Why does SONY resist VC-1 ?

[JimPullan]

Greeting Forum Members,

Does anyone know "Why" SONY resists implementing the VC-1 standard into their products ? Is VC-1 technology - the competition of Sony ?

Jim Pullan
Ocala, FL

[zombie]

Yes, VC-1 is their competition. Sony owns a patent in MPEG2 which explains their reluctance to avoid using it. They enjoy the windfall of money they get from each DVD sold and wish for that to continue with BD.

[JTK]

Originally Posted by JimPullan

Greeting Forum Members,

Does anyone know "Why" SONY resists implementing the VC-1 standard into their products ? Is VC-1 technology - the competition of Sony ?

Jim Pullan
Ocala, FL

Arrogance and stupidity. Hubris.

And everything nyg wrote.

It could be their downfall ultimately, since VC-1 is superior in every respect.

MPEG-2, especially shoddily implemented like what's been happening on a lot of the early Blu-Ray discs, can't tie VC-1's shoes.

[JimPullan]

Originally Posted by nyg

Yes, VC-1 is their competition. Sony owns a patent in MPEG2 which explains their reluctance to avoid using it. They enjoy the windfall of money they get from each DVD sold and wish for that to continue with BD.

That figures !!!! I knew it was something like that. I guess it's like not having DVD-Audio in Sony's DVD/SACD Players! Sad, very sad! (for us!).

Jim

[zombie]

Originally Posted by JimPullan

I guess it's like not having DVD-Audio in Sony's DVD/SACD Players!

It's exactly like that. Sony along with Philips were co-creators of the CD. Thus by incorporating the CD name into Super Audio CD they would make money off of each SACD sold whereas Sony did not invent DVD (including DVD-A) and wouldn't make any money off of their sales. In the end, it's always about the money.

[JTK]

It's not necessarily this grim.

One thing you can thank HD-DVD for right now is that they've kind of lit a fire under the BDA to maybe push things along a little bit.

Sony themselves will probably hold on to this crappy MPEG2 until the bitter end, but what happens if other Blu-Ray studios put out Blu-Ray discs using VC-1? There's nothing stopping them from doing it, as best I know, and frankly, I hope they do it post haste.

[zombie]

Originally Posted by JTK

One thing you can thank HD-DVD for right now is that they've kind of lit a fire under the BDA to maybe push things along a little bit.

Agreed. The heat is on the BDA to prove itself now.

Sony themselves will probably hold on to this crappy MPEG2 until the bitter end, but what happens if other Blu-Ray studios put out Blu-Ray discs using VC-1? There's nothing stopping them from doing it, as best I know, and frankly, I hope they do it post haste.

I disagree, I bet Sony will ditch MPEG2 next year due to the embarrassment that will be caused by most titles from the other BD studios looking so superior due to their use of VC-1. I don't believe Sony is foolish enough to let themselves come in last on purpose.

[Applefiend]

My feeling is Sony have some of the most awesome MPEG2 production facilities around, their DVD realises are considered some of the best around. So maybe they have all these fine authoring software, but their H264/VC-1 facilities just ain't there yet.

Anyone who's played around with early bad Apple H264 encoders know a bad encoder is no use at all. If there's a problem with VC-1 they can use H264, it's a pretty terrific codec.

But yeah, MPEG2 is not ideal. OK, we can have a pretty awesome quality movie in 25GB, anyone who's seen Stealth etc on Blu Ray knows that, but where's room for the extras? Don't want no 480i edited down documentary mister... Don't want no Blu Ray with extras from the DVD edition missing. Blu Rays with DVD extras chopped out is happening a lot. A more efficent codec would help, as would dual layer.

To be honest, to me Sony Pictures suck anyway, and a great deal of BD content seems to come from them.

http://www.apple.com/trailers/sony_pictures/ << 90% suck. Who green lighted this crap. Eughh....

What doesn't suck is Sony Pictures Classics : http://www.apple.com/trailers/sony/ - I'd buy all of them.

And MGM, owned by Sony I think: http://www.apple.com/trailers/mgm/

I wish they'd keep all their gruesome Sony Pictures content to themselves, and get busy with the Sony Pictures Classic/MGM stuff. I dread Click! coming out on Blu Ray...

