Sony Decides Against Blu-Ray Downsampling 261
Paul Slocum writes "According to Ars Technica, Sony is now saying they will not use the Image Constraint Token and so movies will play on analog HDTV sets at full resolution. If HD-DVD does implement the analog downsampling, it's going to give Blu-ray a nice market advantage." From the article: "Sony's decision to not use the Image Constraint Token for the time being is meant to encourage the adoption of Blu-ray players. Launching a new product that would leave the thousands of analog HDTV owners out in the standard-definition cold could have proven to be a nightmare for Sony and the Blu-ray spec in general. Reports that 'Blu-ray discs don't look right on my HDTV' could result in consumers' switching allegiances to the competing HD DVD standard or postponing purchases of next-generation optical players altogether."
Almost there.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Just get rid of the DRM and we might have a decent product.
Re:Almost there.... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Almost there.... (Score:4, Interesting)
What matters most for is whether it will have a region flag on it. The region flag is fine if you speak English, but becomes a huge pain if you buy non-English language films, unless you have something that ignores the region encoding.
Regions on Blu-Ray plus a roundup of news (Score:5, Informative)
Region 1: North America, South America, Japan and East Asia (excluding China)
Region 2: Europe and Africa
Region 3: India, China, Russia, and all other countries.
Note how they put China and Russia, two countries with lax copyright controls, in the same region.
This means that PS3s, at least as Blu-Ray players, will be the same in Japan as they are in the US, making them much more inviting as imports if they were to launch earlier in Japan as opposed to everywhere else.
Ultimate AV magazine [ultimateavmag.com] also got to see a preview of Blu-Ray. Here are the important points:
That is, they can always turn it on in the future on a per-title basis.)
The Blu-Ray group also summarized what they announced at CeBit in this PDF [blu-raydisc.com].
Highlights:
content. (This had been something that was supposed to be delayed in the hardware).
A source at a studio has said that current "Special Edition" content for Blu-Ray discs is being ported over to a High Def signal. It won't be only the movies that are in HD.
Netflix will be carrying both Blu-Ray and Hd-DVD discs at launch [prnewswire.com].
If you have a video card that says it will support HDCP, you may be disappointed. It looks like no current video cards on the market [arstechnica.com] will really support HDCP. From Ars: "With regards to shipping cards, they are correct: no matter what a box's feature list may say, no video card supports HDCP fully at this time. Why? They have not been completely programmed. Until the specifications for the access control system are completely finished, implementing pro
Re:Regions on Blu-Ray plus a roundup of news (Score:2)
Are hardware Blu-Ray players going to be able to play with codecs other than MPEG-1 & MPEG-2?
Re:Regions on Blu-Ray plus a roundup of news (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Almost there.... (Score:5, Insightful)
That's a job for the prosecutors. That's why I don't have a problem with the RIAA rounding up people that distribute their works illegally. We have laws to prevent people from distributing other people's copyrighted material. The laws are already ridiculously harsh. Use them, don't try and turn my home studio equipment against me.
Here's a thought. The folks celebrating the pirating of copyrighted materials, they probably aren't going to buy your movie anyhow, but I will. Unless, of course, I can't play it on my equipment.
Food for thought.
Re:Almost there.... (Score:2)
If the content owners find that they're unable to prosecute infringers (due to the measures of pirates to protect their freeloading brethren through anonymous pirating), or that prosecution isn't moving fast enough to get all the pirates, they'll secure their material so that they stop getting ripped off.
Re:Almost there.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Then the content providers need to get into another business. I am not going to pay for media I can't use, and the pirates aren't going to pay even if they can use it.
Somehow I think that market will work something out.
Re:Almost there.... (Score:2)
Re:Almost there.... (Score:5, Interesting)
I personally use AllOfMP3 because the artist sees just about the same ammount of money and I am *technically* legal. If someone were to open up shop and say: Our pricing model is the same (1c
-nB
Re:Almost there.... (Score:2)
Allow me to role-play that particular scenario for a moment.
Ahem...
FUCK [successful_musician_X]! WHY SHOULD I PAY $20 FOR AN ALBUM WHEN SHE ALREADY HAS ALL THAT MONEY?!
