Slashdot Mirror


Retailers Press For Unified HD DVD Format

datemenatalie writes "While the war between HD-DVD and Blu-Ray continues over who will be the direct successor to DVD, the Video Software Dealers Association (VSDA) has issued a strong statement to Hollywood and the consumer electronics industry regarding the looming HD format war. The statement, which supports a single high-definition disc format, also offers advice on dimensions, packaging, features and even how marketing materials should be designed. The statement argues, "two formats, each capable of storing high definition movies on DVD, are planned for release into the market. Retailers uniformly agree that the concurrent distribution of more than one format is likely unsustainable, and that the launch of a single format is preferable to a format war which could confuse the public and lead to reluctance to embrace either format." This comes just weeks after early indications that HD-DVD will only allow playback of full 1080 resolution video signals through HDMI connectors, leaving consumers with older HDTVs (pre-HDMI) out of luck."

56 of 293 comments (clear)

  1. Only Marginally Good News by Xesdeeni · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So yeah, they are rallying for a single format. Plus ten for style, but minus several hundred for insisting that the copy protection be severe, including the prohibition of analog HD.

    Xesdeeni

    1. Re:Only Marginally Good News by gbrandt · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, consumers are stupid. They(we) have proven it to manufacturers and resellers over and over again. We have a short memory and lots of money.

    2. Re:Only Marginally Good News by Jherek+Carnelian · · Score: 2, Funny

      As a result, anything short of fearing for safety, isn't sufficient to maintain a boycott.

      That's easy then - just tell everyone that, "If you buy HD-BLU-DVDs then the terrorists have won!"

    3. Re:Only Marginally Good News by mog007 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, the taxes on tea in the British colonies in North America weren't that big a deal. Certainly nothing people would worry about. Hey, it's just some tiny little bit of extra money for a luxery item we don't need.

  2. The question and answer is: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    which format offers more pr0n? (blu-ray) That is the answer. That is always the answer.

    1. Re:The question and answer is: by dearreid · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Agreed. Besides, who really wants to see a porn-star's body in high definition? What if they have freckles or crabs or something?

    2. Re:The question and answer is: by Aeron65432 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Only on /. would that get modded "insightful."

  3. war: what's it good for? by dankelley · · Score: 2, Insightful
    From the post, "launch of a single format is preferable to a format war" ...

    ... ya think?

    1. Re:war: what's it good for? by alive75 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, maybe a format war is a more interesting ideia the just choosing.

      Imagine the Blu-Ray frying up HD DVD with those blue laser rays :D

  4. I certainly hope by Solr_Flare · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That for once these format developers can just agree on a single standard and stick with it. But, I think that will be highly unlikely. They will fight it out at the consumer's expense for a few years then finally settle down on a single format.

    By all rights, Blu-ray *should* be the next-gen standard. It is superior in just about every way. Which, studying history, means that HD-DVD will probably win out in the end :P

    --
    You are who you are, let no one tell you different. But, never close your mind to a new point of view.
    1. Re:I certainly hope by Adrilla · · Score: 5, Informative

      Not only do the retailers wish for a single format but so do the consumers. No one wants to be stuck with an obsolete piece of equipment a year or so after they've purchased it. Let's avoid another VHS/Beta fiasco, and actually think about the consumers for once. I personally like the Blu-ray option, it's got more room and just seems like it's the better option to me, plus it doesn't look out all the consumers without HDMI. I'd like these companies to think about the customers just once, but that's probably asking too much.

      --

      "Plans are for fools! Oglethorpe, the plutonian (Aqua Teen Hunger Force)
    2. Re:I certainly hope by sTalking_Goat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      We just have to get the pr0n industry behind Blu-Ray. The rest will take care of itself.

      --

      My days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle...

    3. Re:I certainly hope by boarder · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "plus it doesn't look out all the consumers without HDMI."

      You think BluRay won't? Just because Sony hasn't announced it won't doesn't mean it won't. Sony is notorious for giving the consumer a big "screw you," so I'd expect them to be announcing the same thing in about 3 months (their release schedule is about 6 months behind HDDVD). Hell, Sony is both a hardware and content producer, so they'd really want to lock out the analog hole.

