Slashdot Mirror

except that the blu-ray isn't owned just by sony but by many companies that are part of the blu-ray association http://www.blu-raydisc.com/en/about/SupportingCompanies.html
also sony and all those other companies are part of the dvd forum as well so what makes you think that hd-dvd wouldn't have this kind of problem?

Apple didn't "bet that farm on HD-DVD." They have a seat on the Board of Directors for the Blu-Ray Disc Association. Jobs made an earlier statement saying that licensing costs are the reason they haven't adopted Blu-Ray. Spending money licensing Blu-Ray for Final Cut (right now) would be a waste. Adding a Blu-Ray drive to Apple computers will drive the price up.

I wouldn't say that Apple has "ignored their professionals" regarding Blu-Ray. They are waiting for a bleeding edge format/technology to mature.

"I want my FCP Suite 3 that fixes the problems with the current one and give me native suite bluray menu authoring."

Calm down. Take a deep breath. Go to your cave. Find your power animal. Slide.

The current 18 board members (as of January 2008) are:

• Apple Inc.
• Dell Inc.
• Hewlett-Packard Company
• Hitachi, Ltd.
• LG Electronics
• Mitsubishi Electric
• Panasonic (Matsushita Electric)
• Pioneer Corporation
• Royal Philips Electronics
• Samsung Electronics
• Sharp Corporation
• Sony Corporation
• Sun Microsystems
• TDK Corporation
• Thomson SA
• Twentieth Century Fox
• Walt Disney Motion Pictures Group / Walt Disney Studios Home Entertainment
• Warner Home Video Inc.

Like the PS2 was one of the biggest DVD players in the beginning, the PS3 will be the biggest Blu-ray player... that is untill in 1 1/2 year a $100 Samsung / LG profile 2.0 Blu-ray comes on the market.

Sony doesn't own the format. Quite a few companies are part of the Blu-Ray consortium.

My favorite part of this discussion thread was the "The Future is Blue" Ad that came with it. Very nice targeted advertising pointing at http://www.blu-raydisc.com/

That's exactly the potential outcome - HD-DVD could still win out unless all 174 Corporate Blu-ray backers figure out how to make cheaper consumer examples of their players.

There are 138 Corporate HD-DVD backers of which Microsoft is one. Microsoft has recently primed the pump by helping (funding/bribing) studios to create lots of HD-DVD titles - the other factor of format choice for consumers. There's some contention that Microsoft is just trying to fuel the format wars so they can swoop the download market.

Oh, yeah.. the download market. LG and Netflix partnership, Apple and a dozen others may obsolete both physical standards.

Well damn, you know everything

1. The whole world isn't as poor as you are.
2. My PS3 will last longer than your XBOX.
3. I like Blu-ray. They do too.
4. I have never owned a PS2, but I now go shopping for PS2 games occasionally, and on my 480i TV, they still all look pretty f'ing good.
5. I can play more games on my PS3 than you will ever be able to play on your 360. Eat it.

So information on BD+ seems relatively hard to find. The best explanations I could find are this presentation, this pdf at dell and best of all this general discussion of SPDC.

The basic idea here is that BD+ allows the BluRay maker to embed virtual machine code (and apparently native code) on their disks which are then executed on the host machine. This code then somehow verifies that the host machine is uncompromised (memory footprints apparently) and then executes whatever process is necessary to decrypt the key that allows content access. Now it seems likely that there is some additional decryption process similar to AACS that decrypts the BD+ virtual code. Perhaps this decryption process is implemented better than the one in AACS but that is the only security advantage BD+ provides.

The only extra security that BD+ can offer over an AACS type system is security through obscurity. There has to be some general cryptographic process to decrypt the BD+ VM instructions. Once decrypted an attacker who is aware of the BD+ standard just needs to emulate the virtual machine and have it pretend it is a valid device to access the content. The BD+ people can talk all they want about memory footprints and tamper checks but these are just a complicated private key for the device. Separating out these functions and putting them in a VM just makes the specification of the encryption scheme more complicated (and more obscure) but doesn't fundamentally increase the security.