It's just interesting how many people draw such a broad line in the ethical sand when it comes to the RIAA "ripping off artists," but how few of those people will choose to stand on the side of the line that
Re:Almost there.... (Score:2)
Two issues come to mind for me. 1) I have never met a single person over the age of about 10 that has not commited one copyright violation or another. This makes mos
Re:Almost there.... (Score:2)
Yes, but concentrating on the hardcore pirates is a waste of time. They aren't going to pay Hollywood money no matter what happens. I, on the other hand, am more than willing to pay Hollywood. I am *not* going to pay for media that I can't use. If Hollywood concentrates its efforts on trying to get the hardcore pirates to pay money they will fail to get money from the pirates and from me.
I mean, let's be serious. No amount of DRM is going to stop the truly criminal element. These are the same people
Re:Almost there.... (Score:4, Insightful)
The key word you are missing is allegedly.
The *AA's frequently go after people with almost no evidence, and it becomes a presumed guilty scenario. People who may or may not have done anything are then left to settle out of court, or face even costlier litigation to try and prove their innocence.
If they gather evidence that can be supported in a court of law, and a real prosecutor actually does the follow up, it's one thing. If they get to simply say "we believe person X was making copyrighted content available" without any supporting evidence (which they do), then it's a complete circumvention of the legal system.
There's a huge difference between claiming someone infringed, and actually having the information to be able to prove that it actually happened.
How many little old ladies who don't even own computers have been hauled before court on these things? At that point, it's just a kangaroo court and has no business happening in the first place.
Re:Almost there.... (Score:2)
In civil cases it is not "innocent until proven guilty." The folks that the RIAA targets should be grateful that the RIAA isn't pressing criminal charges. The penalties for distribution of copyrighted works were set up for the days when it took organized crime to bootleg a record.
There's a perfectly good reason that most people simply settle, and that is that the RIAA has basically got the goods on them. It's much better to pay a few thousand dollars than face the prospect of hundreds of thousands of d
Re:Almost there.... (Score:2)
Re:Almost there.... (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree with you that it's impossible to be cogniscant of every law. However, except in one or two cases that have been widely publicized that hasn't been the case at all. The RIAA is in a precarious situation, people should respect its copyrights and they aren't. The RIAA has a right to protect its property and I would much rather that they went after people that were breaking the law than subvert my computer.
All things consider the RIAA could certainly be more heavy handed. Distributing copyrighted
Re:Almost there.... (Score:2)
They aren't pressing criminal charges because they would never win. Their evidence is always circumstantial at best, and they could never convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime took place.
Re:Almost there.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Reword your rhetoric to something reasonable or failing that, STFU.
Re:Almost there.... (Score:2)
No, DRM really does prevent casual piracy, and studies have proven this. However, freeloaders have gotten much more proactive in breaking copy protection and distributing the content to as many other freeloaders as they can.
The money is better spent producing more content, or increasing the quality of what you do make.
There won't BE any money if nobody pays them.
Hell, maybe even kick a few dollars over to the musicians.
Ah, the "RIAA abuses artists" tact. Ex
Re:Almost there.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Because they know that regular people can't/don't care to circumvent the pretection. This is not new. Did you ever hear of terms like "Commodore 64" and "BBS"? The old art form called "cracktros" got its name from the very fact that the stuff was put into the available free space on cracked game disks. Cracking-and-distributing is by no means a recent thing.
There won't BE any money if nobody pays them.
Unlikely. Yes, saled will diminish, because people now get stuff they don't really like for free. But a lot of people still go to the movies or buy that CD-like storeage medium or a DVD. Many people still pay for stuff if they really like it. Filesharing is not going to destroy the entertainment industry, the same as radio and cassette recorders didn't destroy it.
Ah, the "RIAA abuses artists" tact. Except that artists willingly sign their contracts.
Yup, 'cause that's the only way to get to the top. However, some artists are already using non-traditional means of distributing their stuff - and hey, even if the RIAA dies the independent artists will still get paid for their works. Seems like the death of entertainment becomes less and less likely. The Internet does take some of the incentive for a contract away, nowadays you can reach the whole world with nothing more than a website for twenty bucks a month.
