First Blu-ray Drives Won't play Blu-ray Movies

aapold writes "Sony officially announced its BWU-100A product at its "Experience More 2006" event in Sydney yesterday, all the while acknowledging that there's significant room for improvement before the product is viable for integration into media centre PCs. Sony's product manager for data storage, told CNET.com.au that due to copy protection issues and lagging software development, the drive will only play user-recorded high-definition content from a digital camcorder, and not commercial movies released under the BD format." All this hullabaloo makes me want neither side to win. If only I didn't desperately crave HD content on my TV!

Next media should be defined by the community.

[Quebec]

Would it be possible to the community to layout the specifications, fabrication methods of the next generation of media?

Re:So much for Sony in the coming format war!

[Bonker]

This is really typical of Sony. For the last 30 years Sony has iterated this process over and over again.

1. Develop really nice content format.
2. Promote the hell out of new content format.
3. Artificially CRIPPLE THE FUCK out of new content format.
4. Wonder why people aren't buying new content format.
5. Abandon new content format.

See also: BetaMax, MiniDisc, MemoryStick, UDF, etc...

I should say this is really typical of Sony USA. Things like MiniDisc were really popular in Japan, but the restrictions imposed on the format came from pressures from Sony's U.S. media divisions.

Sony execs and marketing people refuse to learn from their mistakes, so they keep repeating them. They've been doing it over and over again for literally decades now.

As a matter of fact, unless HD-DVD manages to be as easy to uncripple as DVDs (and it appears that it will be), it too will be stillborn.

PS3?

[LoverOfJoy]

FTA:

Bautista says that one of two reasons for this is the fact that commercial content is encrypted with High-Bandwidth Digital Content Protection (HDCP), which can only be decrypted using a HDCP-compliant graphics card that offers DVI or HDMI connections.

So is this a confession that the low-end PS3 won't be able to play commercial Blu Ray DVDs? Or does the low-end PS3 use an HDCP-compliant graphics card without offering DVI or HDMI connections?

I smell class action

[ip_freely_2000]

You just know that Joe and Jane Consumer will walk into Best Buy and NOT buy something they think they are getting. You have to think that even companies like Best Buy are going to be pissed having to deal with upset customers and spending time restocking stuff.

But we have to remember this is Sony, so you can't expect something smart or fair for the consumer.

Obligatory: "But, aside from that, Mrs. Lincoln...

[dpbsmith]

...how did you like the play?"

The manufacturers seems to be falling over themselves trying to bring flawed, faulty, and generally unfinished products to market... presumably oblivious to the possibility the first kid on the block to get one will tell all his friends about his experiences.

I do believe Blu-Ray and HDDVD are well on their way to becoming the quadraphonic sound of the new millennium.

Re:Is it really worth it, anyway?

[Tumbleweed]

Have you tried upconverting to 720p, rather than 1080i, and if so, what did you think? I *cannot stand* interlaced displays, but that's just me. I pick out the dampening wires on aperture grille CRTs immediately, too, whilst most people don't seem to notice them at all, or aren't bothered by them.

Remove copy protection and make more money overall

[ksattic]

Am I the only one who strongly believes that if they remove all content protection from Blu-Ray and HD-DVD, the drive and software manufacturers will stand to make more money, even after factoring in rampant piracy, than with the current mess they have? So what idiot decided to spend all this money developing content protection that restricts the format to virtual unusability, giving it a dreadful image in the process? Moreso, what idiot thought that this would be a good way to increase profits?

Re:HD is overrated

[RingDev]

I wonder how much of that has to deal with the filming though. I mean, you could take an old silver screen real and "re-master" it into a HD format, but it's still going to have the quality of a crappy old film. For the Fifth Element, did they actually remaster the move from 30mm film? Or did they just take the existing digital format, blow it up, and run some filters over it to make it look a little more crisp?

-Rick

Re: the demise of the disc

[johnfink]

Issues like this are just going to increase the demand for downloadable movies, and hasten the demise of "Disc Media" as the primary means of movie watching.

Except, even with my not-too-shabby-for-the-US 8mbit/sec cable connection, it'll take about a day to download a 35gig movie. That's assuming, of course, that I can get reasonably close to my own theoretical limit of 8meg down, and whichever (genius) company is sending me the file can push the data that quickly. I can't get that kind of sustained bandwidth from any company I've downloaded anything from, aside from various Linux distros via bittorent. With a very few downloaders, those numbers add up very quickly, and our measly upload rates (384k for me) do not make the bittorrent avenue feasible in my eyes.

I think my point is, before we start looking to get high-def movies via IP, we need to get some bigger trucks to move all these internets through the series of pipes.

Firmware Upgradeable?

[wwiiol_toofless]

When the software dev un-lags, assuming the hardware is capable, couldn't they release a firmware patch to correct the injustice?

It reminds me of many MMOGs initial releases:

"You can buy Game-X now!, you just won't be able to login to the server and play for 2-3 weeks. l33t!"

Re:HD is overrated

[MaineCoon]

Lawerence of Arabia was actually shot in 70mm. It was fairly amazing quality. But I stil stand by my original statement that once you're really into the movie you don't really notice it that much, and I didn't "enjoy" the movie any more because of the quality of the picture, over standard definition. It was a very enjoyable movie anyways.

Fifth Element was Super 35mm. Don't know what they might have done otherwise.

Re:You for got 4.5!

[Keith Russell]

The devil in the details is Sony's split personality:

1. Consumer Electronics division develops really nice content format.
2. CE division promotes the hell out of new content format.
3. Big Media division catches wind of new content format, and demands DRM shackles.
4. Accountants see how much more profit Big Media division brings in, and forces CE division to comply.
5. New content format lands with a thud in the marketplace.
6. One division or the other abandons new content format.

I say "one division or the other" because it varies. CE will hang on to formats that are useful outside of Big Media's influence. Beta lived on in professional circles, MiniDisc found new life in NetMD, and Memory Stick is still their preferred camera memory format. UMD looks like it's dead to both sides. (PSP : UMD movies :: chicken : egg) Looks like CE is already losing interest in Blu-Ray, with this non-Big-Media-compliant drive.

DRM

[ichigo 2.0]

The really silly thing with the HDCP requirement is that eventually the bluray format will be cracked, and then people will be able to watch bluray movies with this player on a pc that hasn't got any kind of hdcp support. So in the end it's the legal bluray viewers that end up buying new monitors, videocards and bluray drives to satisfy the hdcp requirement, while the pirates can watch them with whatever hardware they want. The media publishing industry has to be full of retards, there really isn't any other explanation.

Re:So much for Sony in the coming format war!

[Traiklin]

so who are you blaming?

Sony as a whole (which encompasses more then just the almight world that is the USA)
Sony USA (which has been fucking over the US for quite awhile)

cause there is a big difference in the two, SUSA made a lot of formats die when they really didn't need to (such as MiniDisc), while in other countrys the format(s) took off and flurished.

MiniDisc is the best example, it bombed in the US but just about everywheres else it's still used today. So it makes you wonder just how much influance SUSA has in their global operations now, $600 for the PS3, Blu-Ray drives that don't even play Blu-Ray movies, The Blu-Ray spec isn't even finalized yet cause they haven't decided on a Copy protection scheme to use. Sure their main headquarters is in Japan which is right next to China but the lengths they are going through for copy "protection" is more in tune to the DMCA and stripping rights away from people.

Do they even want to sell media?

[djrogers]

All this hullabaloo is making me think that Big Entertainment(tm) is really not interested in selling media anymore. Does it REALLY make sense that the only way for 99% of us to view HD movies is to pay the cable/sat provider for HBO-HD? Does it REALLY make sense that we needed 2 new media types and players for HD video when we all know that a 2 hour H.264 encoded HD movie would fit nicely on an old fashioned DVD? No, all that this proving is that BE(tm) wants to make purchasing HD movies difficult for us, and delay it for so long, that we'll accept their 'rental' models...

Frankly, I'm sick of it... I'upgrade my sat reciever to watch NFL in HD this fall, but I have very little desire to waste money on HD movies these days. Back when I was an HT geek I probably woulda considered it, but these days I'm far closer to being joe-sixpack than an HT geek. About the only thing that'll get me to start buying HD movies is when the ITMS starts selling them and I can store them indefinitely on my mini, take them with me on my powerbook, and re-encode them to carry on my vPod. Yeah, guess that make me one of the sheeple...

Re: the demise of the disc

[DingerX]

I hate to say it, but it's one of the perverse effects of the "open source mentality": dedicated amateurs will always do a better job at technologically-interesting tasks than professionals. Why? Well, you have to hire professionals; the internet, on the other hand, is the great enabler for addicts of all kinds, including those addicted to getting the best data compression out there.

