know then the studios have the choice of pissing off(and getting sued by) a LOT of customers, or dealing with the pirates.

Also, there is nothing stopping you from transcoding the movie back into any format that will play on HD-DVD/Blu-Ray players(or maybe just stripping AACS from the files). Once Blu-Ray burners become common I'm sure it will be a trivial task to pirate HD movies.

Re:This is ribiculious... (1)

PetiePooo (606423) | more than 8 years ago | (#14761056)

That might well make you wonder what happens when someone like Sony or Toshiba eventually accidentally release a device with a flaw... Would Hollywood have the balls to make a million TVs go black with one stoke of their magic red pen?

The HDCP Speicification [digital-cp.com] (PDF warning), available from Digital Content Protection, LLC [digital-cp.com] describes the copy protection mechanism in detail, including the key revocation mechanism. They don't turn keys off per brand-name, as many here assume. Each piece of electronics equipment has its own key.

To summarize, the key vector is a 40-bit word that contains 20 zeros and 20 ones. That means there are [40:20] ("40 choose 20") combinations, or roughly 137 billion unique keys, enough for each CE equipment. Sender and receiver exchange key vectors and, using secret tables, compute a common 56-bit secret. To verify that they have the same sacret, the receiver sends a hash back to the sender, then waits for a stream. That effectively makes the time required to verify a valid key vector cost prohibitive for a brute force attempt, at least on the receiver side. Now, if someone wanted to brute-force a sender, it may be easier, but hackers want to be able to decode, not encode.

The key tables, electrical traces, timeouts, and several other tangible things that could be used to hack a link or transceiver are mandated and audited by DCP before they grant a license for the real keys. In all, it looked pretty air tight in my review. The media controllers seem to have learned from past mistakes and are employing smart people now to develop their content protection schemes. Strong encryption is becoming the norm...

Re:This is ribiculious... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14760513)

who is crazy enough to upload a full quality HD movie on the 'net

Anybody with a broadband connection.

Highly compressed HD (with codec based on mpeg4 ASP like Xvid/WMV or AVP like x264/Nero) uses *less* bandwidth than legacy mpeg2 dvd...(just a few megs for decent quality)
which means full HD quality movies are readily available under 4GB on the internet...

browse a torrent site for HDTV or the usenet group alt.binaries.hdtv, you'll be amazed by the number of full movies available in HD, the source being re-encoded HDTV like HBO or even straight (drm removed) commercialy-wmv-distributed movies like Terminator 2

FYI, WMVHD comes on DVD:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/cont ent_provider/film/dvd.aspx [microsoft.com]

Things like IMAX documentaries come with *both* 720p and 1080p on a sinbgle DVD, the 1080p version weighs something like 2GB.

Re:This is ribiculious... (3, Interesting)

maxpublic (450413) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760531)

You're talking about the movie/TV industry and assuming that the primary motivation of the people who actually run things is centered about money. It isn't, and hasn't been, for a very, very long time. These people are almost solely motivated by POWER - the power to decide what you can and cannot watch, and under what circumstances. They want control far more than they want money; they're absolutely fucking obsessed with it.

I've noticed that outsiders have a difficult time understanding this concept. They seem to think that the public somehow decides which shows get on the air and which do not, or which shows stay on the air and which do not, despite copious amounts of evidence to the contrary. They also seem to think that market forces have something to do with the process, a load of horseshit that anyone who actually works within the industry will recognize by the stink right away.

First rule: if it's ever about money OR power, power wins. Period. End of discussion. Fuck the market, fuck the revenue losses, fuck what the public thinks, it's power uber alles, and all the way. Once you grasp that you suddenly begin to understand why a host of highly-rated shows have been inexplicably canceled over the years, while other real losers have managed to hang on season after season. Profitable shows get cancelled because someone in authority doesn't like the show, or doesn't like someone on the show, and feels like sticking the knife in just to prove that he has a big dick; unprofitable shows hang on because the reverse is true - someone in power likes the show, or is getting regular blowjobs from the lead actress, or whatever it is that floats their boat.