It does prevent casual piracy, and it makes sure there are dollars to begin with to pay those content creators. Pirates don't want to pay anybody as they consume other people's work. It's the antithesis of both capitalism and the Open Source philosophy.
It also makes sure some people don't want to pay for what they consider otherwise a great product. When I consider buying a music CD I first take a look at whether it's from a major label or independent. If it's the former I check whether there is any kind of copy protection. If there is I just download the thing off the Internet. I don't want to destroy capitalism or the artist's careers. I merely won't buy a copy protected CD.
I should take a look at iTMS, though. If there's some way of removing the DRM from AAC files without quality loss.
This is a "vote with your bucks" thing. I don't have a problem with the quality of the product but with the way in which the product is presented. That's why I'm not boycotting the product but the medium on which it comes.
Re:Almost there.... (Score:2, Interesting)
What studies? Could you be a little more specific? Are these studies done by the **IA? Do they exist?
Re:Almost there.... (Score:2)
Re:Almost there.... (Score:2)
Because "those people" aren't allowed to have opinions.
But for how long? (Score:5, Insightful)
But if blu-ray takes off in the market, how long do you think downsampling will remain turned off?
If this wasn't a publicity stunt, it would be removed from the spec.
Re:But for how long? (Score:4, Informative)
Sony, Disney, Fox, and Paramount are together (Score:4, Informative)
it's only Sony that's not going to use the flag. Other studios are free to do as they wish.
Disney, Fox, and Paramount are apparently going along with Sony in not using the downsampling flag on BD-Video launch titles [slashdot.org]. Among MPAA member studios, this leaves Warner and Universal.
Re:But for how long? (Score:2)
Re:But for how long? (Score:3, Insightful)
That's a really good idea. How far back should we go to "tell the pirates to stop taking stuff without paying for it." Maybe the 15th century, when Gutenberg started the whole printed word thing for Europe? [mainz.de] Or perhaps more recently in the 16th and 17th centuries when composers guarded their original compositions from thieving competitors and pe
Re:But for how long? (Score:4, Insightful)
The "pirates" aren't a recent innovation since the creation of Napster, ok?
And now we're inventing something I never said so you can attack it, called a strawman argument.
Want to know what is a recent innovation compared to the past 500+ years? The Internet. That changes things. You can put a song in a shared folder and have a thousand people download it in a week. So no matter what weak argument you attempt to throw out to distract people, it won't change the fact you're purposely ignoring the new factor that is the Internet, which makes bit-for-bit copying easy and convenient for pirates, and connects them to millions of other people. That's what's different. That's why people are putting safeguards on their content in a net-connected world.
Re:But for how long? (Score:4, Insightful)
It doesn't matter if it's right or wrong, or if the pirates are callously destroying the industry. It's a fact of life: people cheat, and it's going to happen regardless of how difficult the media industry makes it for their paying customers to connect a player to a TV.
DRM is not for preventing piracy (Score:5, Insightful)
DRM is not for preventing piracy. Piracy is just being used as the whipping boy to try to justify DRM and the DMCA law. They know they can't defeat piracy because it takes a system that is locked absolutely 100% perfectly, and that just can't exist. Instead, the purpose of DRM is to provide the content industry with a means to restrict things in specific ways so you have to pay them more to get what you previously enjoyed for one price before. DRM doesn't do everything the content industry wants, just yet, but they will continue to use the existance of piracy to keep asking for more DRM (Digital Restriction Marketing, or Doubling Revenues Monthly, depending on which side you are on). Eventually you'll have to pay-per-view on the disks you actually buy. And then after that, they'll charge you for even doing things like rewinding to replay an interesting scene. You'll see more advertising that you can't skip, eventually even embedded in the middle of the movie. And later, that advertising will even require you to click "Buy now" or "Not interested" before the movie resumes. A small percentage of people might even find a way to defeat the DRM. But the DMCA storm troopers will be activated enough to maintain just enough terror level to keep that percentage small. But of DRM even fails to get any revenue at all from 10% of the population, it won't matter because it will have quadrupled the revenues from the other 90%.
