Microsoft Codec Required For Blu-Ray Players 490
dmayle writes "According to ExtremeTech, the Blu-Ray Disc Association (which consists of many big names, like Sony, Philips, and Pioneer) has decided to mandate Microsoft's VC-1 video codec. With HD-DVD incorporating Microsoft's patented video codecs as well, what will happen to the state of media players on Open Source? (Here's an additional source for Blu-Ray info)."
Re:What will happen? (Score:5, Informative)
Just one option of many... (Score:5, Informative)
"We've been committed to adding advanced codecs to enrich the Blu-ray Disc format," said Maureen Weber, general manager of HP's optical storage solutions business and a member of the Blu-Ray group, in a statement.
"We want to offer content providers a variety of compression codecs to suit their various needs. With the addition of Microsoft's VC-1, we extend that option in a package that makes Blu-ray Disc's capacity advantage even more substantial while still delivering the picture quality that consumers demand from high-definition technology."
A variety of compression codecs sure makes me think we're going to have options...
If you read the article ... (Score:3, Informative)
Notice "A VARIETY OF COMPRESSION CODECS". VC-1 is merely one of several and is being added for those who want better images on high definition displays.
CORRECT LINK IN COMMENT ABOVE! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:the Man is out to own us! (Score:1, Informative)
VC-1 is NOT the only codec (Score:5, Informative)
It might seem surprising that they would mandate 3 codecs, due to the added complexity of supporting them together. But it turns out that once you've implemented an MPEG4 decoder in silicon, VC-1 is not that difficult to add on. As for MPEG2, that's needed for back compatability, but as anyone who uses DivX knows, it's far less efficient than modern codecs.
Re:MSFT media domination begins? (Score:5, Informative)
From the Blu-ray FAQ:
What video codecs will Blu-ray support? UPDATED
The Blu-ray Disc Founders (BDF) still haven't made a final decision about what video codecs will be included, but MPEG-2 is already part of the specification. According to the BDF technical spokesman Richard Doherty, they will also include at least one, possibly more than one, advanced video codec beyond MPEG-2 in the Blu-ray Disc format. Current canidates include MPEG-4 AVC High Profile (previously called FRExt) and VC-9. They plan to announce which advanced video codec(s) will be used sometime in September and expect the specification to be finshed by the end of the year.
Obviously MPEG-2 will be the compression algorithm for most video playback. It just happens that they are adding other codecs to the standard so that in order for hardware to be compliant they will have to decode various other MPEG-4 codecs....VC-9 being one chosen for the spec.
Great! (Score:5, Informative)
Please note that MPEG2 is still a part of the spec and content providers will still be free to use it if they choose. I believe there is still a chance for H.264 to be included as well. (HD-DVD includs all three codecs)
I'm of the opinion that Blu-ray will ultimately win this format war, but we shall see. It has a nice capacity advantage over HD-DVD (and now a next-gen codec to utilize it efficiently). I think the only real advantage HD-DVD has right now is intial lower duplication costs due to its physical similarity to DVD. Sony has stated they are going to run with Blu-ray to the bitter end, so I expect them to press enough discs to overcome that initial disadvantage.
Re:They're doing what now? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:They're doing what now? (Score:4, Informative)
All modern codecs are patented (Score:2, Informative)
Developing the fancy algorithms behind codecs is expensive and at least I think that companies are entitled to protect their inventions. It's up to the standards bodies to define under what (fair) terms the IP must be licensed in order to be adopted into the specs. Some are stricter than others. I'd like to know what's the case here.
Cinches the Deal (Score:5, Informative)
HD-DVD thinks pressing cost (a few cents difference now) will be what wins the war, and cites the VHS/BETA wars as precedent.
But it wasn't blank tape costs that killed BETA, what killed BETA (in the home market), it was 3 HR record time (extended to 4 ½) versus 6 for VHS on standard tapes.