      Toshiba locking out older HDTVs and Microsoft saying the next Windows will suck balls for playing media on current monitors (do you even know anyone with a monitor supporting HDMI? I don't, and I have a newer LCD) are both trends in the market that aren't going away. Sony will probably step right in line.

      My hope right now is that the consumers will be so jaded that no new technology works with the expensive stuff they just bought the past two years and have no guarantee the format they buy will be around next year that they just refuse to support EITHER format and refuse to upgrade to the new Windows. I think these large companies need to find out who really pays their bills.

      --
      IANAL, but I play one on /.
  5. HDMI Only? by mbelly · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This comes just weeks after early indications that HD-DVD will only allow playback of full 1080 resolution video signals through HDMI connectors, leaving consumers with older HDTVs (pre-HDMI) out of luck.

    This could be both good and bad for HD-DVD. Film makers will like the HDMI only for the DRM capability. On the other hand, consumers who are not ready to upgrade their TV's will shun away from them. It's going to be a toss up.

    --
    ~Belly
    1. Re:HDMI Only? by Solr_Flare · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What is really ironic here is....

      Isn't HD-DVD's one big touted advantage supposed to be, and correct me if I'm recalling wrong here, easy backwards compatability?

      It is rather self defeating if its backwards compatable in one way but forces hardware upgrades the other way. This will probably play more against the standard than for it.

      --
      You are who you are, let no one tell you different. But, never close your mind to a new point of view.
    2. Re:HDMI Only? by maraist · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm pretty sure DVD doesn't support 1080i.

      No, he means the player. HDMI supports a specific sets of resolutions; standard DVD is one of them.

      Currently you can get hdmi-capable DVD players. It passes both audio and video to your hdmi TV. I believe there are even HDMI audio recievers; though I don't know if DVD players have dual HDMI outputs thus that seems kind of silly.

      Not all new TV's have HDMI inputs either. Many have DVI which can have an HDMI adaptor applied (if it doesn't ship with the TV).

      From my most recent research, what I've found is that the optimal cost-effective way to get 37+ inches of flat-panel is to get the clearest-picture TV that you can afford and get a DVD player with high quality conversion to one of the several HDMI signals.. A more expensive DVD player is going to be much cheaper than a high quality conversion device on the TV.

      The end result is that HDMI is a preferable solution going forward. Most likely it is going to win out; we're just going to have to accept the associated DRM.

      I'll leave for further discussion the techincal merits of displaying full resolution 1080i or 1080p in analog or even through DVI.

      --
      -Michael
    3. Re:HDMI Only? by cabra771 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      consumers who are not ready to upgrade their TV's will shun away from them.

      I'm sure it wouldn't be long until somebody creates a little dongle that will convert HDMI to a S-Video or Component signal and defeats any DRM imposed at the same time.

      --

      -my other sig is your mom
    4. Re:HDMI Only? by fyonn · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'm sure it wouldn't be long until somebody creates a little dongle that will convert HDMI to a S-Video or Component signal and defeats any DRM imposed at the same time.

      why lose the quality by downconverting to svideo or component?

      This box will strip the HDCP off an incoming DVI inut and output un-encrypted DVI. you can downconvert that if you want, or keep it as top notch 1080i/720p

      dave

  6. That really hurts HD-DVD by EggyToast · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I used to say that, on a purely economic point, that HD-DVD had an advantage based on the fact that the initial discs would be cheaper, and that the hardware doesn't require two separate lasers in order to read HD-DVD and older DVD.

    But that HDMI fact I did not know about. To me, that really, really hurts HD-DVD as a format. My TV supports HD up to 1080i, but has no HDMI connectors. So the format is entirely useless to me if I want to buy a TV. I just bought a TV.

    Blu-Ray already fits more space per disc. I really see little reason at this point to not say "let's just go blu-ray, start retooling machines, and let the price come down." I hate the fact that Sony has its grubby mitts on it, but I'd rather have a format I can actually use without having to buy entirely new hardware. Just a player.

    1. Re:That really hurts HD-DVD by mr_flea · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Did anybody else realize that most of the people pushing HD-DVD and HDMI manufacture TVs?