Re:But for how long? (Score:3, Insightful)
Just because some people put up with Apple's DRM doesn't mean that their DRM is effective at stopping piracy. In fact, the only reason so many people accept it is because it is so loose that a 10-year-old can avoid it b
Re:But for how long? (Score:4, Insightful)
Except that it'll take the actual pirates all of 30 minutes to defeat every single copy protection system the content owners can put in place. Meanwhile, regular people who want to watch the latest movie they bought from best buy, only to find that the $10,000 entertainment system they bought a year ago is inadequate, will get screwed.
Re:But for how long? (Score:2)
Exactly, which is why DRM is becoming much more restrictive to protect the rights of content creators from getting shit on by idealistic freeloaders who think they deserve to download anything and everything. Copy protection is becoming much more sophisticated, which should help artists to actually get paid for their hard work. You and others have yet to explain why
Re:But for how long? (Score:2)
Re:But for how long? (Score:2, Insightful)
If they are smart it will last until... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:But for how long? (Score:2)
It will remain off until the first generation of HD sets edges towards retirement.
Downsampling for the american market still delivers a significantly better picture than standard DVDs.
By this summer, or fall, your big screen HDCP set will break the $1000 price-point at Walmart, after that, no one that matters will give a damn about the token.
Yeah right (Score:5, Insightful)
From the company that brought you every other proprietary technology on the planet and likes to subvert their users' computers with rootkits. People aren't THAT stupid. No, they probably are...
Re:Yeah right (Score:5, Insightful)
So they don't downsample "for now" to get their format established and to get their "foot in the door". There's nothing stopping them from changing their minds later-on once the format is established and the players are commonplace. Flip a bit on the media and it's re-enabled. No HD for you (on old HD sets).
Say they were to release a new HD format and have absolutely no protection enabled on it whatsoever (at least for Sony titles). You do that for a few years and just eat the resulting (probably small) loss in piracy and such while your player crushes competing formats and puts them out of business. Once you've established yourself as the sole format out there, then you can re-enable the protection. What are people going to do? They already have players in their house, and there's no other format to migrate to even if they're pissed-off...
Write the couple years of "no DRM" off to "marketing", and enjoy the heavily DRM'ed future...
N.
Re:Yeah right (Score:4, Insightful)
Until ONE copy of your HD content gets out unencumbered and the next-generation torrent is anonymously, invisibly,freely shared among anyone who wants it, because it's easier to grab just the torrent overnight, over your broadband connection than deal with stupid restrictions on your viewing capabilities.
BTW offtopic, but can anyone point me to the Without a Trace episode that got fined by the FCC? December 31, 2004, I believe. I want to see what CBS got fined for and supposedly won't broadcast ever again.
Re:Yeah right (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.parentstv.org/ptc/action/withoutatrace
I haven't watched it, since I'm at work, so I don't know how long it is or if it's censored. Enjoy!
Re:Yeah right (Score:2, Interesting)
Now does CBS get to sue Parents TV Council for freely distributing their copyrighted data?
Re:Yeah right (Score:2)
I haven't watched it, since I'm at work, so I don't know how long it is or if it's censored. Enjoy!
Wow, what a great job that ParentsTV worker has. You get to be a supposedly-pious churchy Righteous One, who Thinks of the Children, while meticulously watching, documenting and digitizing all the very best smut we've got. Nice work if you can get it.
OT: Fined Without a Trace episode info (Score:3, Informative)
The episode is titled "Our Sons and Daughters" [imdb.com] and originally aired on November 6, 2003 (Season 2, Episode 6).
A great plot summary and video preview of the "offensive" part (wmv) is available from (I'm not kidding) the Parents Television Council:
Re:Yeah right (Score:3, Insightful)
How people can justify the censorship of kids getting to second base but allow showing gruesome war movies, I will never know. Because violence is natural and sex is an abomination, right? Sheesh.
People love to bring up Spatz-Tech (Score:2, Insightful)
The HDCP spec discloses a way to revoke the ability of devices with a given manufacturer ID to play encrypted video. The DVI decoder chip used in the Spatz-Tech converter box might be the first HDCP product revoked.