If you want a semi-famous example, just look at Gail Berman's track record at Fox. She's been directly responsible for the untimely deaths of more than a half-dozen profitable shows simply for personal reasons (and is thought to have been involved in putting a half-dozen more into the coffin as well). She kills shows mainly because she harbors a seething hatred for beautiful young actresses who get a lot of attention, despite the fact that none of these actresses has ever done a thing to Ms. Berman. Her behavior, and the reasons for her behavior, are so well-known it's a running joke in the industry. This one person is in large part responsible for the reason why Fox is known as 'The Place Good Shows Go to Die'.

So when you see the movie/TV industry propose something which will do nothing at all about piracy, yet will piss off most of their customers, and you ask why they'd even consider such a thing, the answer is simple: it's about power. Money has nothing to do with it. The money doesn't matter because the obsession with power supercedes it. Always.

The folks who run the movie/TV industry have always been little tin-pot dictators, and unchallenged little tin-pot dictators, up until the point that broadband made it possible for the consumer to give them a big "fuck you, assholes" - even if it was only a minority of consumers. Think of how much they hated the VCR and how hard they fought it; despite the fact that the VCR meant huge new potential revenues, it also meant a loss of CONTROL - control over WHEN people watched shows. Not that it mattered for shit to the bottom line when they watched a show, but the very idea that Joe and Jane Consumer could make the choice for themselves was utter blasphemy. How dare those little fucking proles think that the choice of when to watch a show was theirs to make?

Now take that hatred over that loss of control and apply it to the current broadband internet situation and imagine just what sort of frothing, enraged lunatics you're dealing with. Again, huge profits are just waiting to be made, but the price is a big loss of power; so guess which concern is more important? They'll do anything and everything to stop YOU from taking back some of the power they've held against you since TV was first invented, and to hell with profitability. As far as they're concerned you're the serf, they're the nobility, and don't you ever fucking forget that. Serfs don't get to decide shit; serfs do what they're told and they don't talk back.

The movie/TV industry is utterly insane at the upper management level. The decision makers are sociopathic twats of the worst sort, the kind of folks who'd welcome a DRM'd police state as their own personal utopia. The only reason they've been able to get away with this crap up until the widespread proliferation of the internet is because until now you've either had the choice to watch whatever the fuck they decided to let you watch, or nothing at all. Now that TV viewing is in decline (and has been, since the year 2000) they're going absolutely apeshit over all you insubordinate assholes who spend your time on the internet instead of watching whatever drivel happens to be on the tube - or worse, watching that drivel sans commercials, and whenever you happen to feel like it, on that blasted, infernal, satan-spawned internet.

They'll burn themselves to the ground financially before they give up one more iota of power; the VCR was insult enough, so far as they're concerned. That's how fucking crazy they are, and how little market forces apply in the strange little world of movies and TV.

Max

Re:This is ribiculious... (1)

thedletterman (926787) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760666)

With years of experience as a media consulant to such illustrious bodies as NATAS. Yes, that's satan backwards... the National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences.. they give out the Emmy awards. I can tell you this rant is spot on. It not only applies to the movie industry and television but music as well. Music moguls and most musicians are far less interested in making money as they are in advancing ideological agendas to control and influence popular culture. Television producers make no effort of estimating how much advertising revenue a season of a show will capture, instead they examine how viewing the show affects the people who watch it.

Re:This is ribiculious... (1)

pubjames (468013) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760658)

Well said.

These copyright holders will have lost more money from me because of copyright restrictions than they gain.

My local DVD rental store is great and has interesting films from all over the world. But very often I can't rent the DVDs because of zoning issues. And I can't be the only one that's been at an airport and thought, hey I'll buy a DVD to watch on my laptop on the flight, ony to remember that I'm in the wrong zone. The stupid thing is people who want to copy the films can do so quite easily, and yet me, someone who is actually happy to purchase them, is provented from doing so.

Who you gonna call? (1)

MarkGriz (520778) | more than 8 years ago | (#14761083)

"I think the copyright holders are going to KILL psychical media far faster than it otherwise would..."

