PDA

View Full Version : Windows 8 - Now charging for DVD Playback



Lucradia
May 4th, 2012, 07:28 PM
http://news.cnet.com/8301-10805_3-57427979-75/microsoft-angers-users-by-cutting-media-center-out-of-windows-8

derp. Glad I have a PS3!

Copper Bezel
May 4th, 2012, 08:06 PM
Good. I welcome Microsoft's decision to educate users on the nature of nonfree codecs and anticipate an appropriately reduced purchase price. The precedent was set with Windows 7 Starter Edition, which didn't include DVD decryption. This is the better route for the consumer, because the necessity of DVD playback depends on the hardware and the user, not the version of the operating system.

lukeiamyourfather
May 4th, 2012, 08:09 PM
Good. I welcome Microsoft's decision to educate users on the nature of nonfree codecs and anticipate an appropriately reduced purchase price. The precedent was set with Windows 7 Starter Edition, which didn't include DVD decryption. This is the better route for the consumer, because the necessity of DVD playback depends on the hardware and the user, not the version of the operating system.

They should do the same with H.264 for the same reason. The average user has no idea how much control and power they are giving to MPEG LA. Not to mention the hidden cost in everything (phones, cameras, Blu-ray players, network media players, etc.).

23dornot23d
May 4th, 2012, 08:14 PM
Interesting .... keep dropping things off one by one - say they are extras and charge for them ..... ( Will people keep falling for it ? do they have a choice !!! )

Thats a little like having a car ...... pay for additional items ..... you want windows too .... whoah ..... they are all extras you know .....

The thing is the main use of a computer is its ability to do many things ....

What .... a radio ...... erm .... let me check in the brochure ..... sorry thats another 30 $ .....

You had it in the last one ....... for FREE ...... lols ....... :lolflag: you must be talking
Open Source ..... they still share things ..... but find a way to make sure that the video playback is choppy and does not play at all well on their systems .... even though they
bought the top of the range graphics cards .....

Then soon ...... people will all have to pay for any new MEDIA PLAYERs ......

I wonder if there is a new idea to make HD available for all (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2144275086/lib-ray-non-drm-open-standards-hd-video-format) that will be open source and end the restrictions ..... more restrictions means more innovation ..... surely .... ;) ..... who knows.

SemiExpert
May 4th, 2012, 08:16 PM
Is this a money grab? Yes, it most certainly is. However, the value of Windows Media Center is very limited. In multiple systems over multiple hardware generations, using both PCI-E and USB TV Tuners, I never managed to get the TV recording functionality of Media Center working. Third party solutions are invariably superior. The same goes for DVD playback. Invariably, Windows PC OEMs bundle proprietary third party DVD and Bluray playback software, as appropriate. I'd also agree that optical disks are becoming increasingly inrelevant. But it still looks like a money grab. Microsoft already has enough bad publicity surrounding Windows 8 and the Metro interface, and this doesn't help.

MG&TL
May 4th, 2012, 08:17 PM
Well, I think Windows 8 could be the next Vista (i.e. mass hatred). Which is a good thing for us. :)

But I'm not jumping to any conclusion until MS releases it.

CharlesA
May 4th, 2012, 08:20 PM
But I'm not jumping to any conclusion until MS releases it.

Yep.

Bad publicity has a way of changing things. I don't intend to move from Win7 to Win8 any time soon, but if I do, I'll just use VLC for dvd playback (or, yanno, use my bluray player instead).

SemiExpert
May 4th, 2012, 08:23 PM
Good. I welcome Microsoft's decision to educate users on the nature of nonfree codecs and anticipate an appropriately reduced purchase price. The precedent was set with Windows 7 Starter Edition, which didn't include DVD decryption. This is the better route for the consumer, because the necessity of DVD playback depends on the hardware and the user, not the version of the operating system.

It's really not better for the consumer in any sense. That's just a marketing line. As far as the precedent of Windows 7 Starter edition, Microsoft's decontenting of the much ridiculed Starter edition did a lot to undermine the netbook sector, to the detriment of all Windows PC OEMs. Granted, netbooks invariably lacked optical disk drives, but the very fact that Microsoft will be selling DVD/Bluray playback in the form of this extra cost pack indicates that they expect to derive profit from this exercise in decontenting. More money for less functionality. It's a losing scenario for the consumer, but also for Microsoft's real customers, the Windows PC OEMS.

lisati
May 4th, 2012, 08:24 PM
I've very rarely had the need to use Media Center on Windows. For most of the stuff I'm likely to use it for there are other options that work well enough: even Media Player has its uses.

Thehumorouscheese
May 4th, 2012, 08:45 PM
I've very rarely had the need to use Media Center on Windows. For most of the stuff I'm likely to use it for there are other options that work well enough: even Media Player has its uses.

