Warner embraces Blu-ray
 

Universal now only studio backing HD DVD.

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6276046.html

Dirty stuff going on here. Content providers, or rather their support, are being "bought". Word is that Warner announced support for Blu Ray after the BDA allowed them to add Red Laser DVD-9 (HD on standard Red Laser discs) to the BD spec.

Call it what you want this is pretty much pork. I'm wondering what other concessions are happening. Blu Ray got Fox primarily based on the invasive BD+ and ROM Mark copy protection which pretty much obliterates any sort of fair use.

Despite Microsoft and Intel's desire to make the HD-DVD format a super computer-integrated platform, I could really do without that. I would much rather have a dedicated set top player, and negligible "interactivity". I'd rather watch the highest quality video possible than have tons of mediocre point and click "interactive" games and options.

Thumbs up for Blu-Ray from me.

-Steve

Blu Ray has not one but 3 forms of copy protection that are supposed to work together? I have my doubts that CE manufacturers will be able to keep this transparent to the end user.

AACS for base level 128bit encryption with a sprinkling of
BD+ for more intrusive DRM which allows the units firmware to be modified<shudder> and finally ROM Mark

Also take a look at the depths in which Sony will compromise your computer

http://www.sysinternals.com/blog/200...al-rights.html

Installing Spyware on a persons computer doesn't lead me to believe that we're suddenly going to have few issues with Blu Ray.

So let's recap

Blu Ray is ....

1. Chalk full of DRM and invasive software
2. likely to be more expensive
3. not going to offer any quality advantages over HD DVD.
4. Wants to block the ability to record a digital version of your movie for streaming on a home theater PC.
5. Wants to license Java when the competing format (iHD) will be in windows vista (higher licensing costs)

Blu Ray appeals to the innate human desire for bigger. Many Blu Ray fans were sold on the format the minute they read about 50GB and future 100GB discs. Never mind that 100GB discs are a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

PT Barnum was right.

1. Chalk full of DRM and invasive software

Does this matter if I'm playing on a set-top blu-ray player?

2. likely to be more expensive

I'm willing to pay for quality.

3. not going to offer any quality advantages over HD DVD.

I was under the impression that the bitrate was higher on blu-ray disks, and that there was an observable quality difference. Time will tell when the format comes out, or has this been proven? Certainly the HD-DVD group wants people to believe there's no quality difference, and certainly the Blu-Ray group wants everyone to believe there is.

4. Wants to block the ability to record a digital version of your movie for streaming on a home theater PC.

Doesn't really bother me. I can understand studios with copyrighted material wanting to prevent direct digital capture. It doesn't mean there wouldn't be work-arounds - such as converting the signal to analog and capturing that.

5. Wants to license Java when the competing format (iHD) will be in windows vista (higher licensing costs)

Historically there are lots of groups that are willing to pay extra not to use Microsoft products.

-Steve

Personally, I just want the disks as data, so I can archive my larger projects and be able to include video clips along with the edit files.

As for the next "DVD" video format to hit the blockbuster shelves, it won't matter what you call it. It'll be loaded with DRM that can only defy the imagination. Hmmmm, retina and brain pattern scanning... special players that physically shred the media after playback... Usage under the watchful eye of a sony security exec...

Speak for yourself! I would use it today, if it was affordable. DV requires about 13GB/hr--that's three DVDs to archive edited material with minimal compression. With BR, I could put seven hours of footage on one disc. And if you move up to HD, how can you use anything but BluRay for archiving?

>>4. Wants to block the ability to record a digital version of your movie for streaming on a home theater PC.

Doesn't really bother me. I can understand studios with copyrighted material wanting to prevent direct digital capture. It doesn't mean there wouldn't be work-arounds - such as converting the signal to analog and capturing that.
<<
Steve, as we speak, studios are trying to outlaw unapproved analog devices that can circumvent digital output/input. The news was reported over at slashdot, with links. The EEF is trying to fight it, but it's an uphill battle.
They are going way beyong simply protecting comercial content. If they have their way, your computer will be filled with all sorts of spyware type crap. It's possible many of todays HDTVs will not be able to play blue ray HD output either. Eventually, they would like anything with analog I/O to be outlawed.

Sounds like we may need to ramp up for a general boycott of Blue Ray movies, even with the psp3 coming out.


Other than that, Blue Ray media will also be a great medium for standard computer backup and storage, much better than HD-DVD out of the box. Blue-ray has much more application than movies and video. That is if Sony or other licensees make Blue-Ray burning devices.

I thought the main advantage of HD-DVD was backward compatibility with the existing DVD disks. This would be the main reason I would prefer HD_DVD if this is true. Is it true?

here we go again =).

do most people know that in terms of software HD-DVD&BR are virtually identical? it's how replicators will manufacture physical medium that's causing problems. if we're using theory, BluRay stores more, if we're using practical real world manufacturing, HD-DVD is already here.

so it's all semantics and it's all mostly physical. i dunno why most people focus on the software.