Consumers will make the same decision here. Blu-Ray now supports all the HD-DVD formats on 25 gig single layer vs HD-DVD 15 gig. Not only this, but HD-DVD is 2 layers max (per side), while Blu-Ray is planning on going anywhere from 4 to 8. Exactly how many hasn't quite been worked out yet, but at least 4 are almost a certainty and 100 Gig on one side as a result (can you say one full season in HD on one side?).
HD-DVD's only advantage (and it is a slim one) is the DVD name. But Blu-Ray is a good name too, and one I think the general public will pick up quickly, and assume better because it's using that newer Blue Laser don't you know (even though HD-DVD will be using Blue Lasers also).
The new Holographic storage is nice too at 200 Gig, but it may be too late to the party to be a video standard storage, it still has a year or two of basic development left. Better to keep working on this one and release it in 2010+ at 1T plus to support Ultra-HDTV. By 2020 I predict Movie Theaters will be an anachronistic oddity like Drive-Ins now. Of course we may not be using Disks at all by then, and downloading U-HD straight off of the internet.
Re:How is this news? (Score:5, Informative)
Yes. Because MPEG LA is handling licensing for them all, including VC-9 [mpegla.com], considering it has been submitted to SMTPE as a standard [google.com].
Re:MSFT media domination begins? (Score:3, Informative)
Read you own link. He wasn't sued for "sounding" like, he was sued for plagerization, which is a perfectly valid thing to sue over. He lost, by the way.
From link:
"In 1985 when John Fogerty made his comeback album Centerfield he include a song called Zanz Kant Danz. The first line of lyric in the song is; 'Vanz can't dance, but he'll steal your money'. Zaentz sued Fogerty and the song title was subsequently changed to Vanz Kant Danz on later pressings of the album. Fogerty was also sued for plagiarizing himself as Fantasy's lawyers thought that The Old Man Down The Road from the same album was Run Through The Jungle with new lyrics. As Fogerty did not own the rights to his old songs they believed this was depriving Fantasy of much needed royalties. Fogerty won the lawsuit."
Re:MS quality codecs.... (Score:3, Informative)
MPEG2 and MPEG4 are patented too... (Score:4, Informative)
Microsoft will likely have to submit to some kind of RAND licensing as part of the deal, which will probably still exclude free players, but last I checked there was no such think as a free MPEG4 patent license either (just plenty of unlicensed implementations).
Re:VC-1 is NOT the only codec (Score:3, Informative)
However, this is a long way from saying that it will only work on Microsoft OS's. First of all, VC-1 is fully published and adopted by SMPTE. The decoder is set in stone, and as a result, nobody need worry thta Microsoft will suddenly change how HD-DVDs and Blu-Ray discs are encoded.
Plus, because the spec is published, it will be possible to implement decoders on a variety of non-MS platforms. Yes, royalties will have to be paid if you're going to stay legal. But this is the case with MPEG4 as well---in that respect nothing has changed. And the royalty process is not going to be controlled by Microsoft but rather the Blu-Ray and HD-DVD consortia. So yes, if you insist on paying NOTHING for your media player, you may be screwed. But the royalty structure for VC-1 is actually more attractive than for MPEG4.
Finally, it's important to note that this has nothing to do with DRM. That's a separate decision process that has not yet been nailed down for either spec. Microsoft doesn't seem to be heavily involved, at least in that they don't seem to have much traction promoting their own DRM technology. At the same time, having Microsoft and Dell and HP in these consortia is only helping to make sure that these formats are PC playable.
Still, I think people should be far more concerned about the DRM schemes being considered for these formats than the selection of a Microsoft codec.
Options for the wrong people (Score:1, Informative)
MANUFACTURERS of Blu-Ray PLAYERS are being required to support the ENTIRE collection of codecs that they specify (MPEG-2, MPEG-4, VC-1, etc) so that a CONTENT PROVIDER (read: the company making the discs) CAN CHOOSE which codec to use.
