Posted on 09/10/2007 4:50:41 PM PDT by Las Vegas Dave
There are already investigations into the Paramount deal... and this will add fuel to the fire. The EU is about to force ms into being castrated... and then this crap breaks.
LLS
LLS
LLS
You forgot the 5 free HD DVD's added as a bonus. Maybe more on BF?
IT WAS ALL BS FROM THE START... NOTHING BUT MORE HD DVD LIES and PROPAGANDA from micro satan!
Bill Hunt today:
“Okay... we’ve got just a quick update for you on the Toshiba thing from yesterday’s post. Apparently, this story in the L.A. Times (also carried in Newsday) was based on information that’s a couple weeks out of date. This “offer” from Toshiba that the piece speaks about was apparently the one made the week Paramount and DreamWorks went HD-DVD exclusive. Our sources are telling us that Warner rejected that offer, preferring to stay format neutral. This offer thing being reported today is apparently old news.
We’ll try to have more on this in the next day or two, but despite appearances - and the latest PR spin - there’s no been no change in Warner’s policy with regard to either high-def format. So for the third time: Ugh.
By the way, as might expected, we’ve received a few testy e-mails from HD-DVD supporters crying foul at our generally negative response to the idea of Toshiba attempting to pay the Hollywood studios to support HD-DVD exclusively. Here’s the thing: If you TRULY believe that this format war should be decided by consumers and by the marketplace, can someone please explain to us how one side effectively paying studios that have previously committed to supporting BOTH formats equally to drop their competition serves the best interests of consumers? If anyone has a good answer for that, please let us know. We’d like to hear it. Enough said.”
Do you own stock in Sony? Why the emotional posting about a person who doesn’t post on FR?
Apparently the 51g disk exists outside the lab too and it’s true gen 1&2 players may need a firmware update. I’m sure we’ll all find out how that goes soon.
I read the comments about the 50g BD. To compare apples to apples, the 51g HD and 50g BD have to be commercially viable products. That’s what I took out of the criticism of 50g BD; it’s not a commercially viable product and apparently it’s not considered “robust” enough to be one. Robustness meaning acceptable manufacturing yield rates.
All things being equal mbps would matter but all things aren’t equal. The new VC-1 codec means disk size is less important than it used to be. True-HD is lossless and I have that on several disks now. Which means to me, I have all I want, beautiful picture and sound.
50 gig yields are up and out of the 115 BD’s I own, more than half are 50 gig discs. I hate HD DVD because it is being used as a tool to prolong the format war, so that physical medium will disappear and bill gates will own your home entertainment. All of these revelations have come from industry insiders on your team and are available in the archives of AVS.
Bill Hunt is well respected across the entire industry... he was one of the reasons DVD took off... and you should start reading and absorbing some of his insights. You need them badly.
LLS
LLS
I do too and where I have both audio streams on a disc... LPCM beats True HD hands down... Uncompressed is best... and you don’t have it. DTS Master does not matter to you either... because you cant buy FOX Movies on HDDVD... or Sony... or Disney.! :-)
LLS
"One thing to keep in mind about Microsoft's success at "requiring" the VC-1 codec was that neither HD-DVD nor Blu-ray had a VC-1 requirement at first. That was a long, painful battle for Microsoft which was typically used to dictating standards to everyone.
Ultimately, Microsoft skillfully played the game of leverage between competitors to shoehorn themselves into both disk standards. With the future of digital media unfolding in the early 2000's, Microsoft simply offered High Definition equipment manufacturers and movie studios the whole Windows Media system [for a fee] expecting a quick surrender to the obvious victor of any technical battle - themselves.
Microsoft envisioned their Windows Media player as the basis of all future television with themselves in control, dispatching all their competitors to oblivion and erecting a global toll booth between media creation companies and viewers. However, manufacturers tend to avoid these traps and SMPTE wouldn't touch Windows Media with a 10 foot pole for exactly that reason, recognizing that the Windows Media Player wrapper was fairly treacherous ground under Microsoft's control. Microsoft was informed by SMPTE that the codec inside Windows Media could be accepted if it was split out and properly standardized like all the other codecs. Leave the "player" wrapper with undocumented controls out of it.
Although the DRM offered by Microsoft was attractive to Hollywood, it became clear that manufacturers would not simply hand their future technical path over to Microsoft, nor would the Hollywood production studios hand over control of their assets to an organization with a history of modifying the terms of an agreement to benefit themselves.
Manufacturers and content creators knew that Microsoft could suddenly replace VC-1 with VC-2 and demand a ransom to stay in business. Windows Media 10 was on the horizon and everyone knew what that meant. Microsoft wasn't trustworthy in either of those circles and proper SMPTE standardization was the only road to considering any products from Redmond.