    2. Re:That really hurts HD-DVD by davros866 · · Score: 2, Informative

      "Isn't it really just a matter of time before some clever hacker builds a relatively affordable HDMI-Analog converter box?" No, you can get one now: http://www.spatz-tech.de/spatz/dvi_magic.htm

  7. Retailers are taking a page from Politicians by ICLKennyG · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is great politicing. Everyone reads: "One format is better than two." Sneak in the copy protection through the back door. I want Blue-Ray to win personally, but right now I just want a frickin' 'HD'-DVD player - and content for it.

  8. Size by tor528 · · Score: 3, Funny

    They're going to be the same size as current DVDs and CDs... Haven't they figured out how annoying those dimensions are? Just barely too big to fit in a pocket.

    --
    If I think something is funny, I will probably mod it +1 Insightful. "It's funny because it's true."
  9. Dear MPAA, Manufacturers, distributors & pr0nz by tod_miller · · Score: 4, Funny

    My name is, erm, Paul Preamble, and I would like to point out that if you release HD-DVD formats, then it will take oh so much longer for me to re-encode them to xvid so it will fit onto a cheapo CD, and be more easily attainable through P2P applications.

    So I urge you, as a consumer, please keep your bit rates low, and consider us warez geezerz.

    Otherwise I will just have to draw upon the dark powers of bittorrent, that evil protocol, and distribute gigs of high resolution video to all my l33t friends on the w3b, you know, d4rkh0rz, m@niac, l0tt0rz and b4dger. (their real handles have been changed to protect the innocent)

    Kindly,

    Tod^H^H^H Paul

    [X] Post Anonymously

    --
    #hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
  10. why not just let them fight it out? by Eugene · · Score: 5, Interesting

    sometimes I'd want to see another messy product war just so the manufactures behind the format war to see it's a no win situation for anyone. I guess most people forgot about the VHS vs Beta, or MD vs DCC (well, this one really isn't a war. since both lost to CD-R)

  11. Same story, different product by MudButt · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The consumer electronics industry will always have "compatibility wars". It was no different with the 56K modem wars (X2 vs K56Flex). Consumers: Don't go out and by the latest HDDVD player if you aren't prepared to have a worthless heap of circuits laying around 2 years later. Case in point: my very own K56Flex modem, retailing for $89.95. DOH!

    1. Re:Same story, different product by jfx32 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Some of the K56Flex modems were flashable to V.90. The one I had was, anyway.

  12. hummm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Hd-DVD or Blu-ray..

    HDMI = BAD

    however.. for blu-ray.. unless you have a HDCP enabled device on the DVI (-d) cable then your only gonna get 480i.. or perhaps 480p anyway..

    SO.. they both suck..

    but blu-ray sucks less because atleast component out is still going to be available and you don't have to by an interface box.

    The chinese will fix it however.. shhh.. you can already get HDCP disabled devices, just don't let hollyweird know. Leave it to a communist regime to set the capitialist markets straight.

  13. who cares? by styxlord · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Is the adoption (or lack thereof) of DVD-Audio/SACD due to format competition? Nope. Much like CDs, DVDs provide more than acceptable quality to the masses.

    1. Re:who cares? by evilviper · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Much like CDs, DVDs provide more than acceptable quality to the masses.

      No, with audio CDs, almost everyone literally can't hear the difference with a higher-quality format. With HDTV, people can easily see the difference between 480 and 1080.

      I'm not saying you're right or wrong, but your rationalle is certainly wrong.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    2. Re:who cares? by BillyBlaze · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think there's a significant overlap between the audiophiles who want better-quality audio and the technophiles who want to organize and use it with their computers. Since DVD-Audio/SACD doesn't provide that flexibility, it isn't worth it to people in that overlap.

  14. HDMI analog converter by adrenaline_junky · · Score: 3, Informative

    A quick google of "HDMI analog converter" yields several interesting links, one of which is a device that removes HDCP encryption from an HDMI/DVI signal:

    http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/12115

  15. Doomed to fail? by interstellar_donkey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Personally, I don't see either standard as being that successful. While I'll personally enjoy the better picture from a HD DVD standard, I don't see the average consumer willing to switch over.

