Toshiba to drop HD DVD
- Thread starter AzBat
- Start date
Some of the facts in the article are incorrect, but the core of the article - that Microsoft was pushing for a monopoly of online movie downloads and media players through use of Windows as a media player, set top box OS and media download center, is correct, and that is still ongoing with the push for online media downloads. That is why Microsoft pushed HD-DVD so hard for so long, rather than taking a neutral stance.
Really ?
I believe managed copy is optional on Bluray. The Holywood studios don't want it for their movies, so movies won't allow it. Vista was specifically with multi-media DRM in mind for precisely the purpose on holding and playing protected media on it's hard drive.
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/oct2005/tc2005106_9074_tc024.htm
Last edited by a moderator:
Studios do allow it, and in fact MC is required in all Blu-ray titles. Only the hardware manufacturers have the option to disable it.
Also, how would the studios not allow it on Blu-ray, and then allow it on HD-DVD which lacks the extra BD+ security layer ?
Doesn't make any sense, now does it ?
Easy, and it makes perfect sense. I guess the BD drive checks the BD media to see if permission is allowed to transfer the file to the hard drive, and if the media doesn't give the required permission, the drive won't allow the transfer. It will allow playing of the content though, without transfer to the hard drive which will be decoded at the video card. The article says clearly that the studios and not the player manufacturer determines whether the movie can be loaded onto the hard drive.
Here you have the same thing from the Bluray consortium itself
http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/#bluray_managed_copy
So the hardware manufacturer can decide whether to support managed copy or not, but whatever choice the manufacturer makes, under no circumstance can copying onto hard disk take place, unless the movie concerned allows it. (I believe Sony only incorporated managed copy at all because HP demanded it in return for support of the format).
That has thrown a bit of a spanner into Microsoft's plans for allowing Windows Vista to manage all movie content and streaming because the studios will not allow movies to be copied onto hard drive, which explains why Microsoft has been so partisan in backing HD-DVD.
From what I understand this protection feature is not yet implemented and it was to be included on movies and player firmware after a particular date.
Last edited by a moderator:
Mintmaster
Veteran
So many people go on about this, but it's complete nonsense.
What does HD-DVD and BR have to do with online movie downloads? They're completely orthogonal. One is about HD, the other is primarily about convenience. Companies trying to get into the online distribution business don't give a rats ass about HD formats, as their enemy is the optical distribution as a whole. Whether HD-DVD/BR took away some of the business from DVD is irrelevent because the target audience is the same.
If anything, awareness of HD movie quality actually makes online distribution more appealing to the masses. If people didn't care about HD, that would be one more reason (albeit a minor one) to avoid online distribution.
HD and online download may be orthogonal, but Microsoft still has to control or else suppress HD if it is to take over the home theater market with Windows based PCs, as opposed to the competition (set top boxes and HD players). Microsoft may wish HD doesn't exist, but it does, and they have to deal with it.
HD-DVD allows movies to be copied onto and managed by Microsoft Windows Media Center acting as a home media server for the entire movie collection. The Windows Media Center also can download and serve online content. If it can be the centerpiece of both of these, it puts Microsoft in control of home media and gives it an advantage over it's competitor the cable/satellite set top box, and if Microsoft can establish a monopoly, it allows Microsoft to control home movie distribution. This is the best option as far as Microsoft is concerned - Microsoft Windows becomes the Apple iPod of home theater.
Now consider what happens if BD wins. BD doesn't put Windows Media Center at the center of Microsoft's planned universe because Windows Media Center can't copy manage BD movies (the studios won't allow managed copy if they have the choice), and the cable/satellite companies' set top boxes have a lock on download of their own movie on demand collection, and they aren't going to hand over their customers, cable/satellite data infrastructure, and this revenue stream over to Microsoft. Why should they? Buy a standalone BD player and a set top box and you get to play HD movies and access a wide online collection - Windows Media Center is a more expensive option which gives you a smaller movie collection, so why would anyone buy Windows Media Center? This is clearly Microsoft's worst outcome.
