Archived: Insiders Thread

[Talkstr8t]

Originally Posted by Hanzaki

Is it important to have Profile 1.1 players? Why BDA just cancel the 1.1 and go straight to the Profile 2.0

2.0 is simply 1.1 with network support (and higher local storage requirements to support downloaded content). There shouldn't be much confusion here; if a consumer wants a player with network support, they'll get 2.0. If they don't care (or actively want to avoid network support, as we've seen many suggest) they can get a player without, which will be 1.1. I expect, however, that in the future most players will have network support.

[Talkstr8t]

Originally Posted by WickyWoo

Didn't you know that's the great part. The Ethernet port lets them stealth update

At least for the minority of consumers who actually have it connected. I'd love to see figures; my guess is it's well under 20%.

[Talkstr8t]

Originally Posted by Razter

There have been previous claims that the reason for BD's delayed PiP was that HD PiP would be mandatory. Now we know this isn't true, what is/was the problem? Why could HD DVD have PiP from the start and not BD when requirements were the same?

I believe HD PiP may have been mandatory at one point. Keith, please correct if I'm mistaken, but I don't believe that the SoC's going into the first generation of 1.1 players can support HD PiP. If not, maintaining this requirement would have further delayed availability of players, and while HD PiP would add some additional feature capabilities, I'd consider them less important than being able to offer SD PiP.

[Talkstr8t]

Originally Posted by hollywoodguy

can you make an educated guess whether any standalone BD players are at all subsidized?

"Subsidized" is somewhat of a subjective term. You can look at the cost of actually building and delivering the player (i.e. components, manufacturing, packaging, and shipping), but what this fails to account for is all the R&D which led up to the ability to deliver that player. If every player were sold for $25 over the bill of materials you'd probably never recover all the R&D which went into creating the format. That's why virtually every new format has started out with pricing in the $1,000 range and seen annual drops in the neighborhood of 40-50%; the larger profit margins allow the manufacturers to recover their R&D and thus ensure they start working on the next greatest thing.

This is what's so damaging about Toshiba's "race to the bottom" price-wise. While they have clearly ensured HD DVD survives longer than it might have otherwise, they've also ensured very little profit is available to manufacturers who don't have a significant IP stake in the platform, and that's why you're seeing so few standalone HD DVD players other than those manufactured by Toshiba. Toshiba's strategy leaves a bit of room at the high end (i.e. Onkyo, though even that isn't an independently-designed player), and leaves a bit of room at the low-end (for those whose competence is cheaply assembling parts and shipping a player, with little likelihood of technical excellence, innovation, or customer support), and effectively no room for anyone else. Meanwhile the fact that Blu-ray vendors have resisted the temptation to match Toshiba's firesale pricing has kept an attractive market for other vendors, hence the ongoing parade of announcements regarding new players. Ultimately this will ensure much better choice for consumers, as we've seen with promised innovations like Mitsubishi's 3D support, Sharp's "quick-start" and TV integration technologies, Hitachi's camcorder support, Sony's changer support, etc.

Can the Venturer player possibly turn a profit

Possibly a slim one, though I wouldn't be surprised if there haven't been explicit or implicit subsidies (i.e. waiving of patent fees or royalties, free engineering support, etc.) to bring this to market cheaply with the intent of "proving" that HD DVD is the more consumer-friendly format.

if so, will we soon see Blu-ray players at the same price point (whatever that may be)?

I doubt we'll see them at the same price point, but I wouldn't be surprised to see one within $100 MSRP.

[WickyWoo]

To any insider's knowlege. Are any existing decks potentially 1.1 or even 2.0 compatible and could be enabled through an update? You don't have to name names

[jdsanko]

Originally Posted by Talkstr8t

At least for the minority of consumers who actually have it connected. I'd love to see figures; my guess is it's well under 20%.

Regarding network support for BD. For me, if it is not wireless, it is useless. My cable modem and router are upstairs and the BD player is downstairs in the family room. I don't plan to rewire my house for the BD player, or disconnect it to move to a wired connection for an update.

The HD-DVD folks make such a big deal about the ethernet port. Actually the best Hi Def player fdrom either format on the market regarding this is the PS3 with it's built in wirless connection.

[Talkstr8t]

Originally Posted by Zaphod

Now correct me if I am wrong but the final 1.1 profile has already been established and needs no ratification, correct? If this is the case, then why are the likes of WB delaying their releases on the fact that no players are 1.1 compliant. The standard is complete so why not just add them to the discs and when the players become available they will already be on the disc. I don't get it...why wait when you can add it now and start releasing more of your catalog?

