Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Code in Every HD-DVD Player

Neophytus writes "The DVD Forum steering group has given preliminary backing to Microsoft's VC-9 codec along with H.264 and MPEG-2 as mandatory playback modes for HD-DVD players. Having this technology, the most fundamental part of Windows Media Player 9, in every new DVD player could well give Microsoft major leverage into the Cable and Satellite TV markets where currently MPEG2 dominates. The approval is pending an update in licencing terms and other conditions within 60 days."

12 of 375 comments (clear)

  1. what are the licensing terms? by jimbosworldorg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What are the licensing terms for MS's VC-9 codec? Is it free, or is every HD-DVD player manufacturer going to be required to pay MS a licensing fee? I don't necessarily mind MS being the ones to author a commonly used codec, but I'm pretty violently opposed to them getting automatic royalties on every HD-DVD player manufactured, and getting stuck in the same position we were with decss regarding open source players.

    --

    Coming soon to Slashdot: meta-meta-moderation!

    1. Re:what are the licensing terms? by Keebler71 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Read the article. Your answer is in the last paragraphs.

      --
      "It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance." - Thomas Sowell
    2. Re:what are the licensing terms? by ratsnapple+tea · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Do we give up on good technolgy simply because it comes from Microsoft? ... I think we should because when the hardware stabilizes OSS will eventually catch up"

      Although by the time OSS catches up, Microsoft's going to have come up with something even better and patented it. Well, maybe not Microsoft, but somebody.

      You can't chase a moving target by aiming at where they were six months ago.

    3. Re:what are the licensing terms? by Dwonis · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Your comment gives the mistaken impression that OSS is somehow destined to always be behind proprietary software, as far as innovation and technical superiority is concerned. Microsoft and SCO love that notion, but unfortunately for them, it's not true. OSS is overtaking proprietary software in many areas, and it's reasonable to expect this trend to continue.

      Here are just some of many examples of innovative, open-source software:

      Python A very clean, versatile language. Will probably replace VB for custom RAD in the next decade. KNOPPIX A very well-featured bootable OS. Mozilla Firefox There are really too many improvements to list here. Vorbis Cutting-edge audio codec Freenet Decentralized global data storage system. WikiWikiWeb LaTeX Widely-used document preparation system. Spawned from TeX, an open-source typesetting system. Popular among mathematicians any cryptologists. A completely new approach to global collaborative development. Eventually led to Wikipedia.
  2. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Though seeing as how both MS and most media conglomerates are looking towards DRM lately, I would imagine it's just around the corner.

    If they would have loaded these things with DRM right away there would have been more outcry from the knowledgable public (bit of an oxymoron there). Just having their plain codec onboard so many machines gives them the leverage to toss in DRM when the time is right.

  3. It's a truly funny article by Helpadingoatemybaby · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Microsoft has long been feared by members of Hollywood and consumer electronics companies for its competitive practices. The thinking has been that if Microsoft were to gain a foothold in their business that it would eventually seize control by charging outlandish licensing fees for its technology.

    "All those fears were on their mind," Majidimehr said. "At the end of the day they said, We're going to trust Microsoft."

    Now, forgive me from laughing at that, but my mind is wandering towards the various ways that Microsoft will exploit this for their own gain:

    1) They can increase the licence fees on the new DVD-9 standard. That's not ineffective because once endorsed and DVDs are released, all players will have to support (and pay) for Microsoft's DVD-9 even if other formats are supported.

    2) They will 'extend' the standard. You can see this coming, can't you? "New DVD-9.1 with extra tracks that are only accessible if you buy Microsoft's new dvd player/software/media unit... etc. etc." This is pretty predictable.

    3) They will offer discounts for those players that remove support for the other standards, thus forcing DVD producers to produce in the only format guaranteed to be multiplayer. Again, pretty predictable -- it's what they always do.

    4) They will patent the transmission of "over the air" DVD-9, so any future Tivo like device will have to pay royalties.

