Yeah, really, it's not.NOT... er,.NET compliant. Plus it's common knowledge that XBox 360 has been scheduled to ship with a DVD drive (with, supposedly, an HD-DVD upgrade) for some time now. I think it was a foregone conclusion that Microsoft was going to be in the HD-DVD camp.
But really.. what difference does it make? Microsoft supporting it won't do jack to change the adoption of the format vs. BluRay. It's not like they're going to be putting software on HD-DVD anytime soon (they're only just now moving Windows to DVD releases). And it's not like OS support is required or they can somehow lockout BluRay from being used in Windows (there have been pics of Nero Burning ROM utilizing a BluRay drive under Windows for almost a year now).
Sure. That's why back in late August the first pics and in-Windows screen caps of Nero working with a Pioneer BluRay drive (BDR-101A) were leaked. FWIW, I've never seen pictures of an HD-DVD burner nor any screen caps of it in Windows... [Google for BDR-101A for more articles]
Unless Microsoft is just making this shit up, which I think they are. It's really weird that HD-DVD, when originally announced, only ever supported 15 GB discs. BluRay was announced from the get-go to handle 25 GB single layer discs and 50 GB dual layer discs. Within a short span of time after that, the HD-DVD crowd came crowing about their dual layer 30 GB solution.
See a pattern here? HD-DVD has been trying to one-up BluRay for quite a while. Now it seems that, instead of playing catch-up, they're just going to pretend BluRay doesn't exist.
I mean, I guess that's one way to try and beat your competitor. But something tells me it'll fail once the market sees what's what (read: forget all this back and forth about Microsoft and Sony; when you (don't) see 50 GB dual layer discs sitting on the shelf at Wal*Mart you'll know who was telling the truth and who wasn't).
Yeah, symbolic links. You're right, it's not perfect, but it's better than nothing. With symbolic/hard links the same data can be pointed to by different filesystem filenames (and from different levels of the path hierarchy). Sadly, at least on Windows, there doesn't exist a built-in method of exposing this functionality. It also has a number of limitations (again, on Windows).
I think I'd read somewhere that Windows Vista would include a new/better way of handling hard links (and would expose a user-visible way of manipulating them). If I can find where I read that I'll post a link.:P
Folders are a clumsy metaphor, I find. The same forces that are moving filesystems (or, in particular, their representation to the user) away from the "directories" approach are making this change. There's no reason to have files which can only be in one "folder" -- it's an artificially limited metaphor.
Indeed it is a silly limitation, this is why Windows has, since at least Windows 2000, supported "hard links". Now you can't create a link across different partitions, but you can create links across the same partition. Now if only the OS had a way to automatically create hard links for identical files to conserve disk space. (*nix has had the same thing since forever practically, I forget what they're called tho).
All that e-mail really needs is hard links, not labels (unless there's some way to achieve subdirectory-like structures with labels).
This reminds me of something Cott Lang had on his website concerning backdoors in his Renegade BBS software. Quote:
There is no back door in Renegade. If you find someone claiming there is one, ask them to demonstrate it for you. They can't.
A backdoor is not a bug, or a screwup by a sysop. A backdoor is a piece of code intentionally put in a software package to allow the author to get unauthorized access.
If some idiot gives sysop access to someone, and that person hacks his BBS, that is not a backdoor.
If you run a door game that changes or displays passwords allowing someone to hack your BBS, this is called a trojan, not a backdoor.
If somebody breaks into your house, and steals your computer, that's not a backdoor, although they might've used one to get into your house.
It's really annoying when people use the wrong terms to describe something. Of course the RIAA/MPAA propoganda machine wouldn't be earning their keep if people referred to it as "copyright infringement"...
Yeah, only idiots are buying these things. I mean, in the deal they probably have with KeyTronic it's probably cheaper for them to buy the keyboards without the lettering on them (and, as someone who worked for KeyTronic in the mid-90's and witnessed them exporting their jobs, first, to Mexico, and then finally to China, I can say without a doubt that the $30 you pay for their keyboard is like $29.50 profit-- when you buy the Das Keyboard it's probably more like $70+ profit).
Those guys must be just raking in the cash whenever someone buys one..
Actually, it is how businesses operate. Or haven't you heard of research and development (R&D) costs? Besides, for the investor that invests in this company, assuming their R&D pans out and this all works, they'll get back far more than they invested in the end.
Be sure to check out the Nero InfoTool screenshots showing the formats it can read and write.:D
Note: the original article link in that forum thread is dead, but there are images/discussion by people who read it. You might also be able to find a cache of the article on Google or Archive.org.
You're right: it's insane. I'll never buy the DVD's at those prices, let alone the newer episodes from Enterprise for example (which, AFAIK, were all done in HD, so when you buy the DVD's you're actually sacrificing quality and paying through the nose: hold out for the HD-DVD or BluRay releases).
FWIW though: I'll happily pirate them on BitTorrent, and if I ever meet an exec from Paramount I'll flip them off and tell them I did.
I wouldn't say that. I think the problems with higher quality audio are directly related to the competing formats (DVD-A vs. SACD). If there were a single unified format, more vendors would stand behind the format and support it with content. As it is right now, the companies behind these competing formats have forced themselves into a niche.
Sad really, because I've desperately wanted high quality multichannel audio to reach the mass market. Standard audio CD's, while being able to handle Dolby Surround encoded content, doesn't have support for discrete channel seperation like DVD-A/SACD does.
Where I live we get a lot of short lived branches of US companies coming in, trying to treat everyone as slaves, then spectacularly going bust. I don't know whether it is a culture of trying to screw over employees as much as possible - or more likely it is a case of exporting idiots.
See, they do that here too, but the companies don't have to leave to do it.:P And no, I have no idea where the mentality comes from. I think most management type people were dropped on their heads as children and just trying to get revenge. Or something.
Anyways.. I'd still rather have something or someone between me and the company trying to keep things fair. Without unions, it's just me and the company, and guess who wins in the debate of "what's productive" and "how much should I get paid an hour"? Not me.
But isn't it in their members interest to maintain that quota? Think about it: just because he managed to ship out 800 assembled units that day (vs. the 200 mandated by the qouta) doesn't mean they'll pay you more. YOU STILL WORK BY THE HOUR. That's the thing that always bugged me about gruntish assembly jobs as a kid, no matter how much work I did or how much faster I was, my paycheck was the same as everyone elses for the most part.
-- then I'd have no problem working as fast or slow as I wanted (within reason, obviously with that kind of formula in place the company would be within their rights to enforce a minimum reasonable parts per day). The problem though is, once a company learns that their workers can get work done faster, they'll demand it from as many of those workers as possible (while paying them the same). This is because, conceivably, without a union, the company would control the variables in that formula and could/would constantly lower the pay-per-unit so more people fall into the minimum hourly wage slot.
And rest assured, even without Unions, jobs would be going overseas or to Mexico anyways-- the fact of the matter is that, in quantity, it's simply cheaper to build the product abroad and have it shipped in in bulk.
Yep, agreed, that Enter key is an awful idea. Please make the Enter key like it is on normal keyboards (Microsoft Internet Keyboard for example). Putting it off to the side like that will pretty much rule it out as an option for me (because I don't want to deal with having to unlearn/relearn using a normal keyboard when I'm away from my fancy keyboard).
I can, on a positive note, handle the new keys to the left of the tab/caps lock/esc keys. Those seem to me to be both functional and pretty.;)
I'm not going to continue to beat you with facts-- why not follow the link where I presented hard numbers, something you haven't done, and where I explained the math so that even a 4 year old could follow along and see how wrong you are.
The fact of the matter is this: for reasons that escape me, you seem heavily biased towards HD-DVD. Perhaps you've some stake in it (training, consulting, or something else?), or perhaps you're genuinely naive. In any event, despite your insistance that ROTK:EE would work fine on HD-DVD, the fact is, it wouldn't without sacrificing quality (lower video bitrate, fewer audio options / lower audio bitrate), convenience (in order to maximize quality, video would need to be split to two discs), content (extras would need to be either left out entirely or put on a seperate disc) or some combination of the above.
Indeed. I use the term "wiaries", a clever mix of "web diaries". Unfortunately when I use it in conversation it a) sounds like I'm saying something relating to "wires" and b) confuses people because they have no idea what it means.:(
Oh well, at least it's not as retarded as "podcasting"..
For people reading this and buying into his arguments, please read my response, already posted to him elsewhere in this story.
BTW: Another thing to consider is that BluRay drives/burners will be coming out in August or shortly thereafter (from Pioneer, should come out shortly after they release the Pioneer DVR-A10 / DVR-110 this month). I've read nothing about HD-DVD burners being available. On top of this, I've seen screenshots of Ahead's Nero Burning ROM with support for BluRay (it's listed as another media type alongside CD, DVD, etc). And Ahead's Nero InfoTool shipping right now will detect if a drive supports BluRay media. For the record: it does not detect HD-DVD capabilities.
As for authoring content, this is really a non-issue. You can use MPEG2 with BluRay and it'll work fine; and what's more, thanks to the extra storage space provided by BluRay, you won't have to sacrifice quality despite the higher bitrate than H.264/VC1. That just leaves the issue of authoring menus/interactive content, and honestly, I'm not too worried about that. Sony owns a nice stable of video production tools and they'd be fools not to update them to work with their new BluRay format. Couple that with the support in Nero for burning the media and, as far as the PC is concerned, the only thing holding back BluRay production is the lack of physical drives to burn the discs with.
I'll say again, if quality doesn't matter then that's what DVD and VHS is for. I like to believe that HD-DVD and BluRay are attempting to fill the niche of moviephiles who can discern differences between the lower quality of DVD and the higher quality of HD-DVD/BluRay.
Otherwise, what's the point in releasing the format if you're still going to go with low bitrates and lossy formats? Most DVD's are anamorphic already and when played through a good DVD player look pretty nice on an HDTV monitor-- the average "end user" probably won't care that HD-DVD/BluRay offers 1920x1080 resolution or better audio formats (with better frequency ranges/quality).
I mean, I do hope one of the formats takes off like wildfire, I just hope it's the one more technically capable of dealing with the demands that HD video and high quality audio require. And IMO, HD-DVD is not the format that should succeed in the market.
I already corrected you elsewhere in this same topic. ROTK:EE simply will not fit on HD-DVD without a visible and quantifiable quality loss (both in video and audio). Not to mention that extras will not fit on the same disc as the movie (while with BluRay, it's very likely possible they could squeeze ROTK:EE onto a single BluRay disc).
If you're going to do capacity comparisons, at least use the same number of layers.
45 GB for HD-DVD is with 3 layers. If the BluRay disc had 3 layers, it'd have a capacity of 75 GB, a 30 GB difference. (FWIW I haven't heard of any attempts at a 3 layer BD, but 4 layer BD media has been created and that has a capacity of 100 GB).
Now, it won't necessarily be LOSSLESS audio, but who cares. It'll be audibly perfect, even if now a bit-for-bit copy of PCM. Really, even DTS is arguably overkill for 99% of home theaters. 448 Kbps AC-3 exceeds the acuity of most of our ears already. Bear in mind that's what the you're hearing in the cinema already.
You lost me here. Why you're trying to persuade people on the next-gen uber HDTV movie format when your attitude is that lossless is a waste and that VC1/H.264 at low bitrates is "quality" is beyond me. What's your interest here? If you don't give a shit how it looks or sounds, you can stick with SD DVD and leave the rest of us to BluRay/HD-DVD.
As far as LOTR:ROTK:EE is concerned, that's a 251 minute long movie according to iMDB. That works out to 15,060 seconds. Assuming HD-DVD ships this fall with 2 layer discs being available (I don't think 3+ layer HD-DVD or BD is realistic just yet for mass production), that's 30 GB of space. 30 GB = 30,720 MB = 245,760 Mb. That works out to 16.32 Mbit/sec of bandwidth for the full movie. With VC1/H.264 at 1920x1080 you're going to want 15-19 Mbit/sec for maximal video quality.
I trust you see the problem with HD-DVD. No room left for audio let alone extras. With BluRay's 50 GB capacity we get the following numbers: 50 GB = 51,200 MB = 409,600 Mb. That works out to 27.2 Mbit/sec of bandwidth for the full movie. More than enough for the whole 251 minute movie plus some high quality multichannel audio tracks (maybe even lossless). Extras are still iffy, but you're still a lot better off than you were with HD-DVD.
In so far as HD-DVD being cheaper, that's a red herring. Economies of scale will make any cost associated with BluRay disappear in short order. AFAIK the materials involved cost the same for both formats, the only cost for BluRay that's beyond HD-DVD is the cost of the duplicator hardware itself (HD-DVD can be retrofitted onto existing DVD hardware IIRC). But when you're dealing with hundreds of thousands or tens of millions of units per movie, the cost of those duplicators quickly disappear.
I think HD-DVD is going to lose out here, I just hope this format war ends quickly so people can be saved the pain of having to rebuy movies in whichever format succeeds...
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, really, it's not .NOT ... er, .NET compliant. Plus it's common knowledge that XBox 360 has been scheduled to ship with a DVD drive (with, supposedly, an HD-DVD upgrade) for some time now. I think it was a foregone conclusion that Microsoft was going to be in the HD-DVD camp.
But really.. what difference does it make? Microsoft supporting it won't do jack to change the adoption of the format vs. BluRay. It's not like they're going to be putting software on HD-DVD anytime soon (they're only just now moving Windows to DVD releases). And it's not like OS support is required or they can somehow lockout BluRay from being used in Windows (there have been pics of Nero Burning ROM utilizing a BluRay drive under Windows for almost a year now).
Sure. That's why back in late August the first pics and in-Windows screen caps of Nero working with a Pioneer BluRay drive (BDR-101A) were leaked. FWIW, I've never seen pictures of an HD-DVD burner nor any screen caps of it in Windows... [Google for BDR-101A for more articles]
Unless Microsoft is just making this shit up, which I think they are. It's really weird that HD-DVD, when originally announced, only ever supported 15 GB discs. BluRay was announced from the get-go to handle 25 GB single layer discs and 50 GB dual layer discs. Within a short span of time after that, the HD-DVD crowd came crowing about their dual layer 30 GB solution.
See a pattern here? HD-DVD has been trying to one-up BluRay for quite a while. Now it seems that, instead of playing catch-up, they're just going to pretend BluRay doesn't exist.
I mean, I guess that's one way to try and beat your competitor. But something tells me it'll fail once the market sees what's what (read: forget all this back and forth about Microsoft and Sony; when you (don't) see 50 GB dual layer discs sitting on the shelf at Wal*Mart you'll know who was telling the truth and who wasn't).
Yeah, symbolic links. You're right, it's not perfect, but it's better than nothing. With symbolic/hard links the same data can be pointed to by different filesystem filenames (and from different levels of the path hierarchy). Sadly, at least on Windows, there doesn't exist a built-in method of exposing this functionality. It also has a number of limitations (again, on Windows).
:P
I think I'd read somewhere that Windows Vista would include a new/better way of handling hard links (and would expose a user-visible way of manipulating them). If I can find where I read that I'll post a link.
Indeed it is a silly limitation, this is why Windows has, since at least Windows 2000, supported "hard links". Now you can't create a link across different partitions, but you can create links across the same partition. Now if only the OS had a way to automatically create hard links for identical files to conserve disk space. (*nix has had the same thing since forever practically, I forget what they're called tho).
All that e-mail really needs is hard links, not labels (unless there's some way to achieve subdirectory-like structures with labels).
Apple, meet your good buddy, Orange.
Maybe you could point me to the authority on this that says you must run your website on the OS the website is promoting/discussing.
I must have missed that one in school.
You, sir, are a complete and total fucktard.
kthx.
Yeah, only idiots are buying these things. I mean, in the deal they probably have with KeyTronic it's probably cheaper for them to buy the keyboards without the lettering on them (and, as someone who worked for KeyTronic in the mid-90's and witnessed them exporting their jobs, first, to Mexico, and then finally to China, I can say without a doubt that the $30 you pay for their keyboard is like $29.50 profit-- when you buy the Das Keyboard it's probably more like $70+ profit).
Those guys must be just raking in the cash whenever someone buys one..
As someone else has said, that's just a reader. :P
:D
On the other hand, BluRay (BDR) readers/writers will be out pretty damn soon. Here's an article discussing Pioneer's BDR-101A drive:
First look: Pioneer Blu-ray BDR-101A
Be sure to check out the Nero InfoTool screenshots showing the formats it can read and write.
Note: the original article link in that forum thread is dead, but there are images/discussion by people who read it. You might also be able to find a cache of the article on Google or Archive.org.