If HD-DVD can't win, then the next best option for Microsoft is to have two competing formats going so that a standard can't be established, and lack of confidence about the winner keeps HD disk sales down. The Internet isn't ready for HD download yet and won't be for some time. If a Windows Media Center centric HD format is not possible, then it is better to stall HD until Microsoft's Internet based on demand service has enough bandwidth to compete with the cable/satellite operators high bandwidth infrastructure.
Mintmaster
Veteran
SPM, look at your original post I replied to. You were talking about MS wanting to get in on the online movie download business.
What does that have to do with managed copy? Why does MS care whether it has to convince a DVD owner or a BR owner to download movies?
Your long post doesn't address this in any way, and moreover it's based on a false premise. Nobody in their right mind could think that ordinary Windows based PCs will have a chance to make it big in the home theater market. It will have to be specialized hardware (with a nice form factor) with a specialized user interface. In other words, a set-top box.
What does that have to do with managed copy? Why does MS care whether it has to convince a DVD owner or a BR owner to download movies?
Your long post doesn't address this in any way, and moreover it's based on a false premise. Nobody in their right mind could think that ordinary Windows based PCs will have a chance to make it big in the home theater market. It will have to be specialized hardware (with a nice form factor) with a specialized user interface. In other words, a set-top box.
It is not a false premise at all - it is Microsoft's core motivation with regard to BD and HD-DVD as well as it's interest in online movie downloads.
It is quite simple if you have the insight to understand the business motivation behind it. The addition of managed copy puts every form of media on the PC with the PC as the center of access. The PC handles movies sold on optical disk as managed copies transferred to the PC hard disk, it handles recorded broadcasts as a Tivo type device, and it handles Internet online download movies. This would make the PC, rather than other devices, the center of media distribution. Microsoft doesn't want to get in on the online movie download business, it wants to get control of the whole of movie distribution, disk media storage and streaming, online download, PVR recording etc. The idea was that Windows (and other Microsoft products such as the XBox 360) will be the only devices capable of doing everything, and so everybody would buy one, rather than separate set top boxes, HD disk players, and PVR devices. Having millions of PCs out there with Microsoft specific DRM, would help kill other competing online movie download formats, and if a nifty feature like managed copy could persuade people to buy a Microsoft Media Center PC or XBox 360 with an add on optical HD drive in preference to an HD player or a Tivo PVR, or a set top box with on demand movies, Microsoft would control it all.
If Microsoft could lock various bits of this media distribution into Microsoft products with proprietary DRM (as Apple iPod does), then that would give Microsoft a monopoly on media distribution, and as Microsoft well knows, control is money. Microsoft only produces a tiny fraction of Windows software, but it generates obscene profits. Why? Because the Windows OS is at the center of desktop software - everybody needs to buy into Windows to run other people's software, and so Windows controls access to desktop software. That is what Microsoft was planning. The Vista operating system was crafted around this idea, and Xbox 360 (originally with a built in HD-DVD and later with a cheap add on HD-DVD) would also have been part of the scheme with Microsoft controlled DRM. This, and the fact that managed copy would not be mandatory on BD, was the motivation for Microsoft's tiff with BD and it's push for HD-DVD.
I agree with you that form factor is important, and that a PC isn't suited to the home theater market. However Microsoft didn't see it that way. Their monopoly mentality means that they believe that they can make the public buy what Microsoft wants them to buy - just look at what an unwanted pig Vista turned out to be. Microsoft also got caught out by small form factor laptops like the OLPC, cloudbook, and eeePC running Linux (which is a best seller), appearing just when Microsoft was trying to force customers onto more expensive hardware, leaving Microsoft scrambling to put a cut down Windows XP on those machines.
And then Blu-ray added managed copy and all MS had left was fucking with Sony...
Bluray has optional managed copy - the content supplier can choose to not allow it, and pretty well all movies sold won't allow it because the content providers don't want it, which leaves Microsoft's media center redundant when it comes to playing BD movies. This makes a standalone BD player plus a set top box for movies on demand a better choice for most people.
It is more than ***ing with Sony. It is the case of Microsoft's whole grand scheme for extending world dominance on which Microsoft had sculpted Vista and it's future OSes as unified media centers which would lock people into Microsoft products, being scuppered by cheaper function specific devices with more convenient form factors.
