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? --
"Cutting off the oxygen supply"
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...
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]
Its like, a bunch of 1s and 0s that make computer stuff work.
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.
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.
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.
A codec is a COder DECoder. It's what takes the analog audio waveforms and the still images that make up a video stream and converts them to 1s and 0s for storage on a CD, DVD or other digitial media. It also converts from the bits on the media back to the original (or near original) audio and video. If the coded is patented, then you can not use it without licensing the technology from the patent holder, even if you write a clean version from scratch. That means the everytime you buy a player, a little bit of your money goes to the patent holder (here, Microsoft.) It also means no open source versions of the software.
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.
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
"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."
You know, it's not like MPEG-2 and MPEG-4 aren't patented codecs, either.