Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony P
but UV is streaming, that is what talking about a "cloud" is all about. The content is at their place and when you want to watch you stream.
|
Between the speech, the faq, and the website, it's made clear a major focus of UV is being able to move copies around after having downloaded them (thank goodness). I don't doubt most people will simply stream, since that's what they're used to, but a lot of time is spent talking about freedom to move downloaded copies from device to device. Licenses to view files will be stored on the "cloud", yes, but getting at the videos themselves will be done any number of ways, including streaming, preloading onto purchased devices (mentioned in the speech), or simply downloaded.
http://uvdemystified.com/uvfaq.html#1.10
Quote:
[1.10.1] Does UltraViolet support side-loading?
Yes. UltraViolet files can be copied onto USB sticks, SD cards, hard drives, and any other form of storage for playback on an UltraViolet player, either directly from storage or after copying from storage onto the player. As long as the player belongs to an account with rights to the file, it will be able to play it.
Players that don't have their own connection to the Internet can use a PC to download UltraViolet files and transfer them to the player.
[1.10.2] Does UltraViolet support superdistribution?
Yes. Superdistribution refers to unlimited distribution of files before they are purchased. Any method can be used to deliver the file (even BitTorrent and other peer-to-peer networks), as well as pre-loading files onto players or storage media such as SD cards. The first time the file is played, the player will discover that the content is not licensed and will give the user the opportunity to purchase it. Once the purchase is complete the file will play.
Retailers are obligated to provide download service for UltraViolet content they sell, but they have the additional option to cast the files onto the winds of the Internet and let them land where they may in hopes that finders will be buyers.
|
Quote:
but encode means nothing, take it this way. There is only one NBC, ABC.... there is only one HBO, MTV..... network channels send to each station the same encode, that station will decide how to distribute it depending on their channel line-up, if you have two stations with different line-ups and subchannels (for example here CTV only broadcasts one 1080p while all the US broadcast more) then you can see the difference even though the CTV (Canadian station) is broadcasting the same show as the US and obviously did not get higher quality to start off. Then that feed at that encode is taken by the Sat and cable companies and since they re-broadcast many stations and have limited BW they re -encode on the fly at lower BW which is why the same show on the same station will look better OTA then Cable or sat and depending on BW & stations not all the cable and sat solutions will look the same. With speciality channels the same thing, happens except for the middle man, they get it directly from the network but are re-transmitted by the cable and sat at much lower BW and on each provider it will be different.
Why do I bring up broadcast? because it is the same here, it does not matter what is provided to the provider, in the end what you receive will depend on the provider and possibly your link. To assume everything is the same because it started off at the studio the same is a very inexperienced view, the same way some people say BD is 1080p the crap Netflix (vudu.....) is called 1080p so it must be the same quality. It does not, we live in a world of lossy compression what goes in is not what comes out and at your home.
|
I was summarizing the speech Penton-Man linked (
http://caltech.keshande.com/201101/), it's very interesting. Goes into detail on how things currently work (hundreds of different encodes), and what the studios are trying to achieve (5 per movie; DVD, Blu-ray, and the 3 UV resolutions). As far as encodes go, the streaming services will obviously have to serve up different bitrates dynamically, that's something I've mentioned a few times already. And it'll be a clear point of differentiation, even if they have to work with the same files the download services do. For example, VUDU can work with higher bitrates since it's using peer-to-peer networking to alleviate load on the servers.
However, for the regular download files, I got the distinct impression the studios are trying for some uniformity in the final product. Like how a DVD looks the same no matter where you buy it from, a UV file is meant to be the same no matter how you get your file (unless you stream, obviously). The studios would almost certainly have the option of providing different quality levels for each resolution, such as a skimpy DD 5.1 1080p encode for fast download and streaming, and a much higher bitrate 1080p encode with DTS-HD MA audio for more archival purposes, but I would imagine each retailer would have at least have access to the different files.
Quote:
|
no, the studios don't need a different film master or digital master for BD and DVD why would they need a different one for DL? I am sure you read of some films being scanned at 2k or 4k or 8k, do you hear of them scanned at 1920x1080 or 720x480, no when the digital file is compressed the resolution is also changed to what is needed you don't need different masters.
|
That's not what I meant. I was responding to Steedeels' apparent worry that 1080p masters would just go away if Blu-ray dies. My point was that they need to have a 1080p master even if Blu-ray goes away, since they still need one for the 1080p downloads anyway. But yes, one master for all the formats.
Quote:
|
still doubt this, but then again I don't really care. All I did is pointed out, for completeness, that since 3D DL are already available by at least one of the members it would be odd that it won't be included.
|
It is odd, yes, but unless the public standards are quite out of date, it's not supported. It's easy enough to add given the nature of the service, but like I joked it could take a while since it's been moving slowly enough as it is. Whether or not someone decides to offer 3D anyway depends on how serious they are about making UV a real standard. I could see a streaming service doing it, but having different providers providing potentially different 3D files that might not work on all UV players that can also handle 3D kinda misses the point of the whole thing.
Seriously though, who did watch the speech Penton-Man linked (or at least read the
http://uvdemystified.com faq)? I misunderstood how UV was supposed to work before that, since I was relying on articles from tech blogs (I should know better). It's not a pure cloud service, in fact, the central UV repository doesn't deliver movies at all, only licenses. It's not pure streaming as licensed players can play files from different storage media (as I quoted above). And it's not just the providers delivering what they've been giving us, there's a new file format they have to deliver, one that works with all UV players (depending on resolution).
P.S. Hope you recover quickly Penton-Man, or at least enjoy your downtime (the heavy-duty pain meds I've had made me feel lousy).
All countries
Argentina
Austria
Belgium
Brazil
Bulgaria
Chile
China
Colombia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Estonia
Denmark
Finland
Greece
Hong Kong
Hungary
Iceland
Indonesia
Ireland
Israel
India
Latvia
Lithuania
Malaysia
New Zealand
Norway
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Singapore
South Africa
South Korea
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
Thailand
Turkey
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
have already been watching, for quite some time, digital presentations at home, being quite happy with their well-done Blu-ray offerings) –
Linear Mode