Mintmaster
Veteran
This is just too expensive of a proposition to be accepted by the mainstream public. It'll never happen even if managed copy was there. This is not like audio where CD's are a pain to carry around with you wherever you want music. There is no reason for average folks to go through the hassle of copying movies to their HDD, let alone buying the hardware that lets them do so. You don't flick through movies like you change channels on a TV or change the track on an audio player. If there was any demand whatsoever for this then we'd see many disc DVD changers on the market as the mechanics are identical to those 100+ disc CD changers.
Managed copy has such miniscule usefulness that it is utterly irrelevant in the success of the media PC.
The 360 is proof that you're wrong, not right. If MS wanted this kind of control then HD-DVD would be standard. A piddling 3% adoption rate among 360 owners doesn't let MS do anything with optical discs, and clearly MS doesn't care about them in their long term plans.
Don't be ridiculous. MS can't make people buy anything in an established industry where they're starting from scratch. As for your second statement, only anti-MS trolls think Vista is an "unwanted pig", but irrespective of that your analogy to Vista is so wrought with flaws that I don't know where to begin.
You don't know jack about what MS thinks. You don't become a $250B company by arrogantly believing you can force people to buy whatever you want them to.
You want to know why MS supported HD-DVD? Their partnership made VC-1 the standard codec, and the quality of their tools eventually carried over a bunch of business over to BR as well (esp. for the format neutral studios). Now that VC-1 is an established codec with great results and they have many people using it, there isn't really any need for studios to switch back, even if other codecs theoretically can do better. This is a real revenue stream, not some phantom media centre revenue that's a complete crapshoot and whose success has nothing to do with BR/HD-DVD anyway.
No. Taking it straight from at the horses mouth - the current Bluray FAQ on http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/ .
Mandatory managed copy - in the sense that it is mandatory that the copy is managed is supported, but the hardware manufacturer can leave it out, hence no need for an ethernet port on Bluray players as it is with HD-DVD, and more importantly the media provider can disable in on the media disk, which will ensure that media providers won't allow managed copy with their media (or charge more if they do).
Bluray initially didn't support managed copy at all, which is why they won better studio support. However HP demanded it as a condition for support, so Sony allowed MMC but allowed the studios to veto it on their own media if they wanted. End result, everyone is happy except Microsoft.
Here is Microsoft's take on why HD-DVD is better for them, again straight from the horse's mouth:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20050927-5355.html
As I have said before, that was Microsoft's Windows Vista centric grand vision of how movies should be played.
Last edited by a moderator:
Oops. I could have sworn this was different when I looked earlier.
However the content providers apparently still haven't agreed what "mandatory means"
http://www.betanews.com/article/DRM_Debate_Resumes_Over_Managed_Copy_for_BluRay_HD_DVD/1180018413
One thing is clear though - HD-DVD's interpretation it seems to be clear cut that content providers would be forced to provide managed copies, and there is some sort of dealmaking going on with regard to Bluray support for managed copy. That would explain Microsoft's strong support for HD-DVD and opposition to Bluray. It seems you may end up paying more for a managed copy on BD (or less without).
Last edited by a moderator:
Whatever HD-DVD's interpretation was is the same as Blu-Ray since they're going to use the same spec for MMC. The only deal making was the MS use to crow about Blu-ray not having adopted MMC (before either HD-DVD or Blu-ray had shipped), so the BDA changed that. All your MS talking points predate that adjustment. Hardware support on HD-DVD players is just as optional. The fact that all HD-DVD players have ethernet ports is immaterial since they still, from a hardware perspective, don't support making copies and never will. The spec still hasn't been finalized and when it does you will see a new generation of devices designed with built in storage as HD movie jukeboxes. You should also see Windows applications that will allow copies on computer systems. Theoretically, the PS3 is actually positioned to work well as a managed copy device since it is net enabled, offers expandable internal and external storage as well as potential access to NAS devices. Bottom line, by the time either were on the market all the software supported MMC but there is still no way to take advantage of it.
Similar threads
- Locked