Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Codec Required For Blu-Ray Players

dmayle writes "According to ExtremeTech, the Blu-Ray Disc Association (which consists of many big names, like Sony, Philips, and Pioneer) has decided to mandate Microsoft's VC-1 video codec. With HD-DVD incorporating Microsoft's patented video codecs as well, what will happen to the state of media players on Open Source? (Here's an additional source for Blu-Ray info)."

27 of 490 comments (clear)

  1. What will happen? by Raleel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It'll be reverse engineered. it'll happen in some other country. it'll move "underground". they'll be a giant legal battle.

    Either that or it'll fail as a format. I'm kinda guessing the latter.

    --
    -- Who is the bigger fool? The fool or the fool who follows him? --
  2. In management this is called by the_skywise · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Cutting off the oxygen supply"

  3. the Man is out to own us! by DownWithTheMan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Orwell was right... First it starts with computers... Then to home appliances... Next to the very cable TV we watch... And who can forget the patent that MS put on watches commercials that ask you questions for a prize... The worst part about this, is what it does to open-source codecs... Things like ogg-vorbis and xvid... Will the world every get a clue?

    1. Re:the Man is out to own us! by NanoGator · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "The worst part about this, is what it does to open-source codecs..."

      What, you mean forcing them to innovate? I know this won't be a popular opinion around here, but if the OSS Community really wants to win things like this, they're going to have to treat their projects like they're products, and compete with the alternatives out there. That means coming up with new stuff that hasn't been done before. That means making interfaces and documentation that dumb-asses such as my self can figure out without having to run to Google. That means making the presence of these things known.

      Microsoft may be a nuisance, but the OSS Community isn't doing near enough to deal with them. The expectation that all the businesses out there who thrive on making money should just stand aside and let the righteous OSS movement stroll right in is self-destructive.

      For the record, nothing about this post is intended to defend MS in any sort of way.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
  4. MS quality codecs.... by B5_geek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am 60% pleased, 30% worried, and 10% indifferent.
    Pleased: Despite all the MS bashing that occurs here, MS does make some very nice A/V codecs.

    Worried: MS has a history of hamstringing their good codecs with DRM and other crap too.

    Indifferent: Nothing to see here folks, FOSS will reverse-engineer and/or come out with far better codecs.

    --
    "The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~Plato (427-347 BC)
    1. Re:MS quality codecs.... by DreadSpoon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Indifferent: Nothing to see here folks, FOSS will reverse-engineer and/or come out with far better codecs."

      Doesn't matter if they do or not. The point is that FOSS will never be legally allowed to play these *standard* media discs, ever. The codecs are patented and not available for Free. Every single set-top box or other such hardware will be forced to run at least partially closed software. They might even be forced not to use Linux/BSD/etc. if Microsoft won't release or license versions of their codecs for those OSes.

      Even if we have a much better Free codec, that codec is worthless if every single DVD/movie released *must* be encoded in Microsoft's codecs because the standard mandates it and the hardware for playing those discs all supports Microsoft's codecs, but only one or two support the Free codec.

      It's just like the MP3 situation. The vast majority of people, even geeks that are pro-Free Software, must use MP3, because many of their devices do not support Ogg Vorbis or another high quality Free codec.

      Now that this standard is out that mandates Microsoft codecs, it can *never* be undone, because backwards compatibility must always be maintained in devices that use this standard (or you risk severely pissing off the end users who bought them or media for them), and that then mandates lockin to Microsoft and lockout of Free Software.

      The only hope in this case is that this new technology doesn't catch on (DVDs are still fairly new, many consumers will resist another video format upgrade so soon) and that by the time the market is ready for an upgrade, another Free-friendly standard is dominant.

    2. Re:MS quality codecs.... by Dr.+Bent · · Score: 5, Insightful

      FOSS will reverse-engineer and/or come out with far better codecs.

      Oh, you mean like the ogg codec? Yeah ogg is great. I love being able to play ogg file on my iPod..oh wait, no. I mean I love being able to stream them to my Tivo. Wait, no I mean, It's great that I can burn ogg files onto a cd and play them in my car mp3...er ogg...wait, no.

      Better technical solutions do not prevail simply because they're better. Mandating a patented codec is a very bad thing because now legal (i.e. DMCA) and licensing issues become much more important than the technical merit of the codec in determining it's success. FOSS can't save you from Microsoft's undead army of lawyers and marketing drones in this case.

  5. Two solutions, really... by Noryungi · · Score: 5, Insightful
    • Either Microsoft opens up its codecs and makes them available for free software players. There is (IMHO) a small chance that Microsoft will actually do this, since the alternative could be another 'monopoly'-type lawsuit.
    • Or the OSS community politely reminds the big corporations that it cannot be ignored anymore, and organizes either a boycott or creates an equivalent of these codecs. Or both (a boycott AND an equivalent).