So why do the studies want BD+? Well maybe they've been taken in by the claims of extra security but the more plausible reason is that they want the extra control BD+ gives them over their content BD+ might not be a real impediment for the serious pirate/hacker but it does allow the movie studios to implement even more fine grained control over how you use their content. The virtual machine might be set up to prevent you from watching the movie more than once, from using a streaming feature of the device, from using it after some fixed time. Imagine, for instance, movie companies creating tiered pricing based on how many rights you want to have. Say make you pay more if you want to stream it. Disney might release their next version of Aladdin on DVD in two classes. The 'gold' class that lasts forever and the standard class that only lasts 5 years. Well you get the idea.

So no I don't buy the argument that this feature makes the system much more secure (except insofar as it might eliminate some fuckups in how the AACS system was defined) but it certainly is in the Blu Ray consortium and movie theater's interest to portray it this way. Maybe this explains the much wider adoption of Blu Ray by the theaters. ... And I used to be rooting for Blu Ray.

I guess I didn't make it clear: I'm not saying HD DVD will win. The format has barely started and current numbers don't mean shit. The studios have hardly released any titles and the total number of high-def discs sold so far is a tiny portion of the number of standard-def DVDs sold in one week.

Like them or not, Microsoft (with their power) can have a large influence in HD DVD's favor. Other big backers of HD DVD include:

• Intel
• Toshiba
• NEC

• Dell
• Apple
• Panasonic

I think you forgot a few Blu-Ray supporters:
http://www.blu-ray.com/players/
http://www.blu-ray.com/drives/
http://www.blu-raydisc.com/general_information/Sec tion-14009/Index.html

First of all, modding pedants up always rubs me the wrong way. I'm a pedant myself, and sometimes even a grammar nazi, but I don't expect (or even hope) that such posts of mine are modded up. I completely fail to see how someone giving their definition of a "fair-weather friend" is insightful. If I point out that fair-weather friend is supposed to be hyphenated, does that make me insightful? What about if I point out that technically, only the B in Blu-ray is supposed to be capitalized?

Second of all, it seems to be your definition of fair-weather friend that needs adjusting. As pointed out above, a fair weather friend is not the same thing as a foul weather enemy. It's a friend that is "loyal only during a time of success." There's no implication that such a friend actually turns against you when the weather isn't so fair, just that they don't support you.

Just because Disney has been contractually beholden to the Blu-ray format does not necessarily make them a supporter. If their contracts lock them into using Blu-Ray but they were out there touting how great HD-DVD is and how much Blu-ray sucks, would that make them a supporter? No, and there have been some instances where something like that has happened. (The row between Howard Stern and Clear Channel comes to mind, when Stern was actively ridiculing Clear Channel on the very stations they owned.) In this case, Disney trying to straddle the fence with their public comments can certainly be taken as non-loyalty towards Blu-ray.

apple is part of the blu-ray disc association so i could really be possible

Apple is on the blu-ray board of directors.
http://www.blu-raydisc.com/general_information/Sec tion-14009/Index.html

You're right. And blu-ray was developed in conjunction by all the companies in the BDA.

You can see the Apple backs Blu-Ray in the easiest way possible. They're a member of the Blu-ray Disc Association and have a seat on it's board. http://www.blu-raydisc.com/

Well, while I expect Apple to not really "care" and probably support both at some level or other eventually. You can see the Apple backs Blu-Ray in the easiest way possible. They're a member of the Blu-ray Disc Association and have a seat on it's board. http://www.blu-raydisc.com/

Meanwhile they aren't a member of the HD-DVD associated companies. Or if they are they're not interested in having their name mentioned anywhere on official materials.