So the movie studios are like Ghostbusters?

Get thos (1)

DavidHOzAu (925585) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760123)

If they think everyone will get the latest-and-greatest TV just so they can watch DVDs with a good signal, they mustn't live in the real world. Furthermore, they must be blind if they think every HDCP 'compatible' TV out there is going to listen to every pin and stick 100% to the standard. I think I'll just import a hardware-based HDMI-to-YUV connector from Russia.

If a device doesn't work with my TV, I won't buy it; I have no reason to. Simple as that.

Re:Get those dongles from Russia (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14760151)

^^ Submit button got pressed before I could fix the title.

Re:Get those dongles from Russia (1)

Briareos (21163) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760191)

I guess "Ghettos" would be a better description for the areas those industry professionals that cooked up these specs must live in - as high as they must be on drugs...

The formats will flop (4, Insightful)

Zork the Almighty (599344) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760126)

This article would have been better titled: "Next-Gen DVD Formats Will Flop" because that is exactly what is going to happen. They've got a small market of people willing to replace all of their gear as it is, and now they have introduced compatibility problems on purpose with these inane restrictions. Nevermind the fact that they've got two completely incompatible formats, one of which is guaranteed to fail. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot. The word of mouth on these things will be how "so-and-so spent gobs of money and it didn't work".

Re:The formats will flop (4, Interesting)

zerocool^ (112121) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760574)


Right. I cannot possibly be the only one without all this next generation hi-def crap. I mean, it's all you hear about, it's all you see advertised, but 90% of america CANNOT all be spending $2300 on a TV. It's just not happening.

I'm still rockin' my 20" TV I've had since I went to college (it's dorm sized) even though I now have my own townhouse, etc. My TV at best has a composite input (like, standard RCA), and my stereo is Dolby Digital 5.1, minus the .1 (no subwoofers in townhouses - the 2 year old makes enough noise to annoy the neighbors). My equipment is all old, with the exception of the Tivo, which is new but doesn't have any functionality over an old device - it outputs standard L/R RCA for sound and composite RCA for video. Plus, my cable signal is far from Digital - my cable company doesn't even offer digital cable. At best, it's slightly grainy regular cable, and the closer you get to channel 1, the worse it gets (no PBS for me, no antiques roadshow, and CBS is pretty fuzzy, so no Criminal Minds or new CSI).

And you know what? My next upgrade is going to be a TV in the 32-36" range. Yep, appearantly, they still exist, but Circuit City, Best Buy, and all the retailers don't advertise them and refuse to help you with one - they want to push you into the $2000 Hi-Def flat screen yada yada widescreen next-gen high-profit-margin. No Thank You, I'm on a budget of probably $600, which believe it or not will buy a decent 36" or a pretty good 32", something with at least componant and s-video inputs.

But, it's probably going to be 5-10 years before I switch to something that can do 1080i or 720p. I mean, I'm sure it looks great, but I'm a fan of "looks good enough". Besides, I just got glasses, so to me, even regular 360 lines of resolution over an RCA cable looks fantastic, whereas 2 months ago, even it looked blurry. See? I just got Hi-Def with a trip to the optomitrist!

Someone has told these people that everyone on earth has or is getting a High-Def TV, and multiple devices that can display to it, along with multiple things encoded in hi-def. The problem with this is that it's just not true. It's too expensive; no one can decide on a standard (720p, 720i, 1080i, 1080p, 480p, HDMI, component, DVI, VGA, etc etc); and no one wants to repurchase their collection of DVDs.

Thanks, but no thanks. Get your ducks in a row, get the prices down for those of us who aren't living on credit cards and conspicuous consumption, find a standard, and make it backwards compatable. Then we'll talk.

~Will

Got it in one. (1)

OmniGeek (72743) | more than 8 years ago | (#14761111)

My 27" picked-up-off-the-curb-and-fixed-a-bad-solder-join t TV has served me well for a decade now; when the vertical hold finally goes out, I'll swap it for a "new"(er) off-the-curb TV provided by one of those gotta-have-HDTV folks in the neighborhood. Repairing to the component level is FUN! (Besides, who really needs HD for the crap that passes for television programming? A decent analog set does fine, works with cable and my cheap DVD player, and will continue to do so for a long time.)

