Slashdot Mirror
CD/DVD Manufacturers To Support Windows Media
Anonymous Coward writes "Seattle P-I story on MS's latest move towards having their finger in every slice of the content pie. Oh, goody. 'Microsoft Corp. plans to announce today that four DVD makers will incorporate its Windows Media Audio technology into their players, enabling consumers to play CDs and DVDs they compiled using that technology. At the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, DVD makers Toshiba, Panasonic, Apex Digital Inc. and Shinco, a Chinese manufacturer, will announce plans to support Windows Media Format in some or all of their models this year, said Michael Aldridge, lead product manager for Microsoft's Windows digital media division.'" We've mentioned this before, but there are a few more details now.
There are gigs and gigs of both pirate and legitimate divx3 and 4 videos out there to be had on IRC, Usenet, FT, and Gnutella.
The only ones who use WMV are corporate entities who don't have anything good to encode anyway...
*sigh*
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
I think that having more formats is a good thing.
Not that I'm an MS fan. "Let the markets decide."
...that this is not a great deal worse than we were before. DVDs have always been the most annoying, closed media around, and theses companies are really trying to prevent any 'unlicensed' players from being able to play these discs.
Okay.. Long term theory here..
Microsoft/media companies get hardware manufacturers to implement wma into most/all dvd/cd player hardware.
Wma is plainly readable on cdrom drives.
Combine this with encrypted redbook tracks and wma media players, and viola...
A set of audio/data cd's that can be played on portable machines, played on dvd/cd players, played on your computer, but can't be ripped into an "open" format..
And yeah i know the encryption would be broken.. But all in all it sounds like a straightforward controlling strategy.. The media corps get the control they want, and microsoft gets a bigger share of a new market..
Rio Volt (a portable CD/CDR/MP3 player) already supports Windows Media format.
150 Opening BINARY mode data connection for slashdot.sig (129323052 bytes).
How long until they're adding windows media video support? Since MPEG-2 encrypted with CSS has ben defeated, moving to Microsoft's content control mechanisms sounds like something the MPAA would be for. This would have the fun bonus of giving Microsoft a monopoly on DVD software, and making DVD playing on Linux (excluding the current illegal hacks, which aren't a nice way to experiance the media you payed for; no menus to access lots of the content) even more of a pipe dream.
Why is this bad? At least Apple had the presence of mind to enable their software/machines to create more-or-less *real* (read: based on MPEG-2) DVD's. There are standards out there.
Microsoft is either strong-arming or 'making-an-offer-they-can't-refuse' to the other device makers to include their formats because of Windows XP's ability to import and edit video...but only export into Windows Media format. Unless you can show me where the device makers *went to Microsoft* and said 'we want to include your tech in our machines!' then don't tell me this isn't how it is.
If this doesn't qualify as using monopoly powers to extend said monopoly into separate markets then I don't know what does.
Blech. Signatures.
As long as MS hasn't forced these companies into exclusionary contracts (Which would be a bad choice to make given their current anti-trust case), I can't see anything wrong with this initially. Unfortunately, this also ties in well with RIAAs plans to copy protect every CD. Since many DVD players appear to have problems with these, the new CDs can't play on them. However, I remember reading that MS was talking with the labels into licensing WMP such that every copy protected CD would include a second CD with the album as WMP files.
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
We need the corporation to, on a one-to-one basis, support a proprietary format for an open format.
asf *and* ogg (I know the latter is audio-specific... are there Free video formats ?), for example.
This way it will still be possible to give the public to choose between Free Art or blockbusters.
Until then then we could call this a kind of monopoly as we are only given the choice to upgrade hardware that'll at the end not belong to us anymore (this is IMHO the final consequence of such digital dictatorship as this is the only way to forbid hackers to even look at these devices' internals).
Trolling using another account since 2005.
Royalties from Microsoft's DVD licensing deals are "pretty small" compared with the impact the arrangements could have on sales of Microsoft's Windows operating system, Aldridge said.