+infinity

I don't think people will really buy it as there are so many free alternatives, some of which are far better than windows media center.

CharlesA
May 4th, 2012, 08:46 PM
I don't think people will really buy it as there are so many free alternatives, some of which are far better than windows media center.

Seriously. I've used Windows Media Center a couple times to play DVDs from my library but otherwise I either use Media Player or VLC.

Merk42
May 4th, 2012, 08:51 PM
What sort of horrible company/OS would do such a thing?
Oh wait (https://apps.ubuntu.com/cat/applications/gstreamer0.10-fluendo-plugins/)

CharlesA
May 4th, 2012, 08:56 PM
What sort of horrible company/OS would do such a thing?
Oh wait (https://apps.ubuntu.com/cat/applications/gstreamer0.10-fluendo-plugins/)
Hahaha. I had forgotten about that.

Copper Bezel
May 4th, 2012, 09:07 PM
It's really not better for the consumer in any sense. That's just a marketing line. As far as the precedent of Windows 7 Starter edition, Microsoft's decontenting of the much ridiculed Starter edition did a lot to undermine the netbook sector, to the detriment of all Windows PC OEMs. Granted, netbooks invariably lacked optical disk drives, but the very fact that Microsoft will be selling DVD/Bluray playback in the form of this extra cost pack indicates that they expect to derive profit from this exercise in decontenting. More money for less functionality. It's a losing scenario for the consumer, but also for Microsoft's real customers, the Windows PC OEMS.
It is a losing deal for OEMs. If it changes Microsoft's overhead on sales of the system, then it could be a good deal for consumers. We don't in fact know if it will be more money for less content.

Windows 7 Starter was a ridiculous price grab, yes. Features were actively removed to make the OS unusable, and while use of an external optical drive with a netbook is somewhat uncommon and although that may have saved Microsoft on some codec licenses, there's no defending the gimped video driver and fixed wallpaper. Windows 8's lock-in to the Windows Store for Metro apps is also a ridiculous restriction that hurts consumers and OEMs for Microsoft's benefit. But to be fair, optical drives are going out of fashion, so the reasoning for that one feature still holds.

I also meant only sarcasm in saying that Microsoft was attempting to "educate" consumers. However, there's a side benefit in that they will, in fact, be doing so with this decision. I'd like people to know what they're paying for. It's exactly the opposite of the obfuscation that Microsoft excels in, and I'd really like to see them start seeing end users as the consumers again, instead of OEMs, because that relationship is exactly the problem.

goldshirt9
May 4th, 2012, 09:14 PM
really, who use wmp these days.
there are so many better alternatives that are free.
They must be feeling the pinch

mamamia88
May 4th, 2012, 09:32 PM
I watch my movies on my tv where they belong but if I didn't and I happened to be using windows I would be using vlc anyway.

forrestcupp
May 4th, 2012, 10:40 PM
I don't intend to move from Win7 to Win8 any time soon, but if I do, I'll just use VLC for dvd playback (or, yanno, use my bluray player instead).

That's what I was going to say. There's always VLC.

alexfish
May 4th, 2012, 11:00 PM
What sort of horrible company/OS would do such a thing?
Oh wait (https://apps.ubuntu.com/cat/applications/gstreamer0.10-fluendo-plugins/)
A one that is is giving you the choice , same as Ubuntu , load what you like ,, possible a step in the right direction as far as MS is concerned ,,

Incidental , as what do they provide at default is more important , will you be looking at a blank sceen wondering what to do next...:p does any one know?

MisterGaribaldi
May 4th, 2012, 11:20 PM
Ok, so how is this any different from every previous release of Windows?

There's not been one single release which INCLUDED a DVD codec. NOT ONE! I've installed and used Windows 3.1, 3.11, WinNT 4, Win95, Win98, Win98SE, WinME, Win2K, WinXP, WinVista, and Win7, and none of them had it. To which version of Windows, exactly, are you folks referring?

I've ALWAYS had to add something (back in the day, commercial DVD playback software) or an open-source product (of much more recent memory, VLC which includes DeCSS) and I can't see why that would change now.

As for people "learning" from non-inclusion, the masses couldn't care less, and the masses -- being Microsoft slaves -- will put up with anything Microsoft does because they're not going to change to anything else.

Some Linux distros include a DVD codec, and Apple has included one ever since they started shipping DVD drives in Macs circa 1995-6. So yes, it's true that Microsoft is the "odd man out" here, but it's never stopped people from buying their products before.

Bandit
May 4th, 2012, 11:46 PM
Good. I welcome Microsoft's decision to educate users on the nature of nonfree codecs and anticipate an appropriately reduced purchase price. The precedent was set with Windows 7 Starter Edition, which didn't include DVD decryption. This is the better route for the consumer, because the necessity of DVD playback depends on the hardware and the user, not the version of the operating system.