Because of the risk of releasing titles without adequate testing across a range of players. If we assume there are a batch of 1.1 players which will be released in November, the studios might only be getting reasonably final prototype players now on which to test the titles. If they can only test now we're probably 60 days or more from actual title release due to the time it takes to test, re-author as necessary, and replicate the discs.

Besides, with a strong slate of titles for the 4Q there really isn't a huge urgency about releasing some of the back catalog.

[Talkstr8t]

Originally Posted by jdsanko

This would lead one to believe that if a player supports DTS-HD it should at least be able to decode MA and pass it throught the analog outs or pass the bitstream if it is HDMI 1.3 compliant. Is this true?

I believe this refers to DTS-HD's ability to decode the core stream. In other words, you can put a lossless DTS-HD MA stream on the title. A standard player would decode the lossy DTS core. An upgraded player would decode the DTS core plus the DTS-HD information providing better fidelity. A high-end player would decode all the information, resulting in lossless audio.

[Talkstr8t]

Originally Posted by GoldenRedux

Could you give us an idea about which players those might be?

Sure - the PS3, the B&8a10asvyas.e
dfssdjfivosa
savsf
s
CARRIER LOST

[BTBuck1]

Originally Posted by jdsanko

The following quote from the DTS web site would have one believe that if a player supports DTS-HD, by default it also supports MA:

"DTS-HD is actually the latest extension of the original DTS Coherent Acoustics technology introduced in 1996. The unique DTS-HD core + extension design allows for DTS-HD to deliver incredible performance and flexibility to both content creators and consumers. It has the ability to encode and decode three DTS formats: DTS-HD Master Audio, DTS-HD High Resolution Audio, and DTS Digital Surround."

This would lead one to believe that if a player supports DTS-HD it should at least be able to decode MA and pass it throught the analog outs or pass the bitstream if it is HDMI 1.3 compliant. Is this true?

It seems like all of the new hardware announcements support DTS-HD but do not specifically mention MA. For me, being able to hear the highest quality audio encoded on a disk is far more important that extras, interactivity or PIP. It also appears that DTS-HDMA is Fox's lossless codec of choice which makes this issue all the more important to me.

this is the type of question i usually ask,

From what I know, if your system doesn't decode DTSHDMA, Then all you will hear is 1.5mbps DTS.

Same with DTSHD capable players, if you select DTSHDMA, you get core 1.5mbps DTS not DTSHD. but you select a DTSHD track you obviously get DTSHD

if I am incorrect please someone clairfy, but this is what my understanding is.

[Talkstr8t]

Originally Posted by jdsanko

Regarding network support for BD. For me, if it is not wireless, it is useless. My cable modem and router are upstairs and the BD player is downstairs in the family room. I don't plan to rewire my house for the BD player, or disconnect it to move to a wired connection for an update.

There are other options available today and soon which will make this less of an issue, including powerline networking, coax networking (putting your data on the same coax as you use for OTA, cable, or satellite), and ethernet -> wifi adapters. Until such support is commonly built-in to the player, you should be able to get data to your living room for no more than $50-100 extra.

[WickyWoo]

Regarding network support for BD. For me, if it is not wireless, it is useless. My cable modem and router are upstairs and the BD player is downstairs in the family room. I don't plan to rewire my house for the BD player, or disconnect it to move to a wired connection for an update.

You can also get a Wireless Access Point, which are expensive, and if you're skilled, you can hack a wireless router with homebrew firmware and get one lots cheaper

[JadedRaverLA]

Originally Posted by Talkstr8t

There are other options available today and soon which will make this less of an issue, including powerline networking, coax networking (putting your data on the same coax as you use for OTA, cable, or satellite), and ethernet -> wifi adapters. Until such support is commonly built-in to the player, you should be able to get data to your living room for no more than $50-100 extra.

Yeah, but an extra $100 for people who don't want to pay more than $199 for the player (you know, those HD DVD fans) seems like an expensive addition -- even more if you need a router as well. And then paying an installer (or some neighborhood kid) to get the whole thing up and running for you ups the ante even more. Of course, if you care about quality, and are looking at the $2,000 Denon BD player, then the situation changes completely.

I always enjoy setting up the networks for friends of friends who have purchased XBox 360's... because the PS3 is 'too expensive.' Then they need me to install the $100 Wifi adapter, the $60 router, etc, etc. And, of course, they're paying an extra $50 a year to Microsoft for the 'privilege' of gaming online. But that money spent never seems to bother them... the additional cost of the PS3, they find 'outrageous,' though. Of course, I charge them for my services. And I charge them again after their system dies and they have to get another 360. How Microsoft ever attracted a fanbase in the gaming world I'll never know.

