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)."
Ahem, it seems that they are making their inroads to Media domination...
Microsoft will maintain its neutral position in supporting the emerging high definition video formats, said Amir Majidimehr, corporate vice president of Microsoft's Windows Media division, in a statement.
MSFT will remain "neutral" as long as they are getting paid royalties to use the codec in the design. This will likely mean that Open Source alternatives will be shutout although with other technologies OSS has been able to make its way around those roadblocks.
How long until the MPAA gives in or will yet ANOTHER media format be created that won't include MSFT or OSS?
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? --
Could someone please explain this to me is words that actually made sence to a person that has no idea what codec and all that stuff is?
"Cutting off the oxygen supply"
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?
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)
Based on my take of the article, seems this is going to be just one option of many.
"We've been committed to adding advanced codecs to enrich the Blu-ray Disc format," said Maureen Weber, general manager of HP's optical storage solutions business and a member of the Blu-Ray group, in a statement.
"We want to offer content providers a variety of compression codecs to suit their various needs. With the addition of Microsoft's VC-1, we extend that option in a package that makes Blu-ray Disc's capacity advantage even more substantial while still delivering the picture quality that consumers demand from high-definition technology."
A variety of compression codecs sure makes me think we're going to have options...
How is this different than mandating all current DVD player support Dolby Digital? This doesn't preclude the standard from accepting other open source codecs. Market forces have pretty much made DTS decoding standard in all current players.
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
The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
Don't jump to conclusions just yet
Damnit, you tell me now, after I already bought the mat...
[I can picture a world without war, without hate. I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it]
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?
The Ezine Directory
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.
corrected link, sorry.
For the record, Blu-Ray also has MPEG2 and MPEG4 AVC High Profile as mandatory codecs. So it's not like anyone is forced to use VC-1.
It might seem surprising that they would mandate 3 codecs, due to the added complexity of supporting them together. But it turns out that once you've implemented an MPEG4 decoder in silicon, VC-1 is not that difficult to add on. As for MPEG2, that's needed for back compatability, but as anyone who uses DivX knows, it's far less efficient than modern codecs.
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?
I know there is a lot of anti-MS sentiment around here, but this is really great news. VC-1 (VC-9) is a great codec for HD and is vastly superior to the aging MPEG2 standard. Think better picture quality at a third of the bitrate on 1080p material. Note that the inclusion of VC-1 does NOT mean the inclusion of any kind of Microsoft DRM. They are completely separate issues We will certainly get some kind of restrictive DRM, but that is a separate issue from VC-1.
Please note that MPEG2 is still a part of the spec and content providers will still be free to use it if they choose. I believe there is still a chance for H.264 to be included as well. (HD-DVD includs all three codecs)
I'm of the opinion that Blu-ray will ultimately win this format war, but we shall see. It has a nice capacity advantage over HD-DVD (and now a next-gen codec to utilize it efficiently). I think the only real advantage HD-DVD has right now is intial lower duplication costs due to its physical similarity to DVD. Sony has stated they are going to run with Blu-ray to the bitter end, so I expect them to press enough discs to overcome that initial disadvantage.
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.
"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?"
Does anyone know what a ballpark cost would be for licensing the IP for a blu-ray player, including the MS and other patented bits?
With all these codecs on board i'd imagine it's a lot more than for regular DVD, and seeing the Chinese manufacturers attitude towards this they'll just go right ahead with their own patent-free platform. Hollywood will ignore them, at first, then they'll panic like mad knowing that a couple of billion users can only buy pirated copies of their films. Brilliant, way to go.
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
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.
-
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.HD-DVD thinks pressing cost (a few cents difference now) will be what wins the war, and cites the VHS/BETA wars as precedent.
But it wasn't blank tape costs that killed BETA, what killed BETA (in the home market), it was 3 HR record time (extended to 4 ½) versus 6 for VHS on standard tapes.
Consumers will make the same decision here. Blu-Ray now supports all the HD-DVD formats on 25 gig single layer vs HD-DVD 15 gig. Not only this, but HD-DVD is 2 layers max (per side), while Blu-Ray is planning on going anywhere from 4 to 8. Exactly how many hasn't quite been worked out yet, but at least 4 are almost a certainty and 100 Gig on one side as a result (can you say one full season in HD on one side?).
HD-DVD's only advantage (and it is a slim one) is the DVD name. But Blu-Ray is a good name too, and one I think the general public will pick up quickly, and assume better because it's using that newer Blue Laser don't you know (even though HD-DVD will be using Blue Lasers also).
The new Holographic storage is nice too at 200 Gig, but it may be too late to the party to be a video standard storage, it still has a year or two of basic development left. Better to keep working on this one and release it in 2010+ at 1T plus to support Ultra-HDTV. By 2020 I predict Movie Theaters will be an anachronistic oddity like Drive-Ins now. Of course we may not be using Disks at all by then, and downloading U-HD straight off of the internet.
Letter To Iran
I remember reading a "report" in a "men's entertainment" magazine that gave the statistic that 2% of men could orally pleasure themselves.
If these numbers are accurate, that means for every person using Linux, there are 2 guys who can suck their own dicks.
I wouldn't call that penetration.
Norman Cook's Ode to Sl
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.
Microsoft will likely have to submit to some kind of RAND licensing as part of the deal, which will probably still exclude free players, but last I checked there was no such think as a free MPEG4 patent license either (just plenty of unlicensed implementations).
...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..."
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
You know, it's not like MPEG-2 and MPEG-4 aren't patented codecs, either.
Why do you assume MPEG-2 will be dominant? the VC-1 codec (aka VC-9, aka WMV9 Advanced Profile) can provide similar quality to MPEG-2 at half the bitrate. This means that content providers could do a project with a cheaper, single layer disc instead of a dual layer disc for longer projects.
I believe the big driver behind this is the competition form the DVD Forum's own blue laser format. DVD Forum already has tentative support for VC-1 and H.264. Even though the DVD Forum has lower digital capacity, the support for better codecs meant that DVD Forum could actually get more hours of good quality content on the disc. So equalizing the codecs means that Blu-Ray's capacity advantage can shine.
That said, I'm still betting on DVD Forum. 30 GB will mean more hours of HD content that DVD can do of SD. Also, DVD Forum discs are MUCH easier to convert an existing DVD plant to, and likely will be more durable in day to day use.
Blu-ray seems more likely to win inside cameras and that kind of thing, where capacity is a bigger deal. Think VHS v. Beta, where Beta turned into the Betacam format, giving Sony a 15-year dominance in professional video formats.
My video compression blog