I have to agree with this as well.

But then again, I am against software patents all together.
That said and since we still have patents on software, dont see a reason anyone should have to pay for something that they dont use.

SeijiSensei
May 4th, 2012, 11:56 PM
I can rationalize the need to collect payments from endusers for codecs and decrypters like CSS. What makes no sense is the unwillingness to include support for open formats like Matroska, Ogg, and FLAC. One of the MS posters on the blog did some handwaving about potential patent issues, but that can't apply to something like Matroska or FLAC which were built as open formats from the ground up. There are no license fees involved in supporting open formats like the Matroska container so what is the rationale for excluding them?

OK, so now it's tinfoil hat time. I've thought all along that the resistance to formats like these is simply the need for Microsoft to do the bidding of its buddies in the content businesses, and the studios in particular. To them, MKV = piracy. I think Linux is largely viewed that way as well. Notice how there's no Netflix app for Linux, but there is one for Android. Sure one could argue it's just market share talking, but it couldn't be that hard to port the Android code over to Linux and distribute a binary blob like NVIDIA and ATI do for video drivers. People in the world the studios inhabit just don't get openness and don't trust it either.

The other thing that was puzzling in Microsoft's argument was the notion that their "telemetry" (read "snooping") suggests that streaming is displacing optical discs so there is less need to support DVD or Blu-ray playback. As anyone living outside the US knows, this is an entirely US-centric perspective. Want to watch Hulu in Germany? Sorry. How about Netflix in Brazil? Nope. Crunchyroll in Singapore? Maybe next decade. I thought Microsoft was intent on expanding Windows into every corner of the planet. This decision seems to run entirely counter to that strategy.


That's what I was going to say. There's always VLC.

Or smplayer (http://smplayer.sourceforge.net/) for Windows.

doorknob60
May 4th, 2012, 11:57 PM
Ok, so how is this any different from every previous release of Windows?

There's not been one single release which INCLUDED a DVD codec. NOT ONE! I've installed and used Windows 3.1, 3.11, WinNT 4, Win95, Win98, Win98SE, WinME, Win2K, WinXP, WinVista, and Win7, and none of them had it. To which version of Windows, exactly, are you folks referring?

Windows Vista and 7 did include DVD playback by default. None of the others did, though this certainly seems like a step backwards for many people, so I understand the criticism. The other problem I have is even though this saves Microsoft money, it seems unlikely that the price of Windows 8 will be any lower than the price of Windows 7 (which includes WMC and DVD codecs), invalidating the argument that this saves consumers money. Maybe they'll make it cheaper, but I sure won't believe that until I see it.

Bandit
May 5th, 2012, 12:05 AM
Windows Vista and 7 did include DVD playback by default. None of the others did, .........
Yea i was thinking XP didnt have it and I was 100% for certain all the other before did not. But I did think vista and 7 both had playback via WMP.

SeijiSensei
May 5th, 2012, 12:10 AM
Maybe they'll make it cheaper, but I sure won't believe that until I see it.

And how much cheaper could it be? What do you suppose the total cost to MS for bulk licensing of MP3, CSS and H.264 (the obvious biggies) can be? I doubt it's even $1 per copy. Especially when I've seen figures that put the cost of an OEM Windows license in the range of $10-25.

Lightstar
May 5th, 2012, 01:00 AM
If companies want people watching their DVDs, they should encode using free codecs. That's what I say.

Otherwise, pirated copies is what we'll be seeing.

Lucradia
May 5th, 2012, 01:03 AM
What sort of horrible company/OS would do such a thing?
Oh wait (https://apps.ubuntu.com/cat/applications/gstreamer0.10-fluendo-plugins/)

gstreamer fluendo plugins are free by the way via synaptic and whatnot. (Maybe not everything can be played, but there's still a gstreamer0.10-fluendo package, which doesn't require payment.)

Also, remember how the Windows 7 Beta literally locked out third-party codecs (IE: Theora video, etc)? They may do the same for Windows 8, but only for DVD, which would likely limit people wanting to use WMC / WMP alternatives like VLC. You can stop the hardware from playing video right from the hardware's driver, no need to limit the codecs. (Similarly, stop WMP from playing ISO files, which in turn, would force Microsoft to block iso feedback i/o loops for emulation.)

Like users to linux; Microsoft can do anything they want to Windows.

forrestcupp
May 5th, 2012, 03:07 AM
Ok, so how is this any different from every previous release of Windows?

There's not been one single release which INCLUDED a DVD codec. NOT ONE! I've installed and used Windows 3.1, 3.11, WinNT 4, Win95, Win98, Win98SE, WinME, Win2K, WinXP, WinVista, and Win7, and none of them had it. To which version of Windows, exactly, are you folks referring?I'm pretty sure that like others said, Vista and 7 both included DVD playback in Home Premium and above. I'm pretty sure the Media Center version of XP included it, too.