    DVD was successful because in addition to picture and sound quality, the format offered quite a few advantages over the prevailing standard VHS tapes. The new format was more durable (could be played over and over again without degradation), portable (smaller, easier to store), easier to manage (no rewinding, could easily jump to any portion of the film) and provided the viewer with quite a few new valuable features (extra features, commentary, switchable subtitles and foreign languages etc.)

    A HD DVD standard only offers the advantage of better picture. I just can't see regular people willing to invest in new equipment and update their video libraries just for that, and in turn I don't see publishers being motivated to offer a large amount of titles in the new standard.

    Sure, I'll buy it, but that's because I'm a dork and I like fancy electronic equipment, especially if it shows off the capabilities of my HD TVs. But most people aren't dorks (heck, a lot of people still prefer full screen versions of DVD movies).

    --
    The Internet is generally stupid
  16. Bias inherent to this document? by Sv-Manowar · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The document published by the VSDA appears to set out a large number of criteria, all of which they seem to rate as essential for the end product. However, the fact that they've released this now, instead of when the new standards were under development would lead me to believe it is biased in the direction of one of the established formats and is more of a party piece to try and rally retailer support behind a particular format (HD-DVD springs to mind). Not to mention the talk of two competing formats being unworkable, and the need for a single format..

  17. The winner by Profcrab · · Score: 2, Funny

    Victory will go to the format that allows end users to make use of the features they have on the existing HD equipment that they have already purchased. Basically, we will have to see who caves in to the demands of the market first. However, if they attempt to go full speed ahead with both formats, it is very likely that neither of them will make a significant gain and DVD, the existing and convenient technology, will continue to be the mainstream. While there were several benifits of DVD over VHS, it may be difficult to get consumers to see the benifit of the additional HD features if they cant use them without investing in newer HD equipment. Hollywood's quest for the perfect copy-protection technology may be undermined by existance of an entrenched format that has good quality, features, and flexability that, while inferior, is very convenient.

  18. Re:Retailers could force the issue! by Luscious868 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    If the format war isn't resolved, retailers could unite behind one format and force the issue by not stocking titles that are in the other format. It would take a nearly united retail front, but it would certainly be possible and would probably be in the consumer's best interest. The guys backing the other format would change their tune rather quickly if retail sales were stagnant.

    I don't usually reply to my own posts but in this case I think it's warranted. It wouldn't really take a united retail front. If Wal-Mart, Circuit City, Best Buy and few more of the major retail chains got togather and decided to get behind a single format that would seal the deal. Hell Wal-Mart alone might due the trick, look at how the RIAA bend over backwards to make sure Wal-Mart will carry certain CD's.

  19. Damn, wish I was smart like you. by DumbSwede · · Score: 2, Insightful
    When NOBODY is "stupid enough" to be an early adopter then you will never have anything nice or new. How lucky of you to get all your goodies on the backs of those willing to pay more than the price point where you wisely step in. Man what chumps. Of course I'm in the chump camp with over 4K invested in a homebrew setup that I've been building for over 3 years. AND I SURE AS HELL AM NOT GOING TO BY HD-DVD EARLY if they are going to punish me for being an early adopter. Of course the upshot is, if the original (monnied/care-about-HD) don't buy HD-DVD (or Blu-Ray if similarly crippled) you won't get lost cost HD toys as early as you would like either.

    HD is already slow to be adopted. While this has nothing to do with OTA transmission, it will likely hurt public acceptance of HDTV once again. Let's all just wait and see if there is an even more newer-newer-newer standard we'll be forced to switch to.

  20. In 1989... by michaelmalak · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I, and a bunch of others on CompuServe's CEFORUM, were putting off buying new TVs because HDTV was "just around the corner." 16 years later, evidently, it still is. 10 of those years were the broadcast standard wars, which was silly, because, overpaid steroid-pumped entertainers aside, the real value of HDTV was prerecorded movies, not over-the-air broadcasts. I.e. the important standard was HDMI, not what they were dickering over in the early 90's.