    All in all, I think this may be more of an annoyance than a real problem. But I'd be interested in the opinion of other /. readers.
    --
    The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
  6. Re:Beta-Ray by ryanjensen · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In this case, though, the two competing standards (Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD ... think back to DVD vs. DivX) are *both* using Microsoft's VC-1 compression. So as it stands now, next-generation DVDs will use Microsoft software regardless -- unless other manufacturers want to come up with a THIRD competing format. What are the odds of that?

  7. Re:Does not matter by Xugumad · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think this is the problem they're going to face. There was a giant untapped market of people who wanted to buy movies/TV shows on a permant media, but the sound/image quality and physical size of video tapes didn't make it worth it for them.

    While BD-ROM will appeal to the home cinema fanatics, who will have the kit to really appreciate the HD images and ungodly number of sound channels that can be put on these disks. For most people though, the jump in image and sound quality is trivial compared to that when going from cassette to DVD.

  8. How is this news? by daveschroeder · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I hate these news articles...they make it look like Microsoft's codec is the only one that will work, when it's just one of several.

    HD DVD supports MPEG-2, H.264/MPEG-4 AVC, and Microsoft VC-9.

    Blu-Ray Disc (BD) already supported MPEG-2 and H.264/MPEG-4 AVC, and now just added Microsoft VC-9. So what?

    1. Re:How is this news? by dmayle · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You fail to recognize what the implication of the standard including a codec is. If You have a choice of codecs as a content supllier, that means you can put content on it in any of the formats you choose.

      As an end user of this tech, my player has to support ALL of the codecs in order to watch media, because the dics will likely come in one format only. So, YES, the content provider will have plenty of choice, but the end users will have none, especially if the content providers end up rallying around the Microsoft codec.

  9. Same thing that happened last time by EpsCylonB · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Assuming blu ray becomes the dominant hi def format (it's not clear but the ps3 supporting it gives it an edge IMO), the same thing will happen that happened with dvd's.

    Someone will reverse engineer it, you will be able to play these movies on a linux system but it won't be legal.

  10. Mandated for hardware, not software by iainl · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Even if we have a much better Free codec, that codec is worthless if every single DVD/movie released *must* be encoded in Microsoft's codecs because the standard mandates it"

    The support for Media Player 9 codec is mandated for the players, to ensure that they are capable of showing video files encoded in that format. They are also mandated to do good ol' Mpeg 2 (just like DVD) and Mpeg 4 as well.

    Of course, Mpeg 2 has its patents as well, but that doesn't seem to be hugely bothering people when discussing what this does over DVD, just because "Microsoft = Bad".

    I'm just happy because a more efficient video codec leaves more room for audio on the discs, and we might see some MLP-encoded films.

    --
    "I Know You Are But What Am I?"
  11. Re:MSFT media domination begins? by wolenczak · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It'll be the same history of DVD's, at first you will need a highend expensive player, and later you'll be able to purchase a fully functional chinese player for a fraction of the price. A guy will hack the codec, you will see a perl perl script in a TShirt, M$ will complain, RIIA will complain. And at the end nobody would care in the rest of the world except in the US.

  12. Re:MSFT media domination begins? by ron_ivi · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Let them.

    I, for one, wish the MPAA, Microsoft, the RIAA, etc all the best in their attempts to protect and overcharge insane amounts for their content and media.

    The more restricted the $40 DRM-enabled Brittney-Spears Clone that can only be played 3 times before triggering the $2/viewing per-use license becomes; the more opportunity there is for Creative-Commons-licensed music to become popular and mainstream.

    As Sony/MPAA/Microsoft and nuts like Zaentz(the guy who sued Fogerty for sounding like Fogerty, and then brought us LotR) keep gettting greedier and greedier; they are in fact _creating_ the same kind of opportunity for reasonably licensed Arts that similar nutcases did for Open Source software when they thought they could charge $100 for commodities like OS's and Relational databases.

    Let them kill themselves. Personally, I'll go see local bands that let me tape & publish MP3s of their shows and actually want people to hear their stuff.

  13. RTFA.... by Ghengis · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you read the article you'd know that this isn't an issue of support, it's an issue of MANDATE. From the article: Blu-Ray, backed by companies like Dell, Hewlett-Packard, Philips and Matsushita will require the codec to be used in playback equipment. They're not announcing that they support the codec. They're announcing that they REQUIRE the codec. There's a BIG difference here. What we have is a collaborative standard MANDATING one company's codec over open, standard codecs.

    --

    "The best laid plans of mice and men gang oft agley..." - ROBERT BURNS

  14. So what.... by zulux · · Score: 4, Insightful



    In the worst case scenario, us OpenSource/GPL freaks won't be able to watch these wonderful hi-definition movies on our wonderful full-room TVs.

    Instead will have to do something else with our time....like...

    Go hiking.
    Learn to play an instrument.
    Drink beer with friends.
    Read obscure books.
    Learn a foreign language.
    Play with children.
    Cook good food.
    Run.

    Microsoft can keep it's crap for all I care.