I doubt this will mean an increase in cost of DVD players. Even though media player format is lame as other's have noted in the past and present, I don't really care since I am not an audiophile. Most people don't have $2K headphones or $10K electrostatic speakers. The old argument about sound quality for average joe is useless. Heck none of my audio equipment costs more than 60 bucks tops.
If it means I can play DVD audio files on multiple devices, than it's all good to me.
That's not the big deal.
I don't care in the least that it's Microsoft and not Apple or Real who succeeded in getting their proprietary format accepted by the electronics manufacturers; the real problem is properietary media formats, period.
The bigger problem is that none of the people in charge (the media industry) has any interest in formats with open specifications, because that would defeat the scheme to move everything to pay-per-view that is taking place:
* closed media formats + anti-reverse engineering laws give control over which players you can use, and
* closed players + anti-circumvention laws give control over how many times you can enjoy the content before having to pay again.
It's just that simple.
All generalizations are false, including this one. (Mark Twain)
So, we have DeCSS. Whos up for writing a DeWMA?
Liberty in your lifetime
As I see it, this means extra hardware in the DVD players is required. Probably some form of generic CPU, one fast enough to decode the video. The MPEG2 chip for DVD usually gives you VCD/SVCD/etc for free and MP3 decoding on the side. But WMA/WMV are different beasts that don't use the same schemes, right? (Correct me if I'm wrong..)
So, assuming they put in some form of generic processor for decoding Windows Media formats, what's to stop them (or some other person) from putting in support for all sorts of media formats using that self same processor? Last time I checked my DVD player it didn't have any chips in there fast enough to decode DivX, maybe Microsoft is helping to change that for me.
- Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
That's even more true now that Ogg Vorbis RC3 is of higher quality than wma and mp3 and mpc, and others, at 128kbit *and* 64kbit.
Yes folks, RC3 is vastly improved over RC2. Give it a try!!
So, like some DVD players can play MP3 CD's, some will be able to play WMA CD's. Not be able to show CD's and DVD's with WMV's on them. Big deal.
...that this is going to eventually turn DVD players into another WinModem-ish hardware problem.
I'm too disgusted to go on a rant.... sigh.
/*drunk.. fix later*/
Sigh, Quicktime is fully open (not the source, but it is fully standardized). You can build your own version. In fact, a few open source projects are under way. This only leaves sorenson as a barrier for Linux, which:
1. Is not owned by Apple.
2. Doesn't have to be used. Blame the content-providers for not using an alternative (or the open-source community for not providing a free codec that is a good alternative).
No way you can blame Apple that the content-providers are using a proprietary, closed codec when Quicktime is an open architecture that can easily accomodate new codecs. Why don't you provide and ask content-provider to use a good cross-platform alternative (perhaps Divx 4). This will solve the entire problem.
The Drowned and the Saved - Primo Levi
Assuming you have the right programs, you can use just about any (last I checked, I could use any) MS Windows compatible codec on a Linux box. Even XMMS had the capability of playing back just about any video file that I thre at it, after downloading and compiling the right plugins.
The problem with Windows XP's integrated audio/video encoding is the fact that most users don't quite have the knowlege to make choices about the formats that they wish to use. What do we have here? Microsoft pushes AVI and WMA down the throats of unsuspecting customers. A large user base of portable music player and DVD player users begin to use their formats. Potentially, we have the whole MP3 thing all over again. Give the users some easy and convenient sets of tools and they are basically opening the door to allowing Microsoft to controlthat market. It's the perfect Microsoft model.
So what are we to do, as a community, about the Powers That Be blocking us from content using technological measures? Will someone reverse-engineer the Sorensen codec or write a WMF player for linux? M$ and Apple will rabidly oppose this, and its author would likely be the next Dimitry Skylarov. DVD was just the tip of the iceberg. Heck, it's even taken 2-3 years to get a reasonable HTML viewer, while M$ and Netscrape embraced and extended the standard over and over.
But from the OSS side of the fence, we don't have the muscle, and aren't organized enough to push our codecs into the forefront. Who, exactly, will negotiate the exclusive contract getting movie trailers in DivX? Or books on tape in Ogg Vorbis?