Microsoft finally did separate the codec from the Windows Media player and offer it for ratification expecting a rubber stamp approval by SMPTE while refusing to release the source code, refusing to define the royalty conditions in advance, promising to deliver finished codecs while retaining control of the current and future source (and a few other tricks). This all prevented ratification by SMPTE. It was Microsoft's first foray into the workings of a real standards body and they thought they could simply bully their way through it. They weren't used to anyone standing up to them like this.
Microsoft was very much out in the cold and basically entered panic mode as they watched other formats develop, deploy and gain momentum. Manufacturers were not going to commit to a proprietary codec which would later hold them hostage. No SMPTE standardization? No use for VC-1. Period. End of codec. End of Microsoft's influence on media. PANIC!
As Microsoft was slowly releasing control of VC-1 and approaching SMPTE compliance, Microsoft released premature press releases claiming SMPTE ratification months before they were in actual compliance. SMPTE had to smack them down at least once for this tactic. Finally, Microsoft did what was needed for SMPTE ratification and gained acceptance by the HD-DVD camp [support and funding had something to do with this, I'm sure].
I don't personally know the back story of HD-DVD very well but VC-1 incorporation into Blu-ray had everything to do with the greed of MPEG LA [mpegla.org]. More on that later.
I can say that the buzz at the NAB (National Association of Broadcasters) [nab.org] show floor was that HD-DVD was a Microsoft backed entity which didn't do it any favors. The NAB members are typically only interested in repeatable standards. Looking around the 2006 NAB show floor, the only people using Microsoft video standards were their direct "partners" in a confined area. Everyone else was using AVC/H.264.
Meanwhile, the BDA (Blu-ray) camp examined the VC-1 codec and found it inferior to the AVC/H.264 which was already identified as a desired standard, so VC-1 was removed from consideration in Blu-ray. Smackdown. Greed played a significant part in how this finally shook out.
There was a serious delay of over a year while royalty negotiations between BDA and MPEG LA were going on over the inclusion of AVC/H.264 in Blu-ray. This gave Microsoft plenty of time to scare enough BDA members (buy enough votes?) to get VC-1 included in Blu-ray. The clock was running and it didn't look like AVC/H.264 negotiations were going to make it.
Using this fear, Microsoft's angle was to offer the BDA a finished codec with higher efficiency than MPEG2 which could be put to use immediately so that Blu-ray would not miss the window of competition against HD-DVD. Blu-ray initially only had MPEG2 support (the AVC/H.264 and VC-1 codecs were added later). With the MPEG LA holding out for more money, more BDA members began realizing that VC-1 may well be their only other alternative for a higher efficiency codec. The MPEG LA, not thinking VC-1 could possibly be ratified given the parent company, saw their negotiating position collapse and the pressure of competition against VC-1 forced the MPEG LA to suddenly relax their royalty demands.
Too late. The result was both VC-1 and AVC/H.264 were included in Blu-ray. Had the MPEG LA not been so greedy and unreasonable, Blu-ray could have come to market sooner with AVC/H.264 and VC-1 wouldn't be a factor in Blu-ray at all. VC-1 would have ended its useful life with along with HD-DVD. Microsoft's dream of influencing all media (except their own) would have fizzled almost completely."
BUMP
Could you please take the time to explain what happened with Microsoft and AVS Forums?
I must have missed it. Hadn’t been there awhile, and I did notice the interface has changed a bit.
Thank you...
Members that have been on that site for years have been driven away... Members that work for studios and CE companies have jumped ship from AVS and many BD insiders have abandoned this site due to the bias and uneven treatment of members. It basically is a paid forum for HD DVD... just like Paramount and Universal are paid for. Those in the industry in Hollywood that have been on AVS for many years know of amir and the situation on AVS. AVS is now a laughing stock amongst many involved in movie business... and some of these people work for studios that sell both formats... one member had his employer ban him from participating on AVS.
LLS
Wow...
Sorry to hear that...I have a Denon 5910 which upscales superbly, and I haven’t followed the format war except superficially, was just going to wait and see who “won”.
Thanks for the thorough answer.
When it's "better vs. cheaper" cheaper will win every time.
I have no idea which is cheapre, because what I would like to buy isn’t on the market yet. I want a recorder.
LLS
LLS
Apparently it’s just fallout from the Viacom deal. Some say Tosh. approached Warner first, check in hand, and Warner told them “we are going neutral”. After that, Tosh. went to Viacom and offered, allegedly, $150 mil. for Paramount.
News sources are behind. More FUD fallout from the format war.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.