Re:Yeah right (Score:2, Insightful)
My DVD drive is region free, all my foreign DVDs work in my domestic player, and I have copies of most of them on my computer. DVD drm was thoroughly raped, and whatever measures they include in Blu-Ray will be equally ravaged.
DRM is irrelevant.
Re:Yeah right (Score:2)
"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face -- for ever." - O'Brien (George Orwell's 1984)
Nothing to do w/Blu-ray vs HD-DVD (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Nothing to do w/Blu-ray vs HD-DVD (Score:2)
So, only Sony movies won't play on my Sony HDTV?
Makes sense.
I just bought a new head unit for my car that was Sonyfied. It has a memory stick in it, and I can record CDs onto the memory stick. Its in ATRAC3 format, DRMed to hell, and I cannot do anything with the DRMed copy except play it back onto my head unit.
Guess which other feature I won't use?
I'll rip my (no
This only affects their movies, not players (Score:5, Informative)
According to the article, use of the "Image Constraint Token" is up to the studios. This announcement is only that Sony movies won't force down-sampling "for the foreseeable future". Other studios' movies could, since the players will still support it.
Welcome to consumer confusion.
Re:This only affects their movies, not players (Score:2)
Re:This only affects their movies, not players (Score:4, Informative)
There were two bits of news this past week on the HD front:
Disney will release on HD-DVD. The worst possible news for the Blu-Ray camp. The Disney logo pretty much guarantees you'll make the top 10 in video sales and rentals.
Warner seems the only hold-out on downsampling. You won't see the token invoked on HD releases from Disney, For, Paramount or Sony. Whatever the media.
Re:This only affects their movies, not players (Score:2)
Seems to me the worst possible news would have been that Sony is giving up on Blu-Ray for the PS3... people have to remember that the PS3 is going to push adoption of The Blu-Ray format SO fast. Even with the recent delay, they'll have 5+M Blu-Ray players in the market by mid '07. People are going to have to consciously go out and plop down $
Re:This only affects their movies, not players (Score:3, Insightful)
When Walmart puts HD rear-screen projection and the X-Box 360 on the front page of its four-color inserts, I think the train has left the station.
The Disney studio product sells a lot of video hardware. Always has.
Disneyland on ABC and The Wonderful World of Color on NBC are two very significant landmarks in the history of broadcast television.
Disney on las
Hey Kids! (Score:5, Funny)
Let's hope other studios follow suit. (Score:2, Informative)
If not they will save me a bunch of money.
Sony Blu Ray Downsampling [inaniloquent.com]
HD-DVD Locks out old HDTVs [inaniloquent.com]
Sony releases only, not all Blu-Ray releases (Score:2, Redundant)
According to Sony Pictures Home Entertainment Senior VP Don Eklund, none of Sony's Blu-ray releases for the "foreseeable future" will use ICT to force downsampling.
This is only applies to Blu-Ray discs released by Sony, not other studios. Blu-Ray players will still support down-sampling, other studios will make this decision independently of Sony, and Sony isn't promising to continue the practice with its own releases indefinately.
Hurray for capitalism (Score:2)
That's enough for me (Score:2)
Re:That's enough for me (Score:5, Funny)
But in Soviet Russia (and elsewhere), Sony roots you!
Re:That's enough for me (Score:5, Insightful)
They aren't.
They are leaving the capability there, and offering only the promise that the first Sony movies released will not use it. Another studio or Sony after a change of heart can and will use it.
Take it out of the damn player. There's no reason for it to exist unless they plan to use it.
special promotional deal (Score:5, Insightful)
As for other content producers without a big vested interest in one format or the other, don't expect them to be so generous with their releases. If they set the flag, Sony's BluRay drives will obediently down-rez the analog output.
Re:special promotional deal (Score:2)
Sony decides not to shoot itself in the foot (Score:2)
It is amazing that any company ever considered downgrading the signal for non HDCP enabled devices. Talk about arbitrarily limiting your market just when you are trying to grow it.
Re:Sony decides not to shoot itself in the foot (Score:2)
I figure that the average Joe won't be buying these discs because 1) the "new" tech looks just like the old tech (same size disc, "digital", no rewinding, etc), and 2) they already think that playing DVDs on their HD is "high-def".