I'll buy an HDTV when there's something SO worth watching on a frequent basis that it exceeds the value of the books I read and the time I spend with my family. (Try reading aloud to your spouse while s/he does the dishes, or vice versa -- now, THAT'S entertainment!)

Which is why I agree with the parent post that these media formats are in serious trouble...

SSDD (1)

Mustang Matt (133426) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760132)

What stops someone from sticking a video camera on a tripod and recording a TV? Nothing.

Re:SSDD (1)

micpp (818596) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760197)

Well, nothing stops you from just taking the 480p output, except the lack of quality. I can't imagine pointing a camera at the screen would provide much in the way of quality.

Re:SSDD (1)

Alioth (221270) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760259)

The internet bootleggers will of course just use the 480p output. Already bootlegged DVDs on BitTorrent are often either converted to MPEG-4 at a lower bit rate or are converted from a 7GB dual layer DVD format to a 4GB single layer format. Most people don't really care that much to be bothered.

Re:SSDD (1)

dgtangman (140663) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760292)

This is called the "analog hole", and our friends at the MPAA are lobbying Congress to fix that problem. If they have their way, it will be illegal to make a video camera that can record a copy-protected image off the screen. To make that work, it will have to be illegal to import uncertified televisions (because they might strip the signal that tells the camera the image is not recordable) and uncertified video cameras that might ignore the signal. That will fix the problem, because all piracy happens at home, doesn't it?

Re:SSDD (1)

Jarlsberg (643324) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760565)

Even if all that came to pass, there's nothing to stop the alleged pirates from hooking up the dvd to a projector and copy the output from the canvas. :)

Re:SSDD (1)

thedletterman (926787) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760691)

It's a good thing all my bootleg DVDs come from Pakistan.

Hmmm, $thousands on new hardware, or piracy? (3, Insightful)

hattig (47930) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760160)

These companies are so focused on restricting the usability of their products to protect imagined revenues that they aren't seeing the big picture - if there is a better, more usable, accessible, cheaper alternative available, people will use that.

The quality of piracy has gone up massively with internet distribution. Once pirates work out a system for ripping HD-DVDs and BluRay (and they will), then they can offer high quality films that will work on computers, older HDTV sets that people invested a lot in, and so on.

Functionality is a massive selling point, enough to make even people that actually do want to pay a fair price for the real thing think about getting the more functional version.

Sadly all this expensive work spent on restricting users will not bring in much more revenue to the companies - those people mainly pirate because they can't afford it otherwise, or wouldn't pay for it being stingy bastards. Instead they'll manage on the DVD resolution version - quality isn't a big issue for them either - students can't afford HDTV systems, stingy people have 20 year old televisions.

Re:Hmmm, $thousands on new hardware, or piracy? (1)

wheany (460585) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760315)

LA-LA-LA-LA! I CAN'T HEAR YOU, PIRATE!

(i'm using so many caps because i am yelling, you silly filter)

Re:Hmmm, $thousands on new hardware, or piracy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14760465)

Polly want a cracker*?

* skillz in 1337 copy protection removal desirable

Next Generation Players Bound To Fail (3, Insightful)

omegashenron (942375) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760162)

Seriously, if this is the case, who is going to waste their money and buy one of these players?.

Consumers will be outraged (even the stupid ones). After all lets see what there is to consider:

  • Choose a format you want and buy the player but to get all available titles you will really need to fork out cash for both players - who is going to do this?
  • Discover that after you buy your two shiny new players that they will not work with your existing HDTV so fork out more cash for a new HDTV.

I think many retailers will end up experiencing a large increase in returned AV equipment in the coming years so much so that perhaps some retailers may decide to stop stocking such products or at least pick stock that is known to work together.

As for me, I probably wont worry about upgrading because my existing DVD collection is sufficiently entertaining and the quality of movies being released now days is simply appalling. In the end it's just not worth it.