Besides that, the price for manufacturing disks has always been a *very* small part of CD's / DVD's. I would be very amazed if this has changed for either format. From a Blu-Ray (hugging) site:

  * First, and most importantly, manufacturing cost is not a consumer issue, as the cost of goods will have little, if any, bearing on the cost to consumers.
  * That said, in the beginning stages of production, the Blu-ray Disc manufacturing cost could be slightly higher than current DVDs.
  * Given the number of studios releasing titles on Blu-ray Disc (7 of the 8 majors), and with the replication of games to support PS3, we believe the volume of discs being created will quickly drive manufacturing costs to mass market prices comparable to current DVD replication cost

Source: http://www.blu-raydisc.com/Section-14064/faqs/5/In dex.html

For now, the disks don't seem to be any influence, but that could be due to high initial pricing and availability of the titles (making manufacturing an even smaller part of the picture).

The Blue-ray Disc standard was jointly developed by a group of consumer electronics and PC companies called the Blu-ray Disc Association (BDA).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc/ So, let's stop insulting every other company who has contributed major technical research and dollars to support a format they thing will stand the test of time. By the way, IF Sony is forcing Blu-ray on us, then wouldn't that means that Toshiba is forcing HD DVD on us, too? Or, is it OK if Toshiba does it? It's more than a little ironic, I think, that while Sony is trying desperately to convince people that they should be buying a PS3 for the Blu-ray drive, in fact, people are avoiding the PS3 specifically because of the Blu-ray drive! The PS3 is sold out. I don't recall anyone who bought a PS2 complaining that they had to have a DVD drive with their console. Maybe some people did, but I didn't hear it. The Blu-ray drive is heinously expensive. People don't want to pay over $500 for a gaming console, even if they can also watch a few movies on it. If they had sold it without the Blu-ray drive, it would be much more competitive with the Xbox 360 and the Wii. I thought the same thing about paying $300 for a PS2. I was wrong. Darn it! Oh yeah, the PS3 is sold out. The Blu-ray drive is hard to manufacture, which is causing Sony's dismal supply. If they had sold it without the Blu-ray drive, they could have made a lot more of them, and average little Timmys all over the world could have one under their Christmas tree instead of only the little Johnnys who happen to have parents that are very, very rich. The Timmys also had to count on the pocketbooks of their parents to buy them the $400 XBox 360 last year, because none of the Timmy's really wanted one without the harddrive (that was my PERSONAL

Now would you like to retract your obviously inaccurate statement?

No, I wouldn't. Nice try though, Propaganda Boy.

Unlike the companies on the Blu-ray page, the companies listed on the HD-DVD page is not a complete list of the companies that have ever remotely thought of having something to do with HD-DVD. It's a list of the major media companies that will be putting out HD-DVD material.

The Blu-ray page, on the other hand, is a list of anyone and everyone that's applied to be a member of the so-called "Blu-ray Consortium." This includes chip suppliers, manufacturers, media companies (including those who will be releasing HD-DVD and any Blu-ray versions of movies), PS3 game developers (duh), and so on. Hey, guess what? For a mere $3,000, even a wise-ass like you can be on their useless list! Basically all you've shown us is that there are a lot of companies that are hedging their bets until they can figure out which format will win the so-called "format war." Duh.

Of course, I suppose that you see the list of nine companies on the HD-DVD page and assume that, like the Blu-ray list, it's a list of anyone and everyone that's had anything remotely to do with HD-DVD. Since you don't seem to have picked this up from context, let me rephrase it so that even your tiny little brain can comprehend it:

Sony decided that it wants everyone using its proprietary format instead of the format that most of the other industry players out there that actually has meaningful input into the format and that actually has the power to convince consumers to buy products that use that format exclusively agreed to...

There. Hope that's more clear.

But hey, if you don't think that Blu-ray is D-O-A, then knock yourself out and buy your little Betamax play— er, I mean, Blu-ray player and the initial wave of movies that come out for it. Go ahead and keep telling us 20 years from now how Blu-ray was a technically superior format. Meanwhile, the rest of us will continue rolling our eyes at you and saying, "Whatever," and buying products that people actually use in the real world.

No, Sony decided that it wants everyone using its proprietary format instead of the format that most of the other industry players out there agreed to...