    The other 6 of those years was, in my personal theory, due to DVD. DVD came out at just the wrong time (from the consumer's perspective). DVD purchasers in the late 90's thought they were getting HDTV. The manufacturers, I believe, let this myth continue and held off on HDTV-DVD so that all the consumers could finish buying all their movies in DVD, before they learned the bad news that they would have to buy them all over again in HDTV-DVD.

    The only technology that is more laggard than home entertainment is space exploration.

  21. Well, Blu-Ray is coming anyway. by mcc · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Blu-Ray is going into American homes anyway, because it's part of the PS3 and it's probably too late for Sony to back out of that now even if they want to. Even if retailers don't want it, even if Blu-Ray fails miserably as a video format, or even if both HDDVD and Blu-Ray fail miserably as video formats and stores refuse to stock them, there are still going to be the Blu-Ray players and discs out there-- because that's what PS3 games are stored on, and this is going to happen with or without the video features ever being used. And this is going to start early next year, probably long before HDDVD players or discs become available.

    Moreover, Blu-Ray isn't going to hurt the PS3-- since if Blu-Ray movies turn out to never happen, then from a consumer perspective all three video game consoles have the exact same video playback features (they all three play DVDs, though the Revolution requires an adapter and the PS3 has the additional optional bluray ability).

    So, what effect does the above have?

  22. Re:Why worry about it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful
    That's retarded. In fields where a product affects everybody, getting down to one good standard benefits everybody. One standard (as long as it's open - please note that Sony does not control Blu-ray - Philips and others are with them!) allows manufacturers to focus their research and development better, which brings prices down. Especially in a situation where you have more than one "standard" (what the fuck? If there is more than one "standard", none of them are standards at all!), manufacturers will find themselves in a position where they must make devices that support all of the standards, which results in HIGHER prices.

    I bet you think it's a good idea that you have no fewer than five different digital cellular phone standards in the United States. Inter-operator roaming is unheard-of (because of differing standards), resulting in every operator having to build their own network EVERYWHERE, which they obviously can't do. So you get worse call quality because there are less usable cellphone towers for you (since you can obviously only use one service at a time).

    Europe went with GSM, and cellphone coverage has not been an issue in Europe since, oh, about 1995. Even the remotest locations in Finland tend to have perfect signal quality. The GSM standard is open, allowing any manufacturer to produce devices for it. All in all, this decision has benefited both consumers and the manufacturers. But boo fucking hoo, I guess fake freedom overrides sanity and clear consumer benefits on the other side of the pond.

    (I call it fake freedom because the lack of a single standard actually makes it EASIER for operators in the United States to lock people into their service only - you can't take your mobile phone and use it with some other service. Don't give me the crap about being able to unlock your phone - most people don't realize that this is an option and the benefits are not transferred all the way to the customer anyway - you're paying the same $29,95 a month whether you bought a phone with the service or not!)

    (Note: This post contains exaggerations which are necessary to drive the point through. If you reply, please concentrate on the meat instead of the hyperbole.)

  23. Re:Why worry about it by Nuttles1 · · Score: 2, Funny

    people with expensive atrack players probably were not very satisfied when they lost the market war. In the end, better technology wins. Trying to make everyone happy doesn't work, there are going to be losers. That is life. if your mamma didn't teach you that, that isn't my problem. So march your butt up stares and ask her to teach you the basics of life

  24. Anyone else notice the anti-copying suggestions? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Did anyone else notice this particular statement from the Video Software Dealer's Association's list of criteria? And I quote...

    "Also, in light of the triennial rulemaking to consider exceptions to the prohibition against circumvention of access controls, increased durability will undermine efforts to excuse or gain legal authorization for the circumvention of copy protection measures for the purpose of making so-called "back-up" copies to guard against degradation or damage."


    The industry's crusade to curb piracy is understandable and expected, but a statement that blatently urges designers and manufacturers to "undermine efforts" of completely legal consumer copying for backup purposes is extremely disturbing.

    I realize I shouldn't be surprised, but it hurts nonetheless.
  25. Someone please explain this to me by mcc · · Score: 2, Informative

    The end result is that HDMI is a preferable solution going forward. Most likely it is going to win out; we're just going to have to accept the associated DRM.