It seems the solution isn't creating standards and codified specifications either. We can beat our drum over and over about "standards", but often, standards don't negotiate contracts for themselves. Standards don't magically get chosen by media execs just because they're better. Formats get chosen because there's a nosy M$ sales guy with a bad tie in the dumb exec's office every day for a month. Which OSS philanthropist wants that job?
Are we doomed forever to have all the power, but none of the content?
--Bob
1^2=1; (-1)^2=1; 1^2=(-1)^2; 1=-1; 1=0.
I know you'll never believe this coming from an anti-DMCA type like me, but I kinda like these news. The reason is this: I think that the RIAA/MPAA/whatever are preparing themselves for a VERY harsh wake-up when they find out that Microsoft cares zero-nilch-nada-nothing about their interests. Microsoft's aim is market dominance and experience shows that it can be obtained much more readily by massive availability of stuff and not massive control. I predict that (obviously) the WMP formats will be cracked (didn't it already happen?) and Microsoft will very gladly look the other way while tons of pirated stuff get exchanged in WMP format only playable on Windows or Microsoft-licensed players. They'll invest 5% of the huge profits they make in PR towards the aforementioned RIMPAA, who will actually learn that Microsoft are the very best in security/content protection and whatever other solution will be worse.
Global result: for the price of a windows license and some gigs of disk the users get unlimited access to (pirated) content. Users are happy. Microsoft is happy. RIAA/MPAA are screwed.
It'll be fun to watch.....
I've got a Panasonic DVD player that plays MP3's? So, now I can get one that plays WMA too? Big whoop. Do I ever use the MP3 capability? No. Would I ever burn a windows media thingy to disk to watch it on TV in really shitty quality? No.
This is nothing. What is much bigger is next year when M$ comes out with their supercalifragilistic-Xbox-alidocious homestation. At that point, I figure I need two components. One receiver. One UltimateTV/DirecTV/DVD/Xbox/CD-player/PC.
Oh, yeah and my Playstation 2 for Grand Theft Auto III.
What's bad about it is that there is not a single end-user (a.k.a. consumer) who wants this. It is being done purely for trade-restraint reasons. There is no other conceivable explanation for it.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Geek propaganda engine Slashdot posts it's 3,651st duplicate story. Come on guys, it's a new year... isn't there anything new to talk about yet?
Why is it that every CD/DVD player that supports *.mp3 or *.ogg is celebrated because but every player that will now support *.wmf is flamed. Let's face it, there is demand for *.wmf support, so why would manufacturers not support it.
Why not have players that support many different formats. How about a convercence box that will play divx, dvd, mp3, quicktime, ogg, and wmf.
Okay, since when has it been evil to say that something Microsoft is doing may not be a bad thing? At the time I typed this, the top level message was modded down to "Flaimbait".
Huh?!?
Face it, folks, there is nothing wrong with DVD players supporting Microsoft media formats. This does not take away from your ability to view DVDs; if anything, it opens up the device to play more diverse formats which as we all know is a GOOD thing.
But hey, if you don't want to be touched by MS in any way, stop playing WAV files, don't touch XML or SOAP, don't incorporate any standards into the whiz-bang window manager you're writing, don't code any more web content using any modern HTML standards, blah blah blah.
Sorry, but some of you REALLY need to learn how to pick your battles (like I do, I guess, considering that this message will probably be modded down as well and in the end won't make anyone see any more light than they're already seeing).
E. (A non-Windows user...)
Assuming you have the right programs, you can use just about any (last I checked, I could use any) MS Windows compatible codec on a Linux box. Even XMMS had the capability of playing back just about any video file that I thre at it, after downloading and compiling the right plugins
But this doesn't mean that we should let Microsoft set all the standards.
I pledge allegiance to the flag...
of the Corporate States of America...
I can encode mp3's at 320kbps on my XP box at home. I just use the software that came with my audigy. There are plenty of crippled MP3 programs out there. You just have to find a good one.