But I think Dual Layer is the key for Sony. Once they're using that their disks will perk up a lot.

[marzetta7]

Why always the push here for VC-1 and not H.264? Personally, I think Sony will go the way of H.264 before they went with a codec that would put money in the pockets of their competion--Microsoft.

Also, I don't see any superiority in VC-1 over H.264. Granted, the hardware requirements for H.264 are a bit higher, but nothing that any future Blu-ray players or computers ought not be able to handle.

Just my .02 cents.

[JTK]

Originally Posted by marzetta7

Why always the push here for VC-1 and not H.264? Personally, I think Sony will go the way of H.264 before they went with a codec that would put money in the pockets of their competion--Microsoft.

Also, I don't see any superiority in VC-1 over H.264. Granted, the hardware requirements for H.264 are a bit higher, but nothing that any future Blu-ray players or computers ought not be able to handle.

Just my .02 cents.

Fine by me. Just get away from this shoddy MPEG2 implementation is all I ask for.

[BTBuck1]

Originally Posted by JTK

Fine by me. Just get away from this shoddy MPEG2 implementation is all I ask for.

im cool with mpeg2. Seems ok when the film is in good shape (STEALTH-ULTRAVIOLET) i feal however when the source material is older, mpeg2 is still ok, just at a higher bit rate which would require 50gb's of storage space.

It seems to me, 50gb & Better codecs will probably both be comming to light around the 1st of the year.

and by this time next year, we should have the best of both worlds available to us in one disc, 50gb-advanced codec-HD special features-lossless audio all in one uncomprimised disc (Blu Ray) what it was promissed to be, "Beyond HD" not, "Barely HD"

off the subject,
It has become increasingly strange to me to see JTK now making reply's to comments in a very different light than his previous (pre HDDVD purchase) posts. It's almost as if some HDDVD fanboi from avs forum has hacked his account and has taken control of his username. Say it aint soOoOooOo!!1

Just something i've noticed in days past.

[BTBuck1]

Originally Posted by JTK

VC-1 is superior in every respect.

Concidering space & bit rates are limited, correct?

If they are not, than wouldn't mpeg2 be superior?

[JTK]

Originally Posted by Brian@BBY

im cool with mpeg2. Seems ok when the film is in good shape (STEALTH-ULTRAVIOLET) i feal however when the source material is older, mpeg2 is still ok, just at a higher bit rate which would require 50gb's of storage space.

I think it's the difference between "good" and "great", quite frankly.

SO FAR, we have not been given concrete proof that an MPEG2 implementation can equal the best VC-1 implementation.

Concidering space & bit rates are limited, correct?

If they are not, than wouldn't mpeg2 be superior?

Look, even the kings of HD-lite, DirecTV, are moving away from MPEG 2 to MPEG4. That's got to tell you something.

MPEG2 is nice, but it's ultimately limited and it's old news.

I say: Move forward all the way!


We're back to the key term: Implementation.

If you have crappy source material and/or suspect transfers and methods, then of course, the codecs don't matter.

All sorts of variables go into it, but I think if all things are equal..check my sig.

off the subject,
It has become increasingly strange to me to see JTK now making reply's to comments in a very different light than his previous (pre HDDVD purchase) posts. It's almost as if some HDDVD fanboi from avs forum has hacked his account and has taken control of his username. Say it aint soOoOooOo!!1

Just something i've noticed in days past.

It's just you. Nothing's changed. I haven't changed.

Please don't do this again.


Actually one thing has changed: I've been exposed to the best HD I've ever seen in my life, including broadcast HD and sadly, in the here and now, it's not on Blu-Ray, but I expect that to start changing as early as next month, as I've been hearing that there will be some non MPEG2 discs forthcoming. I've read that on AVS and several other places.

So..these are interesting times we live in. I still think we all should have our calendars marked for the end of October.

I think I am going to TWO HD players before this year is out, no matter what.

Not my favorite/ideal solution, but if that's what it's going to take, then so be it.