    My understanding is that HDCP (the "associated DRM" in HDMI) is not part of HDMI, but rather a separate layer which may be placed on top of either HDMI or DVI.

    Am I wrong?

  26. ROFL!!! by FunWithHeadlines · · Score: 5, Funny
    "Consumers are not stupid."

    hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

    Oh, brother, I can barely catch my breath. Have you ever wandered through a Best Buy or Circuit City?

    hahahahahahahahahahahaha

    1. Re:ROFL!!! by wildsurf · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Consumers are not stupid."

      "Think of how stupid the average consumer is, and realize that half of them are stupider than that!" (apologies to George Carlin.)

      Meanwhile, on the technical side, my vote would be for the highest-quality, most forward-looking technology, so it has the largest chance to convert people from DVDs. The current DVD technology is to my mind the video equivalent of CD-quality; in other words, "good enough" for most people. Who cares if it takes a few more cents per disc to manufacture, the cost can be trivially passed on to consumers, but the quality difference between DVD and the new format (and of course, reviews in the press emphasizing the difference) is what will get people to upgrade.

      Blu-Ray would be my choice at this point.

      --
      Weeks of coding saves hours of planning.
  27. Re:Why worry about it by Nuttles1 · · Score: 2, Funny

    you ignorant communist. Go ahead and move to a country where decisions are made for you. See what happens. Oh, you are setting yourself up fine for that, replying as an anonymous coward. Those kind of people work really well as communists!

  28. Re:Why worry about it by rbarreira · · Score: 2, Funny

    Maybe you can do the same and ask her for a trip to the pharmacy or psychologist...

    --

    The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
  29. As far as I'm aware by mcc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Isn't HD-DVD's one big touted advantage supposed to be, and correct me if I'm recalling wrong here, easy backwards compatability?

    As far as I'm aware, the advantage is and always has been easy backward compatibility for the content industries. From the consumer perspective, Blu-Ray and HD-DVD will be equally backward compatible with DVD, and both will achieve this backward compatibility in the same way-- by adding a third laser to the two which DVD drives already possess (one laser for CD frequencies, one laser for DVD frequencies, one laser for the "blue" HD disc frequencies).

    In fact from the consumer perspective if anything Blu-Ray is more backward compatible than HD-DVD-- because it is possible to manufacture Blu-Ray discs which can be placed in a standard DVD or CD player, and which appear as DVDs to a DVD player and Blu-Rays to a Blu-Ray player. (However, it is unclear if any such Blu-Ray discs will ever be manufactured, and anyway it may not be too late for HD-DVD to adopt this same feature.)

    The tauted "backward compatibility" of HD-DVD is, as noted above, from the perspective of a content producer. That is to say, you can manufacture HD-DVDs in the same machines you manufacture DVDs in, with some slight upgrades. If you wish to manufacture Blu-Ray discs, you must buy a new machine. Of course, we are told, if it is cheaper to manufacture HD-DVDs than Blu-Ray discs because you don't have to buy new machines, then the discs will be cheaper for the consumer as well. Hooray for trickle-down economics!

    And of course from the perspective of a content producer, forcing your cattle, I mean consumers, to buy new "secure" equipment-- as HD-DVD does and Blu-Ray probably will-- is a big plus.

  30. No guarantees with bendable standards by swb · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What's annoying about this isn't that my 2 year old $2800 HD TV isn't compatible with high definition signalling, it's not compatible with a specific and relatively new standard oriented towards copyright control.

    As long as the running battle continues on securing DRM, nothing you buy will be safe from flexible standards; each standard will go through a phase of being new, then being cracked, then being replaced with something else which renders previous versions obsolete and "non-standard".

    I'm not really pissed because I'm not interested in buying into HD DVD unless it's Blu-Ray, usable on my PC, and as usable for home recording as my current Panny E80 HD recorder is.