True, they do get liscencing fees (all the info you could ever want about that is here) But Sony is (according to that website) obligated by the same liscencing aggreements and must pay the same fees. So even if we ignore that the the Assoc. itself needs some amount of money from the fees to maintain itself, those fees are still split up among atleast the Board of Directors. Which is enough to warrent an assumption that Sony couldn't survive solely on a cut of the liscencing fees. The real money in Blu-Ray for Sony would come in the form of what essentially boils down to a rebate on its liscencing fees plus whatever they get from the actual media sale.

Ergo my initial conclusion that the PS3's success depends on the games, not the relativly few Sony Blu-Ray disks. I suppose I could have been a bit clearer why I discounted the other blu-ray disks towards Sony's success with the PS3 (as the presence of Blu-Ray disks and Sony's machine playing Blu-Rays does not necessitate a success for the PS3, only disks made by Sony can contribute any real measurable success to the PS3 as are the only disks that significantly feedback into the PS3 production loop.) In any case, the real, true success will come because of games, Blu-Ray is an augmentation but Sony has clearly said they intended the added functionality to lead into blu-ray (atleast they have said so significantly more so than vice versa.)

On the larger scale, yes, any disk sale benefits Sony and moves them towards success. But they don't affect the PS3's profitability because their impact is blunted by other available options and relativly small ability to contribute directly back to the PS3 cost. Its the same idea as saying Sony's blu-ray player would not have impacted the PS3 if it had come out on time or not.

What's the difference between the DVD consortium and the Blu-ray one?

Just about the only advantage of the HD-DVD standard is easier retooling of existing manufacturing lines. The cost of the discs probably won't be too different in the long run and is irrelevant anyway (with $60 games and $40 movies who cares whether the disc costs a penny or two?). The reason Toshiba's HD-DVD drive is so cheap is that they aren't stupid. They saw the price of the PS3 did some quick calculations and decided on the same razorblade model Sony's using, while BD manufactures use the usual approach (for consumer electronics) of first milking the super-rich and then slowly lower the price.

Imagine if you will, Sony including the only high definition format disc in their PS3. A dual layer HD-DVD has 30 gigs of storage, more than enough to hold the 22 gigs of Resistance: Fall of Man.

But still vastly less than what I can have on a BD. What do I care about the number of gigs for the PS3 I want a replacement for my DVD-R (or +R or whatever) drive and Blu-Ray is superior (also, unlike HD-DVD, it's been developed with burning discs in mind. I think every BD drive for PC you can buy atm is a BD-R while afaik there isn't even an HD-DVD-R announced).

Every single movie studio releasing their films on the only high definition format: HD-DVD.

Not important. IIRC someone developed a combined head for reading BD and HD-DVD anyway. I think within a few years most drives will support both and the cost overhead shouldn't be so bad (and if a drive then costs $18 instead of $15, so what?). This is not Betamax vs. VHS.

Sony would not be having the blue diode production problems that it is currently having.

Because they wouldn't have to manufacture 405nm diodes for Blu-Ray and 405nm diodes for HD-DVD but could focus on only one waveleng... oh wait.

Because all of the manufacturers would be focusing on only one format, costs would come down even quicker.

Manufacturing costs for discs are in no way connected to the price you pay when you buy one. The companies will charge what the market's willing to pay and a bit more regardless of what it costs to produce them. And apart from the diode shortage the biggest cost for players seems to be the hardware to decode the video which is almost identical for both anyway (as they support the same codecs and I don't think BD's Java is much worse than the thing for HDDVD MS came up with - forgot the name sorry). MS wants $199 for its add-on which probably won't lose them too much money and the lower-end PS3 which has about the same stuff as MS's higher end 360 is $100 more (but I could see Sony losing more on the lower-end model, because that's the point of the lower-end PS3: Get people to buy the more expensive one). So about $150 per drive for both at this stage. Doesn't seem too bad and I'd think the diode shortage is a bigger headache for both.

The high definition era would begin with the same unity as the DVD era. Sony would be guaranteed a huge quantity of money from licensing.

Is it too much to ask that for once the better format wins? It's not like there's much difference between them. Both license freely to 3rd parties; DRM is crappy and identical; costs aren't that different.