Re:Next Generation Players Bound To Fail (5, Insightful)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760364)

3. You realize that after you buy both machines and even though you have a TV with HDMI, that it only has 1 HDMI port, and you have to switch the players back and forth every time you want to play a disc of a different format.

Re:Next Generation Players Bound To Fail (1)

kannibal_klown (531544) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760706)

3. You realize that after you buy both machines and even though you have a TV with HDMI, that it only has 1 HDMI port, and you have to switch the players back and forth every time you want to play a disc of a different format.


OR if you have HDTV through Digital Cable or Satellite.

That's the biggest sticking point with me. I watch a DVD per week (more if I'm on holiday) but I watch HD Television every day. This will be a pain to switch back-and-forth if I want High Def movies as well.

Did they not learn the last time?? (1)

brunes69 (86786) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760164)

CSS did nothing to stop pirating of DVDs. Neither did restricting composite outs on DVD players.

My question is, who are the asshats making this decision, because they obviously have no technical background. Anyone who knows anything knows that you don't need any composite outs or decryption schemes to make a bit-for-bit copy of anything. As soon as the first PC Blue-Ray/HD-DVD drive hits the shelves, you will be able to copy these movies. That simple.

(Sure, you may not have anything to copy them *onto*, but that isn't the point. There is nothing to copy them onto if you record them at full resolution via the composite outputs either).

Re:Did they not learn the last time?? (1)

tgd (2822) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760493)

CSS was never intended to prevent copying of DVDs, it was intended to prevent copying of DVD players.

This always struck me as being pretty obvious, but some people just don't seem to get it. If it was meant to prevent copying the DVD, why would, say, copying the DVD work fine?

Re:Did they not learn the last time?? (1)

brunes69 (86786) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760697)

Er.... why would someone want to copy a DVD player?

It would cost more in parts and labour then it would be to go just buy one.

This was true when they were first released, and is even more true now.

Unless you are talking about a software player? In which case you would just be plain wrong, CSS encryption does not protect the software binaries in any way from pirating.

Re:Did they not learn the last time?? (1)

tgd (2822) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760834)

Why? Because mass produced unlicensed knockoffs years ago could've decimated the ability for companies like Sony to build them.

It happened anyway, but it helped prevent unlicensed players from entering hte market the better part of a decade. This meant that region controls were appropriately enforced and compatibility was maintained.

And CSS does prevent unlicensed players from playing protected content -- although there are a lot of illegal players out there using DeCSS.

Re:Did they not learn the last time?? (1)

jZnat (793348) | more than 8 years ago | (#14761464)

But something like DVD players would have most certainly been patented, so cheap knock-offs would've been illegal without licensing anyways...

HDMI or HDCP? (1)

prefect42 (141309) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760165)

HDMI is unlikely to be required, HDCP over DVI should be fine. The european 'HD Ready' badge only requires HDCP not HDMI.

There are already boxes out there that remove the HDCP, but they'll get their certs revoked and cease to work in future I'd guess.

Re:HDMI or HDCP? (1)

gutnor (872759) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760518)

'HD Ready' means that your "display device" is capable to process and display HD signals. (http://www.eicta.org/press.asp?level2=24&level1=6 &level0=1&year=2005&docid=398 [eicta.org] )

The problem here is simply that your new HD/BD-player will not *produce* HD signal if the display device does not support HDMI, whenever your display device *would* be able to display it.

HD-Ready "helps" customer to choose a TV set that is really HiDef. If you go in a shop like Dixons, those days ALL TV sets have at least one reference to high definition, extra fine crisp wonderful display, beter resolution, ... in their description. However if you look carefully at the resolution very very few are really HD-Ready ( ie can display at least 720i )
If you talk to the vendor of those shop, they don't talk to you about Blue Ray or HD, they just tell you that you are ready for the wonderful future ... I don't think they [the vendors] even *know* that their are a format war coming and that those nice HDReady TV set future will probably restricted to only see HDContent from your HD-Cam sold in the next aisle.