  31. Wow, read this part by rbarreira · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Device keys and media keys are still there, with a major change, in the first steps of content decryption, a player has to find its specific key in a big ternary tree of keys, where each leaf corresponds to the key of a given device (brand and model). By denying a drive to find its key in the tree, Blu-ray and HD-DVD can easily revoke a single given device. If for instance a given player is cracked and its keys are published, the licensing authority will send new keys and navigation information to disc manufacturers. As a result, all discs pressed after the player has been cracked will refuse to play on this specific drive, but will play perfectly on all other (including older) devices.

    This blacklisting of a single player model is quite powerful and can slow down mass piracy, but on the other hand it can also have some significant drawbacks for legitimate consumers. For instance, you could one day suddenly be unable to watch new movies on your player because it has been revoked after someone has successfully compromised this model. Practical use (as well as explanations to future customers) of this new revocation system will be very interesting to watch.


    That absolutely sucks, and I had never heard about it... :(

    --

    The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
    1. Re:Wow, read this part by xigxag · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What will probably happen is that the owners of that model will be required to obtain a patch or take their player in for servicing in order to both update the hardware key and disable the hack. Your "revoked" ZXDVD601 will come back to you as a ZXDVD602. Manufacturers will bear the brunt of the expense of the repair, meaning that they will have a very strong incentive (unlike now) to make their units virtually unhackable.

      Manufacturers who refuse to lock down their boxes securely will wind up seeing all their keys revoked and it will be impossible to purchase any kind of warranty/insurance coverage on their devices.

      It's actually a well thought-out evil plan.

      --
      There are two kinds of people: 1) those who start arrays with one and 1) those who start them with zero.
  32. Re:HD-DVD has a "built in DVD player" by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 3, Informative

    HD-DVD and Blu-ray players can both play DVDs, so there's no difference.

  33. Both formats destined to die? by MrBandersnatch · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So to watch this new format I need :-

    1) A new TV @ £1500 Sterling.
    2) A new HD-DVD/blueray player @ £?
    3) Copies of Films I possibly already have to play on it @ £?
    4) An upgrade to my satalite equipment to receive HD content (2 channels atm?) @ £?
    5) An upgraded sat subscripition. @ £?

    You know...to me (IMO) the above does NOT lead to :-

    6) Profit!!

    Why? Because in 5 years time, when all this stuff is priced at a more reasonable level and the quality/quanity of content could justify upgrading...there WILL be a new/better/cheaper format on the horizon (and VERY close to the horizon as well given this tech were talking about now is nearly 2 (lab) years old).

    Even worse is MANY consumers (well those of us with better than NTSC) WONT be able to see the real benefits to the upgrade and are NOT going to be replacing that DVD collection; uptake in the mass market is likely to be quite slow.

    This is quite probably going to lead to this generation of "technology" being largely shuned in the market place or only occupying a niche in the "videophiles" high end market and eventually going the way of laserdisc!!

    So let the release both formats!! It will only quicken the demise for both and HOPEFULLY somewhere in the implosion the draconion copy protection measures will take some of the flak!

    1. Re:Both formats destined to die? by evilviper · · Score: 3, Insightful
      1) A new TV @ £1500 Sterling.

      I doubt many people are going to go out and buy a new TV so they can watch HighDef Discs. In the US, most everyone is going to end up with a new digital TV over the next few years, with or without HD-DVD/Blu-Ray.

      2) A new HD-DVD/blueray player @ £?

      It's most likely that you are going to need to buy a new DVD player to hook-up to your new digital TV, anyhow.

      3) Copies of Films I possibly already have to play on it @ £?

      Nonsense. You can play all of your current DVDs on the next gen of DVD players. No re-buying necessary, unless you're die-hard, and WANT to spend money to get copies of your current movies in HD.

      4) An upgrade to my satalite equipment to receive HD content (2 channels atm?) @ £?

      The two big sat companies in the US essentially GIVE AWAY their equipment, and I don't see the upgrade to HDTV equipment being any different. They will also be carrying far more HDTV channels, very soon.

      5) An upgraded sat subscripition. @ £?

      This is up in the air. I think it's most likely the satellite and cable companies will charge about the same rates for HD as they do for current television. They are making such huge profits as-is, and they have equal operating costs whether they have 1 subscriber, or 1 billion.

      So, to summarize.

