Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Movies Media Data Storage Microsoft

Microsoft Fueling HD Wars For Own Benefit? 359

DaveyJJ writes "According to Transformers' director Michael Bay, in a story over on Electronista, Microsoft is deliberately feeding into the HD disc format wars to ensure that its own downloads succeed where physical copies fail, he says in a response to a question posed through his official forums. The producer contends that Microsoft is writing "$100 million dollar checks" to movie studios to ensure HD DVD exclusives that hurt the overall market regardless of the format's actual merit or its popularity, preventing any one format from gaining a clear upper hand."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Fueling HD Wars For Own Benefit?

Comments Filter:
  • Summary is awful (Score:1, Informative)

    by nunyadambinness ( 1181813 ) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @10:29AM (#21584529)
    What Bay says in the interview is, essentially, that Microsoft is propping up HD DVD as a stalling tactic until they have a download only technology that can compete.

    I am skeptical of that development occurring anytime soon, but the summary does a poor job of making the point.
  • by Serge_Tomiko ( 1178965 ) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @11:28AM (#21585157)
    Blu ray is NOT a Sony format, anymore than the CD is a Sony format. They are the dominant member of the industry consortium that developed Blu Ray, and one of the original developers. Microsoft would never have to license Blu Ray from Sony, they would license it from the consortium just as with the regular CD.

    What Microsoft does NOT like about Blu Ray is that it requires a java VM.
  • by sm62704 ( 957197 ) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @11:37AM (#21585277) Journal
    Indeed, the CD is far from dead. The RIAA has been saying that MP3s are hurting CD sales for almost a decade, yet there is still a large space devoted to CDs at Wal Mart, Best Buy, etc. I don't see a lot of buggy whips at WalMart.

    And his post was "insightful?" The RIAA lawyers must have mod points [slashdot.org] today!

    -mcgrew
  • Faulty premise. (Score:3, Informative)

    by iainl ( 136759 ) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @11:39AM (#21585307)
    It's pretty pointless discussing why Microsoft might give Paramount $100M in advertising assistance if it's actually Toshiba that did it instead.

    This rant from Bay is about as logical as the plots to his movies.
  • Wrong on two counts (Score:4, Informative)

    by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @11:47AM (#21585427)
    Thanks for pointing this out, and correcting me. It sounds like Sony would still get the benefit of licensing fees

    No, a neutral Blu-Ray forum gets the licensing fees [blu-raydisc.info]. Sony makes money the old fashioned way, selling hardware and software (media).

    Do you know why this (Java support) a big deal to Microsoft? It doesn't sound like there's any practical reason to me

    Why don't know why but we know it's a big deal to Microsoft, because the only thing that stopped HD-DVD and Blu-Ray combining a few years back was the refusial of the Blu-Ray consortium to add iHD (Microsofts menuing format) into the Blu-Ray standard.
  • by FredDC ( 1048502 ) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @11:47AM (#21585429)
    There is a big difference between the game format "war" and the movie format "war" according to me.

    Blu-Ray and HD DVD basically offer the same thing, a way to watch movies.

    The different ways of playing games however, offer different means of playing a game. Very different ways of controlling the game for example.

    The different ways of playing games will attract different types of players, and different types of games will be made, some which can be ported to different devices, some that can't.

    Blu-ray and HD DVD however offer no significant difference to the consumer, therefor one of the formats will go the way of the dodo, because it doesn't make sense for movie producers to have to produce different types of discs which basically do the same...
  • by Dan Ost ( 415913 ) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @11:54AM (#21585505)
    My DSL gives me about 150k/sec. Is that even sufficient to stream a hi-def movie?
  • HD-DVD will prevail (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @11:55AM (#21585523)
    Sony has a history of over-charging for the privilege of utilizing what they've "created" - it doesn't really matter which format is better - Sony will drive the price as high as they can and HD-DVD will prevail. Digi downloads will trudge along, but most people prefer to have media in-hand and that's not going to change anytime soon. The format war is not likely to actually be Microsoft's doing - conspiracies abound are largely unsubstantiated. I guess it's just "hate corporation day" again here on democratdot.
  • by Xest ( 935314 ) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @12:25PM (#21585927)
    It seems silly to speculate that Toshiba is subsidising HD-DVD and the Bluray group are not, particularly as Sony was selling PS3s at a loss for so long which was attributed to Bluray and Cell.