The average consumer is so confused already that you would
and that's why I don't own a DVD player.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Sacred Bits are even worse than encrypted discs.
"Postpone" is right (Score:2)
Until this announcement, any purchase I might have made of Blu-Ray was definitely in the "postpone for a long-damn time" category. With this, they're at least in the running vs. HD-DVD.
Chip H.
hopeless anyway (Score:3, Insightful)
The way companies could make HD DVD a success at this point would be to get rid of all region coding and all DRM and lower prices a little; that way, people might be tempted to replace their current DVD libraries. But as it is, I'm not going to replace any of the DVDs I have with HD ones.
The evil bit returns (Score:3, Funny)
Oh Crap... (Score:5, Insightful)
How long can you buy analog HDTVs? (Score:2)
If the point is to close the analog hole, you can leverage the existing analog TVs by supporting them, but preventing future TVs (and, more to the point, recorders) from supporting that signal. As those wear out and people replace their TVs with (mandated) digital DRM ones, the studios get their dream of DRM all the way through without breaking compatibility with existing set. At some point they all tu
Duck and Cover (Score:5, Insightful)
I buy a new HD-DVD so I can watch King Kong in HD.
I place the disc in my new Toshiba HD-DVD player.
I try to play the HD movie on my slightly older Toshiba HD TV.
I do not get to watch my HD movie that I paid for.
Now if I am the consumer, am not told in VERY plain language that my TV will not play the movie in HD, I am now being misled.
At this point there are all sorts of wonderful legal options to pursue. I can sue the maker of the Player for implementing the Token, which I will. I can also sue the studio for enabling the Token, which I will also do. A case for collusion could also be made (let's get everyone to buy new TVs again).
Since Sony would make the player, the TV, and the movie, one stop shopping for a major lawsuit.
Bring it on!
Re:Duck and Cover (Score:2)
What you get in North America is an analog video output about 50% better than a standard DVD. That is probably going to look pretty good on your Toshiba.
Re:Duck and Cover (Score:2)
Re:Duck and Cover (Score:3, Insightful)
complexity will kill the marke (Score:5, Insightful)
Now look at them. Some of the most pretty laptops on the market, burdened with all the extra cost of paying for proprietary formats and slots. They are pushing formats not to make the consumers life easier, but to insure that the executives can afford drugs and boys/girls.
What mad the electronics market thrive was that one could plug an RCA cable from any decent device to any other decent device and get reasonable results. No need to hire an MSCE person to hook up the TV to the video player. No worry about if the disc was acually made for this region. DVD won on convinence, and the fact that VCR was getting complex, but why is it that I cannot just put a DVD in and watch a movie? Why can't I fast foward over the stuff I dont' want to see.
Shoudn't design be for the sake of the person paying, or is it that consumers no longer are a source of profit on thier own? Is it that Dell makes money only becuase of MS and AOL/TW kickbacks? Is it that Sony does not expect to make any money of the players, but only on the content, which will be so chock full of advertisements that it will be just like watching a tv program? Why can't movie theatres make a profit on ticket sales and concesions? It is because the studios are so greedy that they each up all the sales, yet, because of the rational fear that the major releases are crap compared to the indepdent, won't fund digigtal distribution which might singnificantly increased profits, if only they would stop letting the likes of Michael Bay make films and tom cruise appear in them.
Re:complexity will kill the marke (Score:2)
Very well said.
Bravo.
Useless token gesture. (Score:2)
[sarcasm]Wow, it's a pirate's dream come true! I've always wanted to download a 30gig HD copy of Resident Evil Apocalypse.[/sarcasm]
Idiots. The overwhelming majority of pirated content isn't even up to SD-DVD quality because most people don't want to (or can't) spend enough time downloading it. The idea that someone who can't afford to buy
Why do we even need Blu-Ray right now? (Score:3, Insightful)
The change in quality will be almost negligble. People will only feel cheated paying more and hardly being able to tell the difference.
It would make much more sense to switch to DivX on normal capacity DVDs, which is higher quality and much smaller, that way you can fit more on a single DVD, which I think is one of the more important things we need with a new format.