This means that if Paramount Pictures decides that they're going to exclusively use the VC-1 codec when transferring their movie catalogue to the Blu-Ray format, then that's it. You're not going to play ANY of their movies on a linux (let alone a Solaris, Irix, or MacOS) box without violating the license of the codec. That is, unless Microsoft decides to open the source, or at least start releasing binaries for the other OSes.
Plus, it gives Microsoft the power to mandate that all Blu-Ray players run some embedded form of Windows...
That having been said, given that HD DVD has already chosen to support VC-1, I can kind of understand the Blu-Ray folks wanting to jump on the bandwagon... If both groups support the same collection of codecs, it gives rise to the hope that we'll eventually see Dual-Format players. Sound familiar, anyone? (DVD +/-R)
Re:They're doing what now? (Score:2, Informative)
I've never seen coder/decoder before, so I'm pretty sure that's not it.
Re:Four isn't much more than three (Score:3, Informative)
The Revision of Copyright act of 1830, and the adoption of the Berne Convention in 1886. That makes 6 times.
Re:They're doing what now? (Score:2, Informative)
codec (Score:3, Informative)
So, generally, coding/encoding is not related to encryption.
The present is EVD. The future is unknown. (Score:3, Informative)
First EVD disks and software players have been presented in April 2004. As the disk is physically a DVD disk it can be read with any computer DVD drive. Successful copies have been made with DVD-R disks. The number of films offered is still very limited. -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_Versatile_D
Re:Read what you quote (Score:1, Informative)
Read you[sic] own link. He wasn't sued for "sounding" like, he was sued for plagerization[sic], which is a perfectly valid thing to sue over. He lost, by the way.
"he was sued" = fogerty was sued.
therefore "he lost" = fogerty lost.
but fogerty won, and furthermore fogerty was sued for sounding like himself - for "the old man down the road" sounding too much like "run through the jungle," to be precise. Plagiarism (not "plagerization"), when you're talking about songs, means exactly that - "sounding too much like."
Why not MPEG-2? Compression efficiency! (Score:4, Informative)
I believe the big driver behind this is the competition form the DVD Forum's own blue laser format. DVD Forum already has tentative support for VC-1 and H.264. Even though the DVD Forum has lower digital capacity, the support for better codecs meant that DVD Forum could actually get more hours of good quality content on the disc. So equalizing the codecs means that Blu-Ray's capacity advantage can shine.
That said, I'm still betting on DVD Forum. 30 GB will mean more hours of HD content that DVD can do of SD. Also, DVD Forum discs are MUCH easier to convert an existing DVD plant to, and likely will be more durable in day to day use.
Blu-ray seems more likely to win inside cameras and that kind of thing, where capacity is a bigger deal. Think VHS v. Beta, where Beta turned into the Betacam format, giving Sony a 15-year dominance in professional video formats.
Similar licenses (Score:3, Informative)
Now, if what you want is an open-source VC-1 encoder, I'm sure it'll happen once the standard is fully finalized, ala LAME and Xvid. The same kind of open-source but unlicensed codec implementation should be perfectly applicable there.
Wrong again. (Score:3, Informative)
As a more valid analogy, assume that 2% of Linux users users use Emacs, and 1% of Windows users use Notepad. Does this mean that Emacs has twice the usage of Notepad ? Of course not. The group of Windows users is different than the group of Linux users, and so are any percentages of them.
--LordPixie
The Chinese Already Dominate (Score:3, Informative)
A side note: all dvd drives and players are made in China. There may be some stereo tweeks out there doing custom boxes, but the drives are all sourced from the same 10 or so plants.
Re:Mandated for hardware, not software (Score:3, Informative)
That's the thing here, it's not that it's not open, it is, it's just not no cost which is what most Linux people really want. However for video playback, be it VC-9, MPEG-2 or MPEG-4, you do legally need to have a license. As you can see they aren't expensive per copy, but the developers of the sofware do need to license it.
Re:MS quality codecs.... (Score:3, Informative)
I think you meant 1998.