Instead, Sony decided that it had the Playstation brand as a magic bullet and gave the finger to the rest of the DVD coalition.

Well they weren't alone; there's Philips of course and Apple Dell HP Hitachi LG Mitsubishi Electric Panasonic Pioneer Philips Samsung Sharp Sony Sun Microsystems TDK Thomson Twentieth Century Fox Walt Disney Warner Bros on the board of directors alone. See here

Wow, haven't been reading news much? Universal is the only movie company on the board of HD-DVD. While the Blu ray disc association is comprised of almost everyone else. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc_Associat ion http://www.blu-raydisc.com/general_information/Sec tion-14009/Index.html Before you say something along the lines of HD-dvd having more going for it than blu ray is purely selective.

Sony, by appointment by the above Blu-ray Disc Association Board of Directors as the Blu-ray Disc License Entity is responsible for Blu-ray Disc Information Agreement (IA) and Blu-ray Disc License Agreement.

Jeez, I keep seeing this on Slashdot. What happened here? Did slashdot become full of middle-managers who believe anything if it is repeated enough times? I expect better from people who are SUPPOSED to understand technology.

Go here http://www.blu-raydisc.com/general_information/Sec tion-14009/Index.html and look to see which names you recognise. Just about every brand except Toshiba is here.

Samsung will be first (oh but it's still a Sony standard). And Philips, and Sharp, and Panasonic, and Pioneer, and Mitsibushi, and LG, and Zenith

Who else?: Hitachi, JVC, Yamaha, Zenith, and that's without even starting on the RECORDABLE PC drives...

It's Blu-ray (http://www.blu-raydisc.com/)

Here we go again with the Blu-Ray = Sony shit.

Yes, Sony developed the spec, but this isn't betamax. There's a whole bunch of companies behind it.

http://www.blu-raydisc.com/general_information/Sec tion-14009/Index.html

Am I the only one who's tired of knee-jerk Sony-bashing? Yes, they've fucked-up on a few things, but there's no need to crucify them.

• All first titles are expected to be limited to a single layer.
• There are two Blu-ray modes: Movie Mode (used for high definition films) and BD-J Mode (a fully programmable mode that includes interactive features, like games and Internet connectivity). Both modes can be used on the same disc.
• Sony and MGM titles will be encoded on the discs at 1080/24p. The user will set the player to convert this native resolution as required to match the capability of his or her display.
• At this time Sony has no immediate plans to implement the Image Constraint Token (ICT). (
  That is, they can always turn it on in the future on a per-title basis.)
• All of the Sony and MGM titles will initially be encoded using MPEG-2, at a variable bit rate, but up to a maximum of 30Mb/sec.
• When other codecs exceed MPEG-2 at all data rates, Sony will begin using them.
• On the audio side, all Sony and MGM titles will include both conventional Dolby Digital and DTS soundtracks. Dolby data rate is still unconfirmed. DTS data rate will be 1.5Mb/sec. Additionally all Sony/MGM releases will include a 5.1 uncompressed PCM audio track. (To make sense of these audio formats, Todd B. has written a nice summary here).
• The first Sony and MGM titles will each have a hidden Easter Egg containing several setup test patterns-- a sweep, a standard SMPTE pattern including, among other things, a PLUGE, color bars, and a resolution monoscope.

The Blu-Ray group also summarized what they announced at CeBit in this PDF.

Highlights:

• Two types of Blu-ray Disc video players will be available: a "BD Player" type and an Internet connected player. The most fundamental feature difference is that one supports Internet connections and the other does not. Either player type can be produced and marketed from day one. The internet connections may be used for firmware upgrades. Toshiba has said in their HD-DVD players you can simply burn an image onto a CD-ROM to do the same thing.
• From the beginning, all models of either player type support playback of interactive BD-Java
  content. (This had been something that was supposed to be delayed in the hardware).

A source at a studio has said that current "Special Edition" content for Blu-Ray discs is being ported over to a High Def signal. It won't be only the movies that are in HD.