I don't see how anyone can be excited by Blu-Ray or HDDVD for movies, and you're kidding yourself if you are. More space isn't going to help movies that much at this stage. Yes, it will be in a higher resolution, yes, it will be crisper, but it will be at best half the difference between VHS and DVD. Many people may not even be able to tell the difference.
Games and data storage, yes, but it's too soon as the PS3 is showing. It would be better to wait a little longer to make sure that it can be distributed more cost effectively, and maybe even improve it.
DivX DVDs are a much better idea, in my opinion.
Re:Why do we even need Blu-Ray right now? (Score:2)
Do most people you know suffer from severe cataracts?
The difference between DVD and HD quality is quite distinct to me.
Because... (Score:3, Informative)
Most people think of resolutions in terms of 3D Polygonal games, where higher resolutions means less "jaggies" or blurry anti-aliased edges.
Everything on DVD is "Pre-blended" as such in a much more efficent way than polygons ever will be. I don't know if you've ever notived how even analog television can pull off much more convincing "edges" than any pre-render has done.
Higher resolutions mean it will be a little less blurred. But in p
Will Microsoft follow? (Score:3, Interesting)
My guess is no, because DVI without HDCP is digital, and Hollywood is obsessed with the lack of generational loss when copying digital data. "Oh noes, the pirates will be able to get an unencumbered HD signal!" As if that's materially worsse than getting an unencumbered SD signal, what with all the camcorder jobs floating around the net...
What about DVI? (Score:2)
The honorable rootkit company (Score:3, Funny)
You do as you choose, Sony has yet to prove to me that it's anything better than a script kiddie. One that steals your wallet as well as riffling your computer.
Upconverting (Score:2)
This is why my old TV is the last I will ever buy (Score:5, Interesting)
I stopped going to the movie theater two years ago, and quit buying DVDs about the same time. I stopped buying CDs four. It's easy to quit. I wish more people would back up their feelings with actions. If more did, the media producers would have no choice but to listen. As it is, the sheep will continue to play the no-win game the media producers graciously allow you to spend money to play. Have fun.
Switch to HD-DVD. (Score:3, Insightful)
What would switching to HD-DVD accomplish? They're doing the same thing with analog signals.
I think consumers will be postponing purchases anyway because they'd rather wait for the format war to end.
Aah, at last (Score:3, Insightful)
About bloody time.
Re:still boycotting sony* products (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately, most people complain about those evil corporations, yet still bend over and let them get screwed. Dispite Sony's rootkit deal, I'm willing to bet that PS3 will be sold out on the first day when it launches.
Re:still boycotting sony* products (Score:2)
That's a very valid point. While I believe that a starving man stealing a loaf of bread may be justified. However, music, movies, and software are wants, not needs and some people confuse one with the other. Of course, this still doesn't justify Sony and others from treating its customers like thieves.
Re:Aside from all the Sony bashing (Score:2)
Oh, good. Because where I am, there's still more than 75% of the year left.
Re:Firmware Flash (Score:2, Informative)
Any future titles (or rereleases of the same titles) could have this flag enabled, and they would be downsampled. However, this wouldn't change your ability to watch any previously purchased discs at the higher resolution over analog.
Re:All this DRM.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Not black & white (Score:5, Insightful)
Changing technology has been a real boon for studios. Now they can sell content that has already made its profit all over again. And again. Forever. Copyright is a deal between the public and the content creator - we give you a temporary monopoly in exchange for the creation. That has been perverted by a huge lobbying effort over the years.
Changing technology has also been a boon for pirates. It is possible to make perfect copies for nearly no cost.
It seems a bit hypocritical for studios to eagerly profit from new technology while complaining about piracy. Especially when copyright has been tilted more and more in their favor until now it is practically Forever.
Re:All this DRM.. (Score:2)
Hmm...Sony rewarded pirates with the whole rootkit clusterfuck, too.
If it weren't clearly crazy I'd suspect Sony is trying to encourage pirates.
Re:The Analog Hole (Score:2)
HD at Walmart starts at $1600 US for large screen RCA rear projection. These prices are far less in real terms than your father or grandfather paid for his first 21" color tv set.
Vacuum tube technology. Never Twice The Same Color.
The old folks BTW thought nothing of high ladder work on the