Re:HDMI or HDCP? (2, Informative)

prefect42 (141309) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760553)

You're confused as to the difference between HDCP and HDMI, which is not surprising as a lot of articles seem to. HDMI is little more than DVI + sound + signalling. HDCP is the 'content protection' that is causing the fuss. HDMI actually looks quite nice, as you get fewer cables, can shovel 8-channels of 192kHz 24-bit uncompressed audio down it, and get signalling that should be able to provide a single remote system with the minimum of fuss. How well the signalling will work in practice...

One of the requirements of HD Ready is that you support HDCP, to prevent the problem of people buying HD tvs and then not being able to watch in HD. There are a fair few TVs out there with DVI (that support HDCP) but not HDMI.

Re:HDMI or HDCP? (1)

gutnor (872759) | more than 8 years ago | (#14761064)

Yep, completely confused it seems ...

And the "label" HDTV-Compatible doesn't help.

I guess that means I doesn't qualify as a good HDTV buyer, too bad I have to stick with DVD :-)

And... (1)

Dance_Dance_Karnov (793804) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760174)

You could just buy a player that ignores that crap and outputs in 18 different ways. From where might one purchase such a device? Why from the same factory in china that makes the "normal" players. Only these where made on the night shift. And cost 1/4 as much.

Foot, say hello to Mr. Shotgun (1)

Detritus (11846) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760178)

The electronics industry's best customers went out and spent thousands of dollars on big-screen television sets with component inputs. Now Hollywood is saying, "Fsck you, you potential copyright terrorist, buy another multi-thousand dollar television set." With any luck, that attitude will kill both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray.

Re:Foot, say hello to Mr. Shotgun (2, Insightful)

plumby (179557) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760270)

It's doing the trick on me at the moment. I'm not the earliest of early adopters for home entertainment stuff, but I'm usually not far behind, and have spent many thousands on kit for the house.

I'm in the market for a new HD-TV now (I bought a widescreen TV when they first came out, but it's a big fat CRT and I want a nice shiny thin LCD/plasma to hang on the wall and play XBOX-2 games on), but I aint buying while there's so much confusion/disagreement on standards. I don't mind (too much) paying early adopter prices for kit that's going to be half that cost by next year, but I'm not going to pay early adopter prices for kit that's likely to be pretty much obsolete (and replaced by something more restrictive) by next year.

The problem is that I suspect there's a fair few people like me out there, and if people like me aren't buying the kit now, then it's unlikely that manufacturers will be in a position to lower the price in the near future, so the mass market will never take it up either.

Re:Foot, say hello to Mr. Shotgun (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14760313)

The sad fact just is that people WANT better quality picture than what they have with DVDs and older technology. The movie industry has a great lever there. The quality of DVDs is still very low and many people want better and will instantly switch to everything HD. Including me.

I'm tired... (3, Insightful)

ThinkDifferently (853608) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760279)

I am really tired of having to upgrade all of my entertainment equipment every 5 years. I am not a bottomless pit of a consumer. I've replaced all of my equipment twice in my lifetime, and I'm only 35. Well, I'm tired of it now. As it is, I have to buy a specialized media pc just to record fscking HD content (where were the components?). Damn Blue Ray! Damn HD-DVD! They can rot for all I care. I won't be hollywood's damn pawn. I am the consumer, and I vote with my wallet. ...and if Blockbuster ever drops the DVD format, guess what? I'm not going to Blockbuster anymore.

Re:I'm tired... (1)

gkuz (706134) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760713)

I am really tired of having to upgrade all of my entertainment equipment every 5 years.

Then don't. Who held a goddam gun to your head and forced you to buy a new TV?

So? (1)

MrWorf (216691) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760329)

Who, in his/hers right mind bought a set/projector/whatever which is HDTV compatible (and I don't mean 480p, I mean atleast 720p and above) and didn't check for DVI with HDCP or HDMI ?

Come on people, if you're about to fork out a grand or more on a "tv", don't you find it reasonable to check so it's somewhat futureproof? We all knew this would happen sooner or later, I'm just surprised it took this long. If I were MPAA I would have made sure to enforce HDMI/HDCP as soon as a ratified draft was ready.