Netflix will be carrying both Blu-Ray and Hd-DVD discs at launch.

If you have a video card that says it will support HDCP, you may be disappointed. It looks like no current video cards on the market will really support HDCP. From Ars: "With regards to shipping cards, they are correct: no matter what a box's feature list may say, no video card supports HDCP fully at this time. Why? They have not been completely programmed. Until the specifications for the access control system are completely finished, implementing pro

This is laughable at best. Just look at Blu-ray Disc Association website and the long list of the members, far longer than that of HD DVD.
http://www.blu-raydisc.com/general_information/Sec tion-14009/Index.html

Maybe you should actually read the page. This is a list of Supporting Companies, not Companies that are PART of or EVEN ALLOWED to participate in the technology.

These are just SUPPORTERS, not participents in developing, adding to or even allowed to question Sony about the Technology.

Here I will illustrate for the slow swimmers.. HP is listed on the page you provided us the nice link to, now read this...

"Here's more on the reason for HP's decision to also back the competing HD-DVD format. It appears that HP wasn't too happy that Sony decided to turn its back on iHD support. Hewlett-Packard was pushing hard for iHD which allows for more interactive features to be included on the disc"
http://www.anandtech.com/news/shownews.aspx?i=2545 3

Get it?

2) Sony and Toshiba are the companies behind each product. However Sony is intent on keeping Blu-ray 100% to themselves, Toshiba is more willing to license out the technology.

This is laughable at best. Just look at Blu-ray Disc Association website and the long list of the members, far longer than that of HD DVD.
http://www.blu-raydisc.com/general_information/Sec tion-14009/Index.html

Do you really think HP is trying to discredit Blu-Ray while a member of the Blu-Ray Disc Association?

http://www.blu-raydisc.com/

The Blu Ray video format specifies the maximum read capability of 36 megabits/second. The encoding codec used will allow content creators to compress nearly any resolution as long as it won't surpass 36 megabits/second.

Actually it's inaccurate.
The transfer rate for BD-ROM video application is 54Mbps (1.5x speed) according to the official BD-ROM physical format whitepaper:

3: Data rate
For high-definition movies a much higher data rate is needed than for standard definition.
With the BD format's choices for both NA and wavelength we have been able to realize a
format with 5X higher data rate while only doubling the rotation rate of DVD-ROM discs.
The following numbers offer a comparison:
Data bit length: 111.75 nm (25GB) (267 nm for DVD)
Linear velocity: 7.367 m/s (Movie application) (3.49 m/s for DVD).
User data transfer rate: 53.948 Mbit/s (Movie application) (10.08 Mbps for DVD)
The BD system has the potential for future higher speed drives.

There's a definite argument that the BluRay Java menuing system is too complicated, too bloated, and more expensive to develop for, when compared to a Javascript-based UI.

Now are you saying that just because it's Java, or because you have been looking over the specs?

First of all, the Java used is J2ME - the same Java that goes into cellphones. It's a whole different ball of yarn as many features and libraries are stripped out. Javascript would actually be a larger burden. It uses the Personal Basis Profile, meant for consumer devices.

The UI is not Swing, or even AWT - it sort of resembles the HAVi system.

Look here for Blu-Ray technical specs - the bits about Java are in "White Paper: BD ROM - Audio Visual Application Format Specifications (Update: March 2005)" near the bottom.

If you really want something to chew on, try reading this discussion - a nice juicy flamewar between BD-J and iHD supporters (the iHD guy being an exec at Microsoft). Plenty of meaty tidbits for those on either side... my own take on a lot of the discussion is that people there are right about Javascript being a LOT slower than Java, so more things would be possible in BD-J (for instance, in BD-J you could theoretically write a whole MP-3 decoder/player. Hardly likely in Javascript...

Of course, for a slightly higher price, you'll be able to get a disc with the ads turned off...

"or is Sony misrepresenting just how far along BD-ROM really is?"

Blu-ray is NOT Sony. Sony is just one of them.

And it's easier to say, too. Which would you rather explain to someone: HD-DVD-RW or BD-Re?