I think the BDA needs just to go ahead and leave MPEG2 back in the realm of yesteryear where it belongs. Go to VC-1, or for God's sake, at least go to H.264/AVC/MPEG4.

[BTBuck1]

Originally Posted by JTK

I think it's the difference between "good" and "great", quite frankly.

SO FAR, we have not been given concrete proof that an MPEG2 implementation can equal the best VC-1 implementation.

Stealth was recently compared with "last samurai" in regards to PQ. i'd say that is concrete proof. like i said, if source material is good...then we got something to work with. Your not going to turn a peice of coal into a diamond every time.

Look, even the kings of HD-lite, DirecTV, are moving away from MPEG 2 to MPEG4. That's got to tell you something.

it tells me mpeg2 is a space hog, and in order to get more HD content available better compression is needed. however when we talk about packadged content and the sooner or later available 50gb disc than it doesn't matter. crank the bit rate up, and fill the 50gb's i dont care...its only affecting the disc it's writtin on, nothing else.

MPEG2 is nice, but it's ultimately limited and it's old news.

I say: Move forward all the way!

I hear ya, and I agree. But i'm not going to go and say VC-1 is better in every regard. it's better as i stated in a controlled situation i e limited space, limited bit rate. it's efficient as a mo fo and trust me i have no problem with BR adopting it over mpeg2. But, i'll take 50gb disc & increased BR just as eagerly!

We're back to the key term: Implementation.

If you crappy source material and/or suspect transfers and methods, then of course, the codecs don't matter.

glad we are in agreement on this as you read above ^

It's just you. Nothing's changed. I haven't changed.

Please don't do this again.

Hey sorry if i touched a tender cord, i was half kidding.

[BTBuck1]

Originally Posted by JTK

So..these are interesting times we live in. I still think we all should have our calendars marked for the end of October.

My calendar has been marked for this since the release date of the BDP-S1 changed it's expected date some 6 weeks ago. I will be fine with One format. I don't need a 3rd device just to play universal titles. I'll just upconvert those and enjoy the rest of the gang over on the BR side and keep my entertainment unit simpler, and my wallet fatter.

[JTK]

Originally Posted by Brian@BBY

Stealth was recently compared with "last samurai" in regards to PQ. i'd say that is concrete proof.

Where, and by whom?

...like i said, if source material is good...then we got something to work with. Your not going to turn a peice of coal into a diamond every time.

True.

it tells me mpeg2 is a space hog, and in order to get more HD content available better compression is needed. however when we talk about packadged content and the sooner or later available 50gb disc than it doesn't matter. crank the bit rate up, and fill the 50gb's i dont care...its only affecting the disc it's writtin on, nothing else.

Agreed. Key words here: Efficiency and streamlining.

I need to actually see BD50 discs show up and start being used as well...


Priority one to me: Picture quality. Crank the bitrates into the stratosphere, I don't care how you do it, but if you have a nice codec that makes things a bit more streamlined and efficient...you can get away with MORE!

See how that works?

How's about a BD50 disc cranking uber high, absurd data rates using either VC-1 or H.264/AVC/MPEG4?



Who the hell doesn't want to see what THAT would look like? I don't care what the name of the format is or puts it out. DO IT!


Why does it have to be an either/or situation?

I hear ya, and I agree. But i'm not going to go and say VC-1 is better in every regard. it's better as i stated in a controlled situation i e limited space, limited bit rate. it's efficient as a mo fo and trust me i have no problem with BR adopting it over mpeg2. But, i'll take 50gb disc & increased BR just as eagerly!

Again, why not do it all and have it all?

glad we are in agreement on this as you read above ^

You should know me better than this by now.

Hey sorry if i touched a tender cord, i was half kidding.

I think it's the other way around.

There's no tender cord here for me. I'm an HD enthusiast first and foremost.


You do get a little sensitive, it seems, when anything shy of "OMG BLURAY IS TEH BEST!!!!" is even suggested.

C'mon now...take a breath. Relax. This is me you're talking to. This isn't a certain other forum. No bashing anywhere.


I think it's all good my man. Just a little patience involved.