    In terms of backwards compatibility I refer to the fact that HD-DVDs can use a layer of the disc for DVD such that you can buy HD-DVDs now and use them in your existing DVD player and have them play standard def. then when you do make the switch to HD-DVD you've already got a library of HD films meaning you don't have to rebuy your entire DVD collection in HD if you don't wish to. See here for more information:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD_DVD#DVD_.2F_HD_DVD_hybrid_discs [wikipedia.org]

    I'm not sure why you suggest Bluray DRM isn't more problematic, whilst the underlying AACS layer agreeably isn't, there have been notable issues with BD+ - an extra layer of DRM which HD DVD doesn't use, see here as an example of the issues:

    http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20071007-new-blu-ray-discs-with-bd-drm-failing-to-play-on-some-devices.html [arstechnica.com]
  • by AnyNoMouse ( 715074 ) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @12:42PM (#21586153)
    Because HD-DVD comes from the DVD group, they can make combo discs that have DVD on one side and HD-DVD on the other. In fact, there's another portion of the spec that allows 1-2 layers of HD-DVD and 1 layer of DVD on the same side (The Freedom Anime DVD released in the US is done this way). This can't be done on Blu Ray because of licensing issues, from what I understand.

    This allows, in the future, for a studio to release only one product, a Twin DVD/HD-DVD combo disc that plays in both DVD players and HD-DVD players with High Definition video for the HD-DVD player. Yields are a bit low for that to be a reality today, I think, but it's certainly an interesting option.
  • by mczak ( 575986 ) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @01:19PM (#21586789)

    The DRM is not more problematic.
    This is very much untrue. HD-DVD "only" supports AACS, while blu-ray additionally supports BD+. This runs some code in a virtual machine to ensure the player integrity. Now some discs are supporting this, and apparently older players have a lot of problems with these discs (that is, they don't work at all without a firmware upgrade). And if it works, it seems to cause longer load times and other performance issues. Now, it may be true that this is the fault of the players, but BD+ inherently is another "feature" which at best offers absolutely no benefit to the customer, and at worst causes lots of headaches. Plus, for software players, I really don't want the big media companies to be able to run arbitrary code on my box - I've got no idea what they are allowed to do in that vm, but there's no reason to not fear the worst...
  • by Afrosheen ( 42464 ) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @01:32PM (#21587031)
    A casual look at Nielsen or other numbers shows BR disc is the clear winner and the gap continues to widen. Sony's PS3 is the world's most popular BR player...anyone who owns one and an HDTV will naturally choose it as their format of choice. This helps their market penetration and attach rate. So far I've seen 3-1 disc sales in favor of BR discs and during Black Friday it spiked to 4-1.

      Europe has already decided on the BR format as well. An estimated 75% of HD movie sales have been BR discs. Personally I have some bias since I bought a PS3 at launch, but the numbers from many sources show BR has a clear and dominating lead. Seeing Hitachi and Toshiba launch super cheap players just reeks of desperation as they fight to keep from becoming the next Betamax. Anyone can visit their local big brick retailer and see the difference in shelf space between the two formats as well. BR dominates the shelves at Target, Super Target, Meijer's, Wal-Mart, Kmart, etc. Even my local Blockbuster has a ton of BR discs and a handful of HD-DVD discs. This is the retailers doing what smart retailers do: responding to sales by offering more of the item that moves more units.
  • by LionMage ( 318500 ) on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @03:22PM (#21588655) Homepage

    Microsoft have many political reasons to dislike Java, but BD-J being a messy, ill-specced pile of slowness in comparison to iHD is a valid technical one.
    This is actually the first time I've seen anyone claim that BD-J is poorly specified or slow. Could you provide some references to support that contention?

    I can't speak to the speed of BD-J, though clearly this smacks of the "Java is slow" FUD that Java proponents have been dealing with for years now. Java VMs aren't really "slow" anymore, unless you're dealing with memory-constrained devices. Most Blu-Ray players are going to have plenty enough RAM, so I don't think constrained memory footprint is going to be an issue.

    As for the "ill-specced" claim, I'm puzzled. I know that BD-J is based on an already existing standard for embedding interactive Java content in terrestrial television broadcasts and European cable transmissions; this technology is used, for example, in the German version of "Who Wants to be a Millionaire?" (or maybe it was "Deal or No Deal") -- it allows viewers to play along at home using their remote control. BD-J is just an extension of this already existing and deployed standard, so how is it poorly specified?

    I attended JavaOne in 2006, and attended a couple sessions on BD-J and related technologies, so that's where I got my information from.
  • How is this open? (Score:5, Informative)

    by SanityInAnarchy ( 655584 ) <ninja@slaphack.com> on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @03:43PM (#21588927) Journal

    Yes, how deliciously evil for Microsoft to be buying support for an open and public standard (HD-DVD)

    I'm sorry, but at least, say, OOXML pretends to be open. Google for "OOXML Specification dowload" and the very first result has PDFs, linked to directly, not even so much as a free registration required.

    I develop HD-DVD applications for a living. On my desk are four volumes of "DVD Specifications for High Definition VIDEO (HD DVD-Video)", totaling almost three inches thick. (I'd tell you how many pages, but the pages are not numbered.) There's probably another three and a half inches worth of updates, which someone else here has read and memorized, that I don't really look at.

    We do not have these in electronic form. As far as I know, you cannot get them in electronic form, and they do not come with an index, which makes them a bitch to search until you start to memorize enough of it to have a vague idea of where to start randomly flipping through to find what you need.

    This is because on every single page, at the bottom of the page, is the following notice:

    DO NOT COPY ©Copyright 2005--2006 The DVD Forum*. All rights reserved. CONFIDENTIAL

    "Open" and "public" my ass.

  • by AgentPaper ( 968688 ) * on Wednesday December 05, 2007 @03:45PM (#21588961)
    I believe what GP is trying to say is that even if "next generation broadband" services (i.e. FiOS and DOCSIS 3.0) become common in large cities in the United States, the odds of that service becoming ubiquitous throughout the United States are not good, based on the pattern that DSL and cable Internet availability has followed in the past. As an example, he cited his own home region, which despite being near a large city, still is not completely served by any form of broadband and has poor quality broadband service in those areas where it is available.

    If that is, in fact, GP's point, then he/she has a good argument. Despite all the miles of dark fiber that have been laid and all the investment in gee-whiz networking technology, we still have tolerably poor consumer broadband access in vast regions of this country. It's practically a Slashdot meme at this point that you can get a faster, cheaper Internet connection in Hanoi than in Honolulu. One would think, as we're ten years or so into the consumer broadband era, that the only people who should be left using "legacy speed" (less than 128 Kbit/sec) services are those who have chosen not to upgrade. However, there are still hundreds of thousands of people in rural and exurban areas who would love to have broadband service but can't get it at all due to expense or lack of availability, and hundreds of thousands more beyond that who have poor quality service but can't get anything better.

    Going back to the original topic, those people like the GP with no broadband or poor broadband are the same people who'll be completely shut out of any kind of digital video distribution model, all of which are absolutely dependent on a good, high-speed data connection to function. I can't think of anyone who would willingly wait a week for a 20 GiB HD movie to download when they could drive up to the local movie rental store and take a BD or HD-DVD home within the hour. Those people are the reason why physical media will take a long, long time to die out completely, and until that happens, we'll continue to repeat the format wars over and over again.

"Experience has proved that some people indeed know everything." -- Russell Baker

Working...