Not that it really matters, almost noone(?) copied movies from DVD to D-VHS/DVD via component anyway, we all know that it's much easier to do with a PC ;)

Re:So? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14760393)

It's great that you've done your best to "future proof" your high-buck TV, but what happens when the key it's using somehow gets leaked and the powers that be decide to revoke it?

Re:So? (1)

mshurpik (198339) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760879)

I agree, this whole thing is a joke. Regardless of how people feel about copyright, people coming into the HDTV market are looking for _the best picture_ and HDMI ain't it. It's digital, it's encrypted, it's fragile and expensive.

HDMI may be a blessing because the American worker drone has no concept of being lied to. Shoot a president, bomb a tower, it's all the same to us. But when people realize their TV has been fucked with it may be a day that lives in infamy.

Re:So? (1)

BrianRoach (614397) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760866)

Who, in his/hers right mind bought a set/projector/whatever which is HDTV compatible (and I don't mean 480p, I mean atleast 720p and above) and didn't check for DVI with HDCP or HDMI ?

Well gee, Mr. Wizard, when I bought my 65" HDTV in 1998, they didn't have that :D

And to be honest, I'm completely happy with its 9" projectors and component input. I see no need to "upgrade" (using the term loosely).

- Roach

Re:So? (1)

MrWorf (216691) | more than 8 years ago | (#14761126)

Oups, didn't consider that the US has had HDTV compatible gear for many years. In europe, they are beginning to see the light and over here we mainly see Plasma/LCD/Projectors and that was what I was refering to.

I made an assumption, and as we all know, assumptions are the mother of all fsckups! :)

Anyway, if anyone buying a HDTV set today (or the last year) missed out on HDMI and/or DVI-HDCP, I'm not going to loose any sleep ;)

I don't own a TV (1)

under_score (65824) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760431)

And I have been avoiding buying one until I could get a decent sized 1080p monitor (40'+) at a decent price. That is starting to become possible. On the other hand, I have been collecting DVDs (I have about 350-400) and watching them on my various limited size computer monitors. As a family (with three kids) we are a little tired of the small monitors. I would love to switch over to one of the new DVD formats. But of course I was waiting for the format war to resolve itself since as you might be able to tell I am a very conservative purchaser when it comes to entertainment systems. I don't rip and share music or movies except in the very limited fair use sense of close friends and family who might be interested in a single thing and who are likely to go out and purchase. As others have said, this requirement will punish me. I don't like that, but at this point it may not prevent me from purchasing... I'll just have to wait a little until the De-HDMI workaround is available... Jon?

Re:I don't own a TV (1)

gkuz (706134) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760726)

as you might be able to tell I am a very conservative purchaser

Given that you've said you've spent probably north of $6,000 on DVD's, no, I can't tell. Please tell me how conservative that is.

Re:I don't own a TV (1)

under_score (65824) | more than 8 years ago | (#14761050)

Oops, forgot a tidbit: only started buying DVDs a few years ago.

And it may cost Sony a lot more than just DVD sale (1)

fjf33 (890896) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760505)

There was an analysis of the cost of the PS3 and the DVD alone was almost as expensive as the CPU. Then they proceeded to say that since the definition of the standard was not finished it would also delay the release date of the PS3 if the hardware spec for it didn't change.

So this is another area were SONY the device manufacturer is hurting its core business so that SONY the movie mogul can hold on to an outdated business model.

The only winner here are MS, Nintendo and all the Chinese/Russian pirates that now will have a bigger market of casual pirates that will find it easier to get their warez from them.

Sad.

Funny quote (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14760596)

sent via HDMI, as it features robust copy protection

I think they're talking about the HDCP layer of an HDMI connection.
Of course HDCP can only be considered "robust" if you define it as "proved broken before first implementation" [wikipedia.org]

HDCP and Blu Ray (2, Interesting)

bernywork (57298) | more than 8 years ago | (#14760604)

Actually, all the boxes that are built around Blu Ray at the moment will output 1080i and 1080p over their Component outputs.