Oops, I forgot to ask a question... with BD-R 2.0 / BD-RE 3.0 discs coming soon, can they be written on current BD burners (possibly after a firmware upgrade) or will new drives be required?

[shamus]

Regarding subtitles and 2.35 screens...

Is it possible to have a player move the subtitles or do we have to rely on that option being on the disc????(Immortal Beloved)

[NutsAboutPS3]

Originally Posted by BTBuck1

Same with DTSHD capable players, if you select DTSHDMA, you get core 1.5mbps DTS not DTSHD. but you select a DTSHD track you obviously get DTSHD

if I am incorrect please someone clairfy, but this is what my understanding is.

I would also like this clarifying. As far as I am concerned, if a spec claims support for DTS-HD (e.g. the Philips BDP7100) then it must support DTS and DTS-HD HR and DTS-HD MA, because these are what make up the DTS-HD spec.

If a spec only claims support for DTS-HD HR (e.g. the Sony BDP-S2000ES) then I would expect it to only support DTS and DTS-HD HR, but not DTS-HD MA.

Please can an insider (kjack?) clarify what exactly is supported when "DTS-HD" support is quoted in specifications.

[Fozziwig]

Originally Posted by Fozziwig

Are any insiders aware of any Blu-ray player (s) that will launch in November/December (thus requiring profile 1.1 at least) apart from the Denon model?

I think I can answer this one.

The answer is no. However, some 1.0 players may launch with upgraded firmware making them 1.1 compliant.

This is how Wiki currently reports the situation:

Profile 1 (Final Standard Profile) (mandatory November 2007)-unofficially referred to as "Profile 1.1"- adds a secondary video decoder (typically used for picture in picture), secondary audio (typically used for interactive audio and commentary) and capability of supporting a minimum of 256 MB of local storage (for storing audio/video and title updates). Compliance with this profile will be mandatory for player models introduced to the market after October 31, 2007,[1] but existing products will be unaffected. As of July 24, 2007, only the Denon DVD-3800BDCI and DVD-2500BTCI have been announced as supporting this feature when they become available in the fall of 2007.[2]

Some profile 1.0 players may be upgradeable via firmware update to profile 1.1 if they have the appropriate hardware, but no manufacturer has announced any such upgrade. When software authored with interactive features dependent on Profile 1.1 hardware capabilities are played on profile 1.0 players some features may not be available or may offer limited capability. Profile 1.0 players will still be able to play the main feature of the disc, however.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc

[Brain Sturgeon]

Originally Posted by Talkstr8t

Sure - the PS3, the B&8a10asvyas.e
dfssdjfivosa
savsf
s
CARRIER LOST

LOL! That's awesome

[Brain Sturgeon]

Originally Posted by BTBuck1

this is the type of question i usually ask,

From what I know, if your system doesn't decode DTSHDMA, Then all you will hear is 1.5mbps DTS.

Same with DTSHD capable players, if you select DTSHDMA, you get core 1.5mbps DTS not DTSHD. but you select a DTSHD track you obviously get DTSHD

if I am incorrect please someone clairfy, but this is what my understanding is.

You are correct that if your system can't decode DTS-HD (HR or MA) then you will only hear the decoded legacy DTS 1.5 Mbps track.

When you select DTS-HD tracks, there is no separate selection for HR or MA; you just simply select the DTS-HD MA track. How its decoded depends on what your hardware does with it. If your decoder will do DTS-HD HR (the Panny DMP-BD10, Sony BDP-S1, etc) then it will decode the core 1.5 Mbps packet and the HR packet. It will not decode the MA (lossless) packet. So you will be hearing a lossy soundtrack, but it should be better than legacy (core) 1.5 Mbps DTS. I think the Blu-ray spec allows for bitrates up to 6Mbps for DTS-HD HR.

AFAIK, No player will pass the bitstream of or decode DTS-HD MA at this point.

Hope this helps...

[WickyWoo]

Sure - the PS3, the B&8a10asvyas.e
dfssdjfivosa
savsf
s
CARRIER LOST

Wait! Look at that! The Panasonic BD10s!

It's all code!

[MatrixS2000]

Originally Posted by Talkstr8t

Sure - the PS3, the B&8a10asvyas.e
dfssdjfivosa
savsf
s
CARRIER LOST

Originally Posted by WickyWoo

Wait! Look at that! The Panasonic BD10s!

It's all code!