Sure, these guys get the accolades, and see their files copied across the world, but the bug that drives the true nuts isn't mass approval; it's knowing that nobody else can squeeze the bits like they can.

Paying jobs don't give that: neither the big media corps nor the big media pirates need an ace at this job.

so while they disdain the preponderance of brain-dead pirates who benefit most from their work, they take heart in the few cognoscenti who admire their art.

Yes, it's a sick world we live in. What gives me most fear is the notion that the "Open Source Mentality" itself is to blame, rather than an inefficient marketplace.

Re:You for got 4.5!

[stunt_penguin]

It seems that it's not that the drive won't play the movies, it's that there are no HDCP-enabled (crippled) graphics cards out there that will decode the video according to the DRM spec.

After the fiasco with Blu-ray and the required DRM allegedly being a big contributor to the PS3's delays, this is Sony embarrassing themselves with their DRM once again. Situations liek this just give more time for HD-DVD to gain market share while the Japanese giant flounders.

Re:Is it really worth it, anyway?

[kimvette]

Not quite. DVD is to high resolution as 128kbps MP3 is to 320kbps

Because, see, 64kbps is downright painful to listen to, while 128K is good enough to listen to and enjoy, but its limitations become readily apparant on high-end stereo systems (or good headphones). 320kbps does introduce noticeable artifacts on rare occasions, but is almost close to "good enough" to consider tossing the CDs to the curb. DVDs can be very enjoyable to watch, but view on a GOOD screen the artifacts become readily apparant. Blu-Ray abd HD-DVD are supposed to solve this, but being compressed, they will never quite eliminate all compression artifacts.

64kbps would be more analog to S-VHS, and 48kbps to VHS.

Sorry, I'm being picky because I hate 128kbps MP3s and comparing high definition formats to 128kbps MP3s is an insult to the high definition formats and the engineers who worked on them.

Re:PS3?

[kimvette]

So even in that case you should be able to play blu-ray movies until studios start setting the HDCP flag. Even then it will play blu-ray movies they just get downsampled to normal content (sucks I know).

I do wish the big content providers would stop being so paranoid and just make it easy for people to watch legally purchased films.

That only introduces a defense against lawsuits from MPAA members.

"Ma'am, did you download Pirates of the Caribbean Part 4"

"Yes sir, I did. You see, Disney enabled HDCP and my high definition television does not support HDCP, so it will only play low-definition video. Therefore, the only way to watch it is to, argh, "pirate" the movie, me matey. Disney, Sony, and the MPAA at large is actively encouraging piracy because only legitimate paying customers are affected by copy protection. Yar!"

crave?

[spazoid12]

"All this hullabaloo makes me want neither side to win. If only I didn't desperately crave HD content on my TV!"

Honestly I don't crave it and don't see why any one would care. I'm just feeling kinda "done" with media. I can't watch almost anything on TV anymore without going insane and see so few movies since so many just suck now days. Why would I care to upgrade all my crap just to watch bad movies with a little more visual detail? You know what, maybe if they want to convince me to watch any of the crap they'll have to send me some free equipment and some money for my time.

HD formats

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope both formats fail.

I work in the pro video industry, and I regularaly use a consumer DVD player for a source, and run it through a quality real time scaler (such as Folsom's ImagePRO) to get it to HD for viewing on a native HD flat panel. What's really intersting to me is that for 99% of content that you find in movies, a good quality scaler can make standard def DVD look just as good as HD.

Now, most consumers have never seen a good quality scaler, as the stuff the put in most TV sets is junk. But, the price on the chips that make good scalers are dropping like rocks, so I don't imagine it'll be long before you can get decently priced pro quality scaling boxes at home.

The simple truth is that for most real life video sources, the jump from SD to HD is minimal enough that a good scaling algorithm can create a result that looks good enough at HD.

That being the case, why do I want to carry around the baggage of all that extra storage space on my media server?

Re:Next media should be defined by the community.

[idonthack]

I've never encoded to Matroska before, but if you're comfortable with the command line it's pretty easy to rip a DVD with mplayer/mencoder. Subtitles can also be dumped easily using the "-dump__sub" options. The manpage can tell you how to dump subs quickly around line 7150. IIRC on a dvd you should use -slang en instead of giving it a source file.