They are saying that it's up to the studios to disable this via the medium if they choose too. The box manufacturers want to stay as far away from this arguement as possible, they don't want the bad blood with the consumers. It could well be that the studios do choose to do this, aside from HDCP, Blu Ray also has the additional feature of being able to black list boxes. Apparently what they are doing is embedding the key of the machine that decoded the stream into the video output. That way the studios can pick up that key out of a ripped copy and then disable that unit for all future releases. Based on this, they don't want to introduce any further copy protection onto the Blu Ray discs such as a more advanced version of CSS encoding or other encryption.

However, a lot of this is up to the studios in how they want to protect their content when it's published. What happens thereafter the box manufacturers don't want to know.

Well that's what I was reading the other day anyway.

IT'S ACCESS CONTROL, not copy protection (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14760669)

These moves do nothing to prevent copying.

They are designed to restrict access to the copyrighted works only to limited, licensed, subset of devices that are designed under the tight control of media giants. MPAA wants to decide how you consume their content.

They want you to sit thru the commercials without skip ability. They want to dictate terms to both display manufacturers and end users about the type of display device used. They want region control that works to protect their price discrimination systems (DVD had a crappy first try). They want piece of the pie every step of the way.

Once they control everything, they can start jacking up the price, tighten 'region coding' and other trade barriers, and add up things like 'phone home'. And once that's done, they can start charging per view etc. Or start monthly subscription 'clubs' with latest releases only available to 'premium members'.

Yes, first it will be 'value added services', but media giants think long term. Once it's normal that your MPAA approved Black Box Player is in constant connection over encrypted link to MPAA server farms, with no competition, and no way to play legal content other than MPAA approved, they can start tightening the screws. Oh, and all other ways will be illegal by then. Including movie playback on PC. Hardware makers will get to put their sticker on the black box, and fight to the death with each other on commoditizing the MPAA-approved solution, but that's their part of the pie.

It's all about maximizing the profits. Current plan is to make customer pay more.

What's the alternative? (1)

Bing Tsher E (943915) | more than 8 years ago | (#14761024)

"For those thinking about upgrading to either Blu-Ray or HD-DVD when they become available, you may want to think again."

So what's the alternative? What is the High Defintion alternative that is on the horizion that people can purchase instead?

Don't forget that the kind of people with a HD display already are the 'early adopters' who will probably buy both a Blu-Ray and a HD-DVD player.

The alternative is, uh... to watch those Petticoat Junction DVDs they sell at Walgreens for $0.99. Content is King, and the content creators and owners will define the standards.

Same as it ever was.

Um who exactly (1)

Tweekster (949766) | more than 8 years ago | (#14761158)

is pirating stuff using component? Honestly. if you want to copy it, just rip the original digital files. And do they think that wont be possible with a next gen player, the HD dvd's and BlueRay, they will be cracked, the revokable keys defeated. That is why I always hated macrovision, because on older tvs, (well most TV's) only had one set of composite Inputs, which meant my VCR would go there, and the DVD in to the vcr.... ohhh the movie studios were sooo fucking scared I might tape record (WTF?) a dvd that I couldnt even playback many movies. If I want to copy a dvd, i wont copy it to tape, I will simply crack their silly waste of time encryption and rip it to my hard drive.

HDMI is still very buggy (1)

maynard (3337) | more than 8 years ago | (#14761254)

I'm using a JVC-HM-DH5U D-VHS deck connected to a Sony HS-20 digital projector via HDMI. I often see dropouts and HDCP renegotiation between the deck and projector during viewing. It's especially apparent during resolution shifts between HD and SD recordings. The renegotiation can take several seconds during which the screen completely blanks, so it's not a minor blip during playback.

If these issues aren't ironed out soon, I expect the first and second generation of HD disc players will not operate with displays with the quality that consumers expect.

altogether (1)

HTH NE1 (675604) | more than 8 years ago | (#14761512)

Hollywood wants these new players to get rid of component video all together.

Hollywood wants these new players to get rid of component video.

(Typos like this make me wonder if people actually understood why the original joke [imdb.com] was funny.)
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...