    --

    Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

    1. Re:So what.... by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I'm getting ready to buy Ken Burns' "The Civil War" documentary on DVD, and I'd like a reasonable method of backing it up (at $150, I won't be buying a spare copy). Right now I can pretty much do this using only Free software. Would I still be able to if it came on Blu-Ray media?

      You're right - there's a lot of time-wasting stuff on TV. That doesn't mean that there's nothing worth viewing, though.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
  15. The future is EVD by Animats · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The future is EVD, from China. Why?
    • Most players are made in China.
    • The Chinese government wants to reduce dependencies on foreign technology that requires royalties.
    • With players selling for as little as $29.95, paying royalties to high-wage countries is no longer competitive.
    • The top-grossing movie this week is Hero. It's from China.
    It no longer matters what Microsoft or Hollywood wants. EVD players will be in Wal-Mart.
  16. Re:The Auto Industry by Luscious868 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The average consumer isn't going to care about Blue-Ray anyway because the average consumer doesn't have a 50 inch big screen HD-TV and 7.1 channel surround sound. Right now DVD is good enough for the average consumer, who isn't likely to want to run out and replace their new DVD collection.

    There have been plenty of new media formats that have been superior to previous formats that never really caught on. Laser disc, DVD Audio, Betamax, Minidisc, etc. I'm not at all convinced that consumers are going to want to switch to a new video media so soon after adopting DVD. I think DVD is here to stay for a while. I look at Blue Ray much like I used to look at Laser Discs, it's a cool format that videophiles will no doubt love, but the average consumer won't care because what's already available is good enough.

    Look at the new media formats that caught on fast. CD's were leaps and bound better than tapes in the eyes of the average consumer. No more tape players that can shred tapes. Say goodbye to having to fast forward or rewind to find a song and say hello to better audio quality. It was a huge improvement in the eyes of the average consumer. Now consider DVD's. No more worrying about the VCR shredding the tape. Say goodbye to rewinding the tape to the watch the movie and say hello to superior video quality, 5.1 channel surround, extras and deleted scenes. All that Blue Ray is going to have over DVD is that it can hold more extras, will have higher video quality and room for more channels of surround sound. While this is an improvement, the average consumer doesn't have equipment that can take advantage of it. DVD's are good enough, and thus Blue Ray will be akin to Laser Disc. Videophiles will adopt it, but it'll never really catch on with the average consumer.

  17. What is NOT trivial... by Chordonblue · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...is the fact that many of the companies behind these formats are media giants.

    If for instance Sony decides to only release Spiderman 4 on Blu-Ray, whatcha gonna do? It would only take one mega-hit for people to starting shelling out the cash. Hell, I've bought GAME SYSTEMS because I liked one game.

    Just imagine how they will put us all on the rack with two competing formats.

    --
    "...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
  18. Overcharge? by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I, for one, wish the MPAA, Microsoft, the RIAA, etc all the best in their attempts to protect and overcharge insane amounts for their content and media.

    Ok, I have to weigh in here in the interest of some objectivity. Most DVDs currently are in the $25 or less range. Most of the DVDs I've recently purchased have been $10 to $14. I don't see that as overcharging, particularly since a matinee ticket costs $5.00-$5.50 and as high as $9 for evening showings, and you have to schedule yourself to be at the theater at their showing time, not when best fits your schedule.

    Some people apparently missed the Good Old Days when VHS tapes of movies were $30 up to $80 (one studio was always in the $70 to 80 range, while others were much lower) and if you adjust the dollars these would be considerably more in today's bucks.

    Blank media may be pricey, but don't confuse that with what's on sale with content.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:Overcharge? by vena · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ok, I remember when VHS tapes cost a lot, but you can't argue against price gouging by comparing DVDs to theatre tickets, can you? they're both under the same price control and the counter-attack is simply too easy: of course the MPAA's price gouging is reasonable when compared to the MPAA's price gouging. :)

  19. MPEG-2 and MPEG-4 by rd_syringe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You know, it's not like MPEG-2 and MPEG-4 aren't patented codecs, either.

  20. Re:MSFT media domination begins? by kavau · · Score: 4, Insightful
    "Fogerty was also sued for plagiarizing himself as Fantasy's lawyers thought that The Old Man Down The Road from the same album was Run Through The Jungle with new lyrics."

    Oh dear. The good old times when copyrights served to protect the artist are really long, long gone.

  21. Re:MSFT media domination begins? by accelleron · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The RIAA/MPAA will complain, no matter what.
    It's a given:

    They bitched when CD burners let us copy their precious music, albums at a time.

    They bitched when players were released to play that [mp3] music, from CD/Flash/HDD

    They bitched when DVD recordables were released to allow people to shrink and burn their precious movies.

    They're bitching about the dual-layer DVD formar becoming recordable and available to the puclic.

    Guess what they're going to do when we can slap 4-8 of their precious DVDs onto one BluRay disc for 50c? [hint: bitch.]

    --
    Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped.