Microsoft Code in Every HD-DVD Player 375
Neophytus writes "The DVD Forum steering group has given preliminary backing to Microsoft's VC-9 codec along with H.264 and MPEG-2 as mandatory playback modes for HD-DVD players. Having this technology, the most fundamental part of Windows Media Player 9, in every new DVD player could well give Microsoft major leverage into the Cable and Satellite TV markets where currently MPEG2 dominates. The approval is pending an update in licencing terms and other conditions within 60 days."
Re:Hmm... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Hopefully... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:what are the licensing terms? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:what are the licensing terms? (Score:3, Informative)
In other words, it's EXACTLY deCSS all over again: the OSS community won't be allowed to play HD-DVDs legally, but somebody will hack together a perfectly functional driver as soon as the actual hardware hits the scene.
Some things just never change. Sigh...
Three manditory playback modes means (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Hmm... (Score:5, Informative)
Microsoft will no longer be the ones to control revisions added to the codec if it's approved. SMPTE will be.
Re:Hmm... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:what are the licensing terms? (Score:2, Informative)
Yes, just like MPEG2, MPEG4, AAC, MP3 and other patented codecs.
> In other words, it's EXACTLY deCSS all over again
DeCSS was about DRM, not codecs.
Buy yourself a clue before posting next time.
Re:Here we go again (Score:5, Informative)
Re:what are the licensing terms? (Score:2, Informative)
Every modern codec requires licensing fees.
Re:Linux DVD players... (Score:2, Informative)
The codec is about to become an open SMPTE standard. Anyone will able to implement the codec. Those who live in coutries without software patents won't even have to pay royalties.
Microsoft can't stop anyone from implementing the codec once it becomes a SMPTE standard.
But hey, you're obviously fond of FUD, so keep it up.
Re:spelling bug (Score:2, Informative)
Licence Defintion [reference.com]
KFG
Re:This will be a big push for EVD (Score:5, Informative)
Re:what are the licensing terms? (Score:5, Informative)
Every modern codec requires licensing fees.
Like this? [vorbis.com]
Re:Uh oh. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Um an idea (Score:2, Informative)
Re:what are the licensing terms? (Score:5, Informative)
Excuse me, but royalties are paid on DVDs TODAY (Score:5, Informative)
Neither MPEG-2 nor the other technologies that are part of the DVD standard are free (save for possibly PCM audio). Furthermore, the hardware royalties are quite nominal as shown by the proliferation of DVD players, on the order of less than a dollar as the FAQ shows clearly. MPEG-4 Part 10 (aka H.264) and MPEG-2 are still available for use in authoring DVDs. Nobody is forcing anyone to use WMV9 if they don't want to. Just because Microsoft's CODEC is included in the standard doesn't mean that they're taking over anything. It's not mandatory.
Newest Versions of XVID (Score:5, Informative)
This amount is based on me burning dvd video backups using codecs like xvid and others video files using wm9 codec to be played on the pc versus me burning in mpeg2 for standalone dvd players.
Re:Yeah (Score:5, Informative)
It's no different than MPEG-4. An open, but not free, standard that you pay a royalty to the owner to use. Open standards can still be patented, all it means is that the technology is open to the world and there is a standard licensing fee that anyone can pay to use said technology.
Firewire would be another example. It's not a free technology, Apple owns it and you have to pay them royalties to use it. However the technical spec is open for anyone to look at and provided you pay the royalties, Apple is happy to have you implement their technology.
This is actually an example of the patent system working as it should. A company does research, makes the results available to the world to use, and profits from it. That was the intent as perscribed in the constitution.
Re:This will be a big push for EVD (Score:1, Informative)
Re:what are the licensing terms? (Score:5, Informative)
VC-9 has patents involved. You can't legally reverse engineer a patent and use it. Hell, you can't even legally use a patented item that you developed independently.
Re:what are the licensing terms? (Score:1, Informative)
IANAL, but I believe there is some indemnification in patent law if you are using a patented technology you independently discovered, but aren't selling it. If you design a better cellphone antenna and put it on your phone, you are pretty safe even though someone has patented it. If you start selling them, that's when you get into areas of patent infringement.
Also, if you were to use the information disclosed in the patent application to build the device, even if you aren't selling it, then you are liable. Of course, only a lawyer could claim with a straight face that using the information in many patent applications to build the patented technology isn't itself an act of independent discovery. Most of them aren't the greatest examples of technical readability.
Re:Hmm... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:what are the licensing terms? (Score:5, Informative)
This automatically excludes any open-source (ie FREE) implementations, as either the end-users (??) or the distributors (most likely) would be held responsible for unlicensed copies.
Yeah it's only Ten Cents, but it's a Big Legal Stick that The Monopoly can BEAT you with.
Score+1 for Microsoft vs OpenSource.
Re:Hmm... (Score:2, Informative)
If you think this one won't get cracked, you are on crack. Unlike MS software, there is a strong tradition that when you buy entertainment on a physical medium, you own the physical copy for a wide range of legitimate uses.
Bottom line, regardless of the fine print that I won't read, I have the right to play that DVD I bought on any DVD player I own. If I choose to play it on my computer, I don't have to use your software. I don't have to buy Windows. I can run Linux/HURD/FreeBSD/BeOS/FreeDOS. You are going to have a tough time making a convincing argument that people are stealing from you when they are paying for the media and paying for the device to play it and you want more control.
Re:what are the licensing terms? (Score:5, Informative)
It is also not a "pure" OO language, you can write linear script like, write procedural, even pure functional and ofource OO, or combine them all. Although the syntax is pretty strikt unlike perl, the way you can program is very open.
I'm not a windows programmer, but I have played with Python under windows, and a large part of the windows API is exposed "as standard" in python.
It is also very easy to add API and callbacks in Python. For example I build in a few days a coupling that alowed python to be used as a TopEnd (Transactional middleware) service/application component. (You were talking about transaction based systems)
Now, I'm sure not everything you mentioned are already exposed to python, but the parent also told about a full decade, that is 10 years.
And I am sure You could make everything you put in that list by yourself in a year, including learning python language and concept.
Python is very easy to pick up, even by non-programmers. There are people teaching Python to their 6 year olds. I've noticed there is even turtle graphics (from the old LOGO language) in Python.
Also the interactive python interpreter is very nice, you can test and learn concepts on its command prompt. even making TCP connections, opening windows, changing fields in excel, or connecting to a transaction system.
My languages of choice are Python/C, I know many more languages, but I don't need more. (except for work, but that is not by choice). I use C mostly if things needs to be fast (such as image, video or audio processing) or if I want to expose a API to Python.
Now, I'm certan that technicaly VB can easely be replaced by Python. There are many political reasons that this may not be the case.
Re:what are the licensing terms? (Score:3, Informative)
If Microsoft was able to determine that you infringed on their patent, regardless of your selling of the technology, regardless of your inventing it 'independantly' (Actually, the assumption with patents is that you have read them all... i.e. that there isn't such a thing as independent development), they can sue you and prevent you from using it as well as getting damages.
If you're hoping that Microsoft/the gov't won't catch on, yes, that may be correct, but that is not -legal- use under today's laws.
No, I'm not a lawyer, but it is pretty clear that the parent poster isn't either.
Not a lot of fun (Score:3, Informative)
Here's the kicker- I played the HDTV version alongside the MP2 version and I couldn't see a dramatic difference in quality.
One thin dime (Score:5, Informative)
Re:One thin dime (Score:4, Informative)
Re:what are the licensing terms? (Score:3, Informative)
Also, don't forget that Guido got a DARPA acceptance and funding for Computer Programming for Everyone [python.org]. Kids may be learning Python in elementary school soon.
Re:Hmm... (Score:1, Informative)
Then, the player needs to "call home" to make sure you're allowed to use it (via the Internet)."
Really? Where's your proof?
"Then, the player needs to be updated.
Then the update needs to call home."
Perhaps these calls home aren't about enforcing DRM but rather just checks for product updates. A lot of software does this today.
Take off your tin foil hat. It sounds to me like you're jumping to conclusions and making accusations simply because you don't really understand what's going on.
Re:One thin dime (Score:3, Informative)
For reference their cost structure is:
No charge for units produced up to Dec 2004 (first they get you hooked)
First 100,000 units are free
Then its $0.10-0.20 (twice MS's fee) per unit depending of the exact nature of use.
The MPEG-2 tax can be even more, as there are many different patents tied up with it. Depending on which patents licencing fees you are exempt from or get a discount it will cost you $0.04-0.40 per unit.
The Microsoft licencing cost is no different then the other. You've already paid licencing fees for your normal DVD player, even though you might only use it to play VCDs and MP3 CDs and never se an MPEG2 DVD (or vice versa).
Re:what are the licensing terms? (Score:1, Informative)
Because it is a long way from finished (alpha 3), and in tests (doom9's tests, for example), the VP3 codec it is based on fared quite poorly even compared to DivX. You can try them out yourself if you wish.
Now, I'm no Microsoft fan, and it pains me to say this, but
(I note that the VCM version can be used in AVI, or Ogg or Matroska containers, instead of the crap WMV container, and that the standard referenced here will likely not include the poor ASF container format. I note that some groups, particularly anime groups, actually release WMV9-VCM in AVI into the wild, and that it is the highest quality video for its bitrate and content that I have ever seen; content which causes even divx5 and xvid to chuck nuts.)
OK, so it's patented and proprietary, but so is MPEG-2 and MPEG-4; the only safe codecs of note I know, from a pure OSS point of view, are MPEG-1 (which is god-awful), and VP3 (and Theora on which it is based, because on2 "opened" the patent). Many technologies in a DVD player are patented, too; for example, most of the audio encoding. AC3, anyone? mp3? AAC? AAC-HE? Even the lossless compression mode used by the linear PCM on DVDs? You are, to put it bluntly, screwed already, by several big patents, defended rather aggressively, if you want to write an open-source DVD player, or HD-DVD player. What's one more? It only takes one to shut down your project, unless it's an educational implementation only...
Theora isn't even close to what WMV9 can do. When Theora matures, it'll beat WMV9 quite a lot for speed, but not quality. Ogg Tarkin is the only reasonable contender to fight WMV9 for quality, and it's years away.
I welcome this, because it's the best damn video codec there is. You knew they weren't going to choose a "free" format, because frankly, there isn't one yet (it's either block city, blur city, or alpha 3 - which, frankly, is a pity, but I'm still interested in where the Ogg video codecs are going - they're just not there yet); of the proprietary formats, they really couldn't have made a better choice than WMV9 (though I note that the cost of the licensing may be dwarfed by the increased oomph needed by the decoding chipset - we are talking something in the 2 GHz range of a PC, for bitrates they would use, so some ninja skills in hardware support may be required).
This will have a noticeable, very positive impact on the perceived video quality of the HD-DVDs compared to DVDs (DVDs still have 4:1:1 Y:Cb:Cr commonly, for a start; if you think that's not too bad, wait until you see something red); if BluRay don't adopt a nearly equal (H.264 or higher profile, encoded by Xvid), equal (WMV9), or develop a superior, codec, their discs will look worse, despite being able to support a higher bitrate; if they use MPEG-2 again, well, that's it, game over.
Of course, you don't have to trust me on this, you could grab the stuff and evaluate it for yourself, EULAs be damned.
I note, interestingly, that the WMA codec sucks in comparison, and that WMA Pro isn't actually that much better (at its bitrates, Vorbis 1.0.1 or the garf tuned versions have a tendency to own it - even without more then pair channel coupling), which just goes to show, not all codec families are created equal.
Re:Hmm... (Score:2, Informative)
Blu-ray discs (Score:2, Informative)
Check out this report [thedigitalbits.com] comparing the two at CES. HD-DVD sounds like it is getting left in the dust.
Re:Hmm... (Score:3, Informative)
Personally I find humor in the fact that we may see prices lowered because someone is coming into the market to compete, and that competitor is Microsoft.
Re:Anyone actually doing this? (Score:4, Informative)
As far as I know, the only company which does this is Intervideo, who make LinDVD. LinDVD is not available to the general public, however, and is only licensed to OEMs making Linux-based DVD players.