      1) Everyone will be getting a new HDTV eventually.
      2) You'll want a new DVD player, and high-def ones may be nearly as cheap.
      3) You don't need to re-buy any movies.
      4) Probably Free.
      5) Probably the same as current prices.

      Because in 5 years time, when all this stuff is priced at a more reasonable level [...] there WILL be a new/better/cheaper format on the horizon

      That's a pretty ridiculous claim to make. We've stuck with the current TV standard for 50+ years now. I can't see anything above HDTV comming along in the next few decades. Since BluRay/HD-DVD have enough room to do full-resolution HDTV, it's very unlikely something else will come along to replace it on HDTVs.

      Even worse is MANY consumers (well those of us with better than NTSC) WONT be able to see the real benefits to the upgrade

      Absolutely ridiculous. No doubt you're talking about PAL, which is just slightly higher res than NTSC... HDTV DOUBLES the vertical resolution, and almost triples the horizontal resolution.

      That would be 1.8 times the vertical, and 2.5 times the horizontal, if upgrading from PAL. Plus, you'll get a 20% increase in refresh-rate, which is a huge improvement.

      and are NOT going to be replacing that DVD collection;

      NOBODY NEEDS TO REPLACE THEIR DVD COLLECTION.

      This is quite probably going to lead to this generation of "technology" being largely shuned in the market place

      Since you've got almost everything else wrong, I can't see any reason to have any faith in your conclusions.

      or only occupying a niche in the "videophiles" high end market and eventually going the way of laserdisc!!

      LaserDiscs were huge and cumbersome, and you needed multiple discs for one single movie. The price was also prohibitive. BluRay/HD-DVD are certain not to suffer from the first problem. The second, though, is entirely up to the studios. Whether the HighDef formats live or die depends on the prices of the movies released for them, and the difficulty of circumventing the copy protection to a lesser extent.

      Since I don't know how they are going to price the HD movies, I can't say if it will be a success or not, but it's certainly got everything else going for it.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  34. The fight is over by HBergeron · · Score: 4, Insightful

    the HD-DVD folks just don't know it yet.

    In the same 18 month period that the most optomistic forcasts have 500,000 HD-DVD players sold Sony is projected to sell 15-20 million PS3's - which will include a BD player. Given the forecast price of the PS3 you can bet a large percentage of families are not going to be willing to buy that and a seperate hd-disk player when they get both in the Sony package.

    Given that the studios are complete whores and given the substantial decline in DVD sales, they are going to sell BDs for the PS3 no matter how much they prefer HD-DVD - they won't have a choice if they want to keep their phony-baloney jobs.

    After two years - an installed base of 20M+ vs. an installed base of 2M+.... It won't even be a contest, and there are no viable theories that contest these well hashed over market projections (with the possible exception of the PS3 never being released.) Even if the X-box takes 50% of the market (Microsofts finest dream, not considered likely) that's still 15M PS3s in the first 18 months.

    Oh, and for all the HD-DVD partisans who try to say that Sony will drop BD from the PS3 (other the n the complete absurdity of that contention) Just keep in mind that Sony can count the royalties it gets from every BD sold (and into the future) to subsidize the market price of the PS3 from day one due to the lock it will give it on the next generation format.

    --
    THE YEAR WAS 2081, and everybody was finally equal...
  35. Re:What's in a name? by The+Lynxpro · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "The only reason HD-DVD is a competitive is because it's got the better name. Sure it'll cost lest to manufacture and be...*cough*... more compatable, Blue-Ray offers so much more, it only has a crappy name. Maybe this group can think of a better name. Any ideas? HDVD? DVD-Ultra? Super-DVD?"

    Are you crazy? Blu-Ray has the catchy name. HD-DVD sounds like a naming convention nightmare. Like something someone from BMW dreamed up working the night shift and running out of other lettered combos to affix "iii" to.

    When someone asks what Blu-Ray is, they'll be informed that it is "DVD's successor" along with all the benefits. In comparison, "HD-DVD" sounds like a *riced out* addition to DVD, like a Ferrari F40 wanna-be spoiler affixed to a 10 year old Honda Civic.

    --
    "Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*