Re:*cough* *cough*

[Cynonamous Anoward]

Not really, and it kind of misses the bigger point. Unfortunately, I'm not allowed to go into much detail about how cool it's really going to get. See, as you might have guessed, I know all this because I work for DivX, I am an engineer here, I am in the office right now, and I am staring at a large pile of very cool toys, which I helped make. DivX has just filed for IPO, and we are in the quiet period, so I have to be careful what info I give out. All I can give you is a bunch of published, but not well known info. So to give you the general idea: DivX 6 does tons of things which vastly improve quality, while squashing the files down even futher. Technically, nothing prevents you from doing what you describe, it is simply the quality profiles that we use to certify DVD players as meeting our interoperability standards. These profiles are guidelines only, and the encoder CAN encode outside of them (although new versions will warn you). But we make no guarantees about the ability of hardware decoders to play such files. The profiles are to help you make sure that you are buying devices, and making or downloading movies, which will all play nice together. The other reason for the profiles is the emergence of hardware encoding devices. There is an emerging market for DivX capable recorders, digital cameras, and hybrid devices, like linux based net appliances. These devices need stricter encoding contstraints in order to produce files that will play back on whatever player you stick them in. In other words, yes, you COULD encode a huge resolution with any DivX codec, but you would be hard pressed to find a DVD player that could play it on a TV, in NTSC, let alone 720 or 1080. You'd also have trouble finding codec settings that struck a good balance between quality and file size. A 2 hour DivX 5.0 file, even in 720p, would be a long download, and only play on a fairly hefty PC. Oh yeah, and only the DivX 6 HD profile supports non-square pixels, so if you used anything older, you'd get the typical blocky scaling artifacts. But even that misses my real point from the original post. See, even if you got past all of that, you would still just have an avi file right? it's just a plain old movie, even if it's a really nice looking movie. No menus, no multiple audio languages, no subtitles, no chaptering, and no bonus "making of" movies. So, what would you say if I told you that I have a 2 hour, 720p movie on my hard drive? What if I told you that it had full DVD-style menus, 8 audio tracks, 8 subtitle tracks, 50 chapter points, and a making-of documentary? And if I told you that the encoding was so good you could barely tell it was encoded, even on an HDTV? Cool, no? So what if I told you that the entire file is under 4 GB? Now, how about I tell you that I'm sitting here, right now, watching a $200 DVD player PLAYING that file, off a standard DVD-R, at full resolution, on an HDTV? That you don't NEED a blue laser? That you don't have to pay $1500? That you never needed more storage space in the first place? That's the point. It's one thing to encode a huge video. It's another thing to fit the entire movie, bonus features and all, on a normal DVD, completely bypassing the need for expensive new technology. It kind of highlights the fact that the piracy-fearing tatics of companies like sony, are putting a strangle hold on innovation in digital video, does it not? There IS a better way, a cheaper way, an easier way, and a more environmentally friendly way, to watch a movie. And DivX is going to try and give it to you. I'll let you in on a secret, that will tell you exactly what the MPAA's mentality has done to the industry. We have a half-finished piece of software in house here. It can rip entire DVD's into DivX files, bonus features and everything. Entirely automated. A few mouse clicks, and your whole DVD collection is faithfully reproduced on your hard drive, as easy as ripping it with DVD decrypter, but with 1/8 the hard drive space. But it's likely that you will never see DivX release such software. Why

Re:Next media should be defined by the community.

[nutshell42]

Basically:

You'll want MkvToolNix [bunkus.org]. It's gui's called mmg (and is part of the package).

Create an avi with video and audio in dvd::rip, have it extract the vobsub file. Then use mmg to merge the avi and the vobsub file (mmg can split the files too, so don't do it in dvd::rip).

If you're ready to invest more time you might look at how to create a x264 video (if you got the horsepower for playback that is) because it's much better than even XviD.

Re: the demise of the disc

[Gowry]

I agree with HD vs DVD for movies. HD definately looks better but not enough to put up with what the industry is doing with the content. However, I think it's because of mastering. All you have to do is look at the difference in the way sports looks between SD and HD and you can clearly see they're holding out when it comes to movies. Movies played via my Infocus 4805 projector definately don't leave me wanting a HD projector. I look at my HD tv and don't see a huge difference. However, all it takes is a look at a football or basketball game in HD, and I'd much rather watch my tv. I wish more people could get as clear a view of this type of difference when listening to audio--but then again audio mastering sucks except in rare instances like Natalie Merchant and Fiona Apple these days. Pump up the volume seems to be the new creed of sound engineers everywhere. Dynamics? who cares about those? It's sad to think that artists put up with it. Gowry