You're right: it's insane. I'll never buy the DVD's at those prices, let alone the newer episodes from Enterprise for example (which, AFAIK, were all done in HD, so when you buy the DVD's you're actually sacrificing quality and paying through the nose: hold out for the HD-DVD or BluRay releases).
FWIW though: I'll happily pirate them on BitTorrent, and if I ever meet an exec from Paramount I'll flip them off and tell them I did.
I wouldn't say that. I think the problems with higher quality audio are directly related to the competing formats (DVD-A vs. SACD). If there were a single unified format, more vendors would stand behind the format and support it with content. As it is right now, the companies behind these competing formats have forced themselves into a niche.
Sad really, because I've desperately wanted high quality multichannel audio to reach the mass market. Standard audio CD's, while being able to handle Dolby Surround encoded content, doesn't have support for discrete channel seperation like DVD-A/SACD does.
See, they do that here too, but the companies don't have to leave to do it. :P And no, I have no idea where the mentality comes from. I think most management type people were dropped on their heads as children and just trying to get revenge. Or something.
Anyways.. I'd still rather have something or someone between me and the company trying to keep things fair. Without unions, it's just me and the company, and guess who wins in the debate of "what's productive" and "how much should I get paid an hour"? Not me.
The upshot of that is, it's highly unlikely they'll successfully reproduce if they continue having sex with their clothes on.
But isn't it in their members interest to maintain that quota? Think about it: just because he managed to ship out 800 assembled units that day (vs. the 200 mandated by the qouta) doesn't mean they'll pay you more. YOU STILL WORK BY THE HOUR. That's the thing that always bugged me about gruntish assembly jobs as a kid, no matter how much work I did or how much faster I was, my paycheck was the same as everyone elses for the most part.
Now, if they paid me based on a formula of--
HourlySalary = (PayPerHour * HoursWorked);
PartsSalary = (PayPerAssemledPart * PartsAssemled);
GrossPay = (HourlySalary > PartsSalary) ? HourlySalary : PartsSalary;
-- then I'd have no problem working as fast or slow as I wanted (within reason, obviously with that kind of formula in place the company would be within their rights to enforce a minimum reasonable parts per day). The problem though is, once a company learns that their workers can get work done faster, they'll demand it from as many of those workers as possible (while paying them the same). This is because, conceivably, without a union, the company would control the variables in that formula and could/would constantly lower the pay-per-unit so more people fall into the minimum hourly wage slot.
And rest assured, even without Unions, jobs would be going overseas or to Mexico anyways-- the fact of the matter is that, in quantity, it's simply cheaper to build the product abroad and have it shipped in in bulk.
Yep, agreed, that Enter key is an awful idea. Please make the Enter key like it is on normal keyboards (Microsoft Internet Keyboard for example). Putting it off to the side like that will pretty much rule it out as an option for me (because I don't want to deal with having to unlearn/relearn using a normal keyboard when I'm away from my fancy keyboard).
;)
I can, on a positive note, handle the new keys to the left of the tab/caps lock/esc keys. Those seem to me to be both functional and pretty.
I'm not going to continue to beat you with facts-- why not follow the link where I presented hard numbers, something you haven't done, and where I explained the math so that even a 4 year old could follow along and see how wrong you are.
The fact of the matter is this: for reasons that escape me, you seem heavily biased towards HD-DVD. Perhaps you've some stake in it (training, consulting, or something else?), or perhaps you're genuinely naive. In any event, despite your insistance that ROTK:EE would work fine on HD-DVD, the fact is, it wouldn't without sacrificing quality (lower video bitrate, fewer audio options / lower audio bitrate), convenience (in order to maximize quality, video would need to be split to two discs), content (extras would need to be either left out entirely or put on a seperate disc) or some combination of the above.
Indeed. I use the term "wiaries", a clever mix of "web diaries". Unfortunately when I use it in conversation it a) sounds like I'm saying something relating to "wires" and b) confuses people because they have no idea what it means. :(
Oh well, at least it's not as retarded as "podcasting"..
For people reading this and buying into his arguments, please read my response, already posted to him elsewhere in this story.