My calendar has been marked for this since the release date of the BDP-S1 changed it's expected date some 6 weeks ago. I will be fine with One format. I don't need a 3rd device just to play universal titles. I'll just upconvert those

No long necessary, imo. Why settle for that when you can have great HD across the boards? One player? Two players? Same end result, at least short term.
All HD baby!

... and enjoy the rest of the gang over on the BR side and keep my entertainment unit simpler, and my wallet fatter.

It's just one extra shelf on a rack and an HDMI switcher at most.


There's one small little detail here, at least for me:

For movies coming out on both formats, I will choose the best version.

If I had to be a betting man, and if ALL THINGS WERE EQUAL...I'll bet yo here and now the VC-1 version of a given title will be superior to an MPEG2 version of that same title.


Let's see my little hunch is proven wrong.

If it is? Adios to the HD-DVD player via Ebay or Videogon.

I'd LMAO if October comes and I end up selling off my HD-DVD player and set those funds toward the Blu-Ray player. Fine by me! I couldn't have rented the equipment for that long and that's three months of HD bliss I will have enjoyed, worst case scenario. I know I can sell it for decent money on videogon. The player, movies, one big lot. Someone'll take it. I'm saving the boxes and everything.



If I can get the best on one player, that would be great! I won't be bitter at all if it comes down like that!


No harm, no foul, for a little experimenting, I say.

Instead of blowing $500 on SD DVDs (this can happen fast! ), paying for HD-lite monthly on cable or satellite, or wasting my money going to the movie theater (Haven't done that since LOTR:ROTK and I sure as hell won't now)...why not get some great HD lovin' now and later? That's my attitude.

You can do a LOT worse with $500, imo.


For me, and hopefully everyone else around here, it isn't about being a Blu-Ray fan, or an HD-DVD fan...it's about being an HD fan first and foremost, and I'm going to get as much great HD as I possibly can, anyway I can. (legit that is. )

[zombie]

Originally Posted by marzetta7

Why always the push here for VC-1 and not H.264? Personally, I think Sony will go the way of H.264 before they went with a codec that would put money in the pockets of their competion--Microsoft.

Also, I don't see any superiority in VC-1 over H.264. Granted, the hardware requirements for H.264 are a bit higher, but nothing that any future Blu-ray players or computers ought not be able to handle.

Just my .02 cents.

To be honest I don't know all that much about H.264. If it's as good as VC-1 then by all means I'd be happy with it's use on BDs. All I ask is for something comparable or better than the codec HD DVD uses.

[JTK]

Originally Posted by nyg

To be honest I don't know all that much about H.264. If it's as good as VC-1 then by all means I'd be happy with it's use on BDs. All I ask is for something comparable or better than the codec HD DVD uses.

Simple as that.

[zombie]

Originally Posted by Brian@BBY

it tells me mpeg2 is a space hog, and in order to get more HD content available better compression is needed. however when we talk about packadged content and the sooner or later available 50gb disc than it doesn't matter. crank the bit rate up, and fill the 50gb's i dont care...its only affecting the disc it's writtin on, nothing else.

I'm not going to speak for JTK but IMO, it would be easier for BDs to implement VC-1 than it would be for them to start using dual layer discs. I agree that MPEG2 on a BD50 should look terrific but since dual layer discs are not ready and VC-1 is that's why I focus on Sony's need to adopt the better codec. They could improve their BD releases NOW. Why wait till fall when you don't have to to make great looking discs?

[JTK]

Originally Posted by nyg

I'm not going to speak for JTK but IMO, it would be easier for BDs to implement VC-1 than it would be for them to start using dual layer discs. I agree that MPEG2 on a BD50 should look terrific but since dual layer discs are not ready and VC-1 is that's why I focus on Sony's need to adopt the better codec. They could improve their BD releases NOW. Why wait till fall when you don't have to to make great looking discs?

And that ultimately leads back to a question none of us likes, which is: Why didn't the launch happen under that auspice in the first place: By releasing great looking discs right off the bat? Not GOOD. GREAT.

The Blu-Ray launch was supposed to be nukes, shock and awe, right from the get go and sadly, it didn't happen.