Sometimes I have to stop myself. While the fact that M$ has managed to twist the arms of hardware manufactures to spend money on inferior "standards" that won't work tomorow, and the implications of this are ominous, the reality today is not so bad. Do I really need the kinds of canned crap the RIAA puts out? I have not bought a non local CD in years. Do I really need a computer to look at crappy movies? On the rare occasion a movie is worth seeing, I go watch it in a theater.
The implications are the things to worry about, not the content. Worry about your ability to publish in a format that you can share with others. Isn't it more important to share pictures of your wedding with your friends and family than it is to show "Shreck"? How about your ability to publish ordinary papers? Worry about your ability to share published works in a public library. Do we really want to hoard information that way, so that it's pay per play or nothing? Isn't it more important that children and adults can research questions they have at a public library than it is for you to be able to read the latest pulp fiction? It is important to realize that the "content" control we see being born here is comming from the bassest of publishers, and stop the practice before it becomes universal practice. We must also work to make sure we can continue to publish on the internet.
Exercise your own power and refuse to publish in inferior, non free formats. Creating the financial incentive for hardware makers to respect your interests is just as easy as that. People who buy these new players are going to get burnt when WMA changes two years from now. The makers of those devices are going to get a big black eye from it. Don't you think that part of the tech slowdown comes from user uncertianty created by nothing M$ working right? It hurts to screw up. Meanwhile, my png, ogg mpegs and what not will work the same.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
Considering how poorly most DVD players support MP3 CDs, maybe this will be a good thing. We all know how militant Microsoft is about support their feature set fully. I've never seen a DVD player that supports long file names, let alone ID3 tags. Perhaps when Microsoft forces hardware manufacturers to support the WMA format fully, they'll finally write the microcode to display full song information.
And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
This move isn't about now; it's about the future. MS is betting that the SSSCA (or whatever) gets passed and suddenly manufacturers will be compelled to drop all formats that don't contain DRM. And, since WMA is DRM ready, it will be the natural choice, since the equipment manufacturers will have it licensed already. Likewise, the equipment folks are hedging their bets against SSSCA, licensing WMA now so they'll have it available when the hammer falls.
I'll bet the licensing is a sweet deal too: right now the fee's are either $0 or nominal, which MS can view as a loss leader. Thenn SSSCA passes and whammo - licensing fees skyrocket, and the manufacturer's just start charging $10 more per unit.
Here's the real beauty of the scheme: Let's say some smart guy figures "Hey, I just won't upgrade Media Player to the latest copy-protection-mandatory version. Fine for a while, and then Mr. Smartguy clicks on Windows Update and sees CRITAL UPDATE - SECURITY RELATED!!! and he scrambles to download it. And hidden beside the fix to the security hole of the week is a Media player update. MS previewed this tactic with the IE5.5 "security" update that wiped out plug-ins as well.
"As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
You make a valid point, but I have one correction:
The elimination of Netscape-style plug-ins was a security concern. Netscape-style plug-ins are simply DLLs loaded with LoadLibrary(...) that execute code with no protection in mind, such as SSL Object Signing (Microsoft's branded Authenticode). By getting rid of that layer, they closed another hole for crackers to insert potentially harmful code. With ActiveX, users (at least, those that understand signed controls or at least read the dialog that pops up) have the security of signed code, such as the ActiveX wrapper for QuickTime. This way, at least users are "warned" that the control is safe to download. You don't get this option with DLLs with a model like Netscape-style plug-ins.
Just FYI. I do get your point about the other, though. I pray that the SSSCA does not pass. Too few people have too much money already!
So, if you contact Apple, they will say "Don't talk to us, we don't own it, talk to Sorenson."
And if you talk to Sorenson, they will say "We'd LOVE to license it to you, really we would, but we cannot without Apple's approval, go talk to them".
So why not arrange a three-way conference call among the three legal departments? On most telephone exchanges, it's as easy as click, dial, click, discuss terms.
That is, unless Sorenson is right, and (as rumored) Microsoft is StrongARMing Apple with terms such as "if you release QuickTime for Linux, we discontinue Office for Mac."
Will I retire or break 10K?