    I could go on, but you see where Microsoft's going with this. It's a horrible, horrible decision for the DVD steering committee. They've just voted themselves into the guillotine. "Trust Microsoft" -- sheesh!

    --

    The baby's fine -- please stop sending business cards.

  4. Re:Linux DVD players... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Buy yourself a clue.

    MPEG2/4 requires payment of royalties as well.

  5. It's called r-e-p-u-t-a-t-i-o-n by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It is a fact that Microsoft has hoodwinked and swindled their way to the top. Ask about GO, STAC, DR-DOS, forged video evidence at the anti-trust trial, rigged bencharks, blatant lies and FUD, any period of their history, including that the very MS-BASIC that Bill Gates so infamously complained about being stolen when he himself had stolen the computer time to develop it, and you will find blatant decption and skulduggery.

    Then the other side of it, what has Microsoft actually done that is new? You sure won't find much. They are excellent at doing a shoddy job of copying others.

    Consider a serial killer, say that guy in Canada who murdered several dozen prostitutes. Would you suggest that some other prostitute should take a chance on that guy?

    I doubt it. So why should anyone believe a thing Microsoft says, or have any expectations for future decency in any of their current activities?

    Reputations take time to build. Microsoft has shot their own reputation so many times that it will take a wholesale change of corporate leadership to change their reputation, and years and years of reinforcing that new sense of ethics. In the meantime, they continue to reinforce their current reputation. Apologists like yourself do them no good.

  6. Re:Hmm...Linux by frovingslosh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You're missing the point. In this case Microsoft doesn't give a damn about hackers. They want to own the industry like they own the desktop, and they want to strengthen their hold on the desktop. Microsoft pattented property being required for playing a HD-DVD will be the tool they need to be sure that no official Linux release ever has a HD-DVD player. Sure, a few hackers may add on after the fact, but for the masses Windows software will be able to play HD-DVDs and Linux will not.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
  7. Re:Hmm... by abandonment · · Score: 5, Insightful

    exactly, to submit the standard, ms had to specifically remove the codec from its proprietary 'vault' and make it publically licensable. after the years of development that they've put into their video compression, this is quite the move for them - considering that years ago the idea of a microsoft standard was simply breaking existing ones with proprietary extensions. frankly the video compression is the ONE thing that microsoft gets right. not that i want ms tech in my dvd player mind you.

  8. A format without a purpose.... by CarrionBird · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Why are we even bothering with a new format when 97% of the people out there don't use the full capabilities of the existing format.

    How many people really out the longing for better than DVD resolution and are willing to pay for it.

    The only obvious reason to push this new-and-improved DVD is to try for a whole new round of DRM lock-in. Since they lost the CCS battle, they'll start over with DVD-HD. Feh.
    --
    Free Mac Mini Yeah, it's
  9. Re:Hmm... by .@. · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Really?

    Let's take a look at the T2 disc that is available with WM9 HD content now.

    To watch it, you have to install the player on the disc.

    Then, the player needs to "call home" to make sure you're allowed to use it (via the Internet).

    Then, the player needs to be updated.

    Then the update needs to call home.

    If it hasn't crashed by then (mine did, three times), you MIGHT get to watch your DVD.


    Remember DIVX? Not the codec, the abomination Circuit City was pushing as an alternative to what we now call DVD? Basically a dial-home, pay-per-view DVD format.

    Do we REALLY want that whole scenario all over again?


    I HATE the way companies try to push all of this before the general consumer populace is even aware it's occurring. DVD early-adopters won the DIVX battle, but primarily because Circuit City was the only distributor, and they were easy to boycott. They were also in poor financial shape to begin with, and couldn't bankroll a protracted battle to push their format through.

    MS can. MS will. And our DVD players will have to dial home to ask for permission every time we want to watch a DVD. And you can be certain that "ask permission" will morph into "pay for use" at some point in the future.

    --
    .@.