BTW: Another thing to consider is that BluRay drives/burners will be coming out in August or shortly thereafter (from Pioneer, should come out shortly after they release the Pioneer DVR-A10 / DVR-110 this month). I've read nothing about HD-DVD burners being available. On top of this, I've seen screenshots of Ahead's Nero Burning ROM with support for BluRay (it's listed as another media type alongside CD, DVD, etc). And Ahead's Nero InfoTool shipping right now will detect if a drive supports BluRay media. For the record: it does not detect HD-DVD capabilities.
As for authoring content, this is really a non-issue. You can use MPEG2 with BluRay and it'll work fine; and what's more, thanks to the extra storage space provided by BluRay, you won't have to sacrifice quality despite the higher bitrate than H.264/VC1. That just leaves the issue of authoring menus/interactive content, and honestly, I'm not too worried about that. Sony owns a nice stable of video production tools and they'd be fools not to update them to work with their new BluRay format. Couple that with the support in Nero for burning the media and, as far as the PC is concerned, the only thing holding back BluRay production is the lack of physical drives to burn the discs with.
I'll say again, if quality doesn't matter then that's what DVD and VHS is for. I like to believe that HD-DVD and BluRay are attempting to fill the niche of moviephiles who can discern differences between the lower quality of DVD and the higher quality of HD-DVD/BluRay.
Otherwise, what's the point in releasing the format if you're still going to go with low bitrates and lossy formats? Most DVD's are anamorphic already and when played through a good DVD player look pretty nice on an HDTV monitor-- the average "end user" probably won't care that HD-DVD/BluRay offers 1920x1080 resolution or better audio formats (with better frequency ranges/quality).
I mean, I do hope one of the formats takes off like wildfire, I just hope it's the one more technically capable of dealing with the demands that HD video and high quality audio require. And IMO, HD-DVD is not the format that should succeed in the market.
I already corrected you elsewhere in this same topic. ROTK:EE simply will not fit on HD-DVD without a visible and quantifiable quality loss (both in video and audio). Not to mention that extras will not fit on the same disc as the movie (while with BluRay, it's very likely possible they could squeeze ROTK:EE onto a single BluRay disc).
If you're going to do capacity comparisons, at least use the same number of layers.
45 GB for HD-DVD is with 3 layers. If the BluRay disc had 3 layers, it'd have a capacity of 75 GB, a 30 GB difference. (FWIW I haven't heard of any attempts at a 3 layer BD, but 4 layer BD media has been created and that has a capacity of 100 GB).
You lost me here. Why you're trying to persuade people on the next-gen uber HDTV movie format when your attitude is that lossless is a waste and that VC1/H.264 at low bitrates is "quality" is beyond me. What's your interest here? If you don't give a shit how it looks or sounds, you can stick with SD DVD and leave the rest of us to BluRay/HD-DVD.
As far as LOTR:ROTK:EE is concerned, that's a 251 minute long movie according to iMDB. That works out to 15,060 seconds. Assuming HD-DVD ships this fall with 2 layer discs being available (I don't think 3+ layer HD-DVD or BD is realistic just yet for mass production), that's 30 GB of space. 30 GB = 30,720 MB = 245,760 Mb. That works out to 16.32 Mbit/sec of bandwidth for the full movie. With VC1/H.264 at 1920x1080 you're going to want 15-19 Mbit/sec for maximal video quality.
I trust you see the problem with HD-DVD. No room left for audio let alone extras. With BluRay's 50 GB capacity we get the following numbers: 50 GB = 51,200 MB = 409,600 Mb. That works out to 27.2 Mbit/sec of bandwidth for the full movie. More than enough for the whole 251 minute movie plus some high quality multichannel audio tracks (maybe even lossless). Extras are still iffy, but you're still a lot better off than you were with HD-DVD.
In so far as HD-DVD being cheaper, that's a red herring. Economies of scale will make any cost associated with BluRay disappear in short order. AFAIK the materials involved cost the same for both formats, the only cost for BluRay that's beyond HD-DVD is the cost of the duplicator hardware itself (HD-DVD can be retrofitted onto existing DVD hardware IIRC). But when you're dealing with hundreds of thousands or tens of millions of units per movie, the cost of those duplicators quickly disappear.
I think HD-DVD is going to lose out here, I just hope this format war ends quickly so people can be saved the pain of having to rebuy movies in whichever format succeeds...