And I'm pretty sure the market is ECSTATIC about the copyright notice at the bottom of the site you mentioned:

This web site is not affiliated with the Blu-ray Disc Association. All trademarks are the property of the respective trademark owners. © 2002-2005 Blu-ray.com. All rights reserved.

As far as availability of Blu-Ray? If you live in Japan, at least 3 players/recorders exist and you can even buy at least one model. As for the discs, they have a transfer rate of 36 Mbps and cost roughly 33 dollars a pop for rewritable discs.
Blu-Ray is currently used only by video player/recorders, but will eventually be used on computers, in the PS3 (quite obvious, by now), and, I imagine, in many other devices, including video cameras.

As far as availability of Blu-Ray? If you live in Japan, at least 3 players/recorders exist and you can even buy at least one model. As for the discs, they have a transfer rate of 36 Mbps and cost roughly 33 dollars a pop for rewritable discs.
Blu-Ray is currently used only by video player/recorders, but will eventually be used on computers, in the PS3 (quite obvious, by now), and, I imagine, in many other devices, including video cameras.

As far as availability of Blu-Ray? If you live in Japan, at least 3 players/recorders exist and you can even buy at least one model. As for the discs, they have a transfer rate of 36 Mbps and cost roughly 33 dollars a pop for rewritable discs.
Blu-Ray is currently used only by video player/recorders, but will eventually be used on computers, in the PS3 (quite obvious, by now), and, I imagine, in many other devices, including video cameras.

While I could care less what "data format" is used, the Blu-Ray disc itself is far superior in capacity and data rate, and I'm glad it won.

With a paltry 15mbit per second, HD-DVD's disc would not have a high enough data rate to encode 1080p video in MPEG4 (or any other codec) at any reasonable quality, essentially crippling HD until the next generation. (For comparison, the highest bitrate allowed in DVD video is 10mbit. D-VHS allows 30 mbit, Blu-Ray allows over 50mbit (section 3, bottom of page 5))

Of course, more space per disc is always nice. Whether you're just trying to cram the Janitor's Commentary track into the extras, or providing Star Trek with a Klingon subtitle track, every little bit helps. More space also allows for movies to use that 50mbps data rate for longer periods of time. Fans of superbit DVDs would drool all over the promise of superbit Blu-Ray discs.

#1 - Sony's not about to cave.

#2 - Apple's already backing Blu-Ray. Check out the list of companies. They aren't alone.

Sony is sure to put Blu-ray drives in their PS3. They're equally as likely to release a bunch of movies in this format. They may have some olive branch to offer the HD-DVD association, but they're not saying they're stopping BD-DVD to create a single standard. Here's the story you may be talking about. From what miniscule information is there, it may just be that they're doing either (a) a PR move to make it look like they tried, or (b) offering up their tech with some modifications, pricing, or other tricky business. Either way, it's a pretty safe bet that Blu-ray is going to end up in PS3's at the very least, and it may just be Sony saying "we think we've already won, how about you save face by playing nice with us, we'll call Blu-ray HD-DVD if you like".

In any event, it'll be well over a year before Apple has the option of putting a Blu-ray disk reader in a machine, let alone a writer, so they simply will use dual-layer DVD+-RW drives for some time.

According to a secion of a technical paper for the Blu-ray disc format found here the encryption used to protect contents will involve:

"DES (Data Encryption Standard) with a key length of 56 bits has been adopted, and Triple DES with a key length of 112 bits has been adopted for the key generating process. In addition, for the exclusion of illegal devices (System Renewability) and for the prevention of illegal copying, RKB (Renewal Key Block) information and a Disc ID unique to the disc are written in ROM area of the disc. Each recorder (player) has a device key, which differs depending on the manufacturer or the machine. An encryption key is generated by combining the device key and RKB. Therefore, illegal devices can be excluded by updating the RKB information. Furthermore, illegal copying is also prevented by using a disc ID unique to the disc to generate the encryption key, because even a bit-by-bit copy cannot generate the encryption key."

Sound similar to the DVD encryption ideas, but now with longer keys.