And how much cheaper could it be? What do you suppose the total cost to MS for bulk licensing of MP3, CSS and H.264 (the obvious biggies) can be? I doubt it's even $1 per copy. Especially when I've seen figures that put the cost of an OEM Windows license in the range of $10-25.The cost of OEM depends on the how much leverage a company has with MS. The $25 range was a long time ago. I'm pretty sure it's probably closer to $50 or more now for the big companies.

wewantutopia
May 5th, 2012, 04:50 AM
Please excuse my ignorance... How can VLC etc. offer these playback options for free but microsoft has to pay for codec licensing?

Lucradia
May 5th, 2012, 05:41 AM
Please excuse my ignorance... How can VLC etc. offer these playback options for free but microsoft has to pay for codec licensing?

Reverse engineering I guess?

pqwoerituytrueiwoq
May 5th, 2012, 06:04 AM
Please excuse my ignorance... How can VLC etc. offer these playback options for free but microsoft has to pay for codec licensing?
MS probably gets a cut of the Pie

or they are trying to raise awareness so people know who to blame when they buy dvd/blueray players that require you to purchase a codec to use them

realitykid
May 5th, 2012, 08:13 AM
I look at this as a good thing. Just one more reason to continue using Linux. More specifically Linux Mint for me, but that's beside the point. lol.

Seriously, Microsoft has done nothing but shot themselves in the foot with Windows 8.

Lucradia
May 5th, 2012, 08:30 AM
Seriously, Microsoft has done nothing but shot themselves in the foot with Windows 8.

I believe Professional has more interface enhancements geared toward the normal desktop as per normal.

I don't mind the lack of DVD Software, because I already have a dedicated DVD Player I could switch to. But what I DO mind is the lack of a start button and Metro UI by default. Steam needs to get a Linux port for their client first (Gabe Newell is still working on it I hear) before I consider changing to Linux full. (As well as support for games on Linux like Skyrim and terraria, etc.)

23dornot23d
May 5th, 2012, 10:19 AM
One thing that annoys me .... and I speak purely for myself here ....

I have bought numerous DVD players .... does this not in some way give me a right to use the codecs ..... somewhere along the line I have paid for use of said codecs .....

I have many DVDs all bought and all with different encryptions that in the early days stopped me watching my DVDs in other countries without changing things to suit them on the Older Dvd players in my computers.

I also have something called pinnacle studios .... that worked on XP but no longer works on Windows 7 ...... I paid for this and the device 100 euros that is used to decode TV too ... neither now work due to the fact Windows has changed so much it does not support them.

My point ..... I paid ...... and every time I paid they took ...... they want more for the same item that still plays my same DVDs that I still have

I will only ever pay for something now that actually does give me better quality

The business is my main worry - I worry they cannot get any more MONEY for the same old hat ...... would break my heart if MICROSOFT went out of business tomorrow NOT .....

I do worry that when people buy things from Microsoft that in a years time they may not work ....... but no one tells them that this may be the case ..... as its all good business to the company in question ......

Lets look ..... so far I have had 10 computers .... all with Windows on them .... and I have not got one working set of installation DVDs or CDs that I can use as they now do not even supply those ...

I have a Intel Microscope ..... now of no use ..... as Windows 7 will not work it.
I have a Thompson Mira MP3 player .... of no use as Windows 7 will not pick it up.
I have software of old that is stacked up and needs codes inputting every time I want to use or install them ......

Money spent on things that only seems to go one way ....... and no comeback for the said perpetrators that are constantly finding new ways to extract money for things that are giving us little or no enjoyment for said spending.

(When we spend MONEY and we have all the tools ...... my drill bits work in all of my drills .....)

My DVDs .... only work on and using LINUX open source software or in my DVD player ....... bizarre ......

( MICROSOFT = I have paid for things that are now useless - no refund ? )

Of the 4 computers I now have left - only one has a working Windows 7 and the last time I used it was to try to get the Intel Microscope and Pinnacle USB TV tuner to work and the Thompson MP3 player //// of which NONE now work on Windows 7 .....
( total loss to me in MONEY over 300 euros ) Windows 8 .... lols ...

MICROSOFT = MONEY = WASTE OF ........ for me at least ......
They can charge for what they want .... they will never get anything from this USER ever again.

SeijiSensei
May 5th, 2012, 10:57 AM
Please excuse my ignorance... How can VLC etc. offer these playback options for free but microsoft has to pay for codec licensing?

Lucradia's answer concerning reverse engineering is pretty much on target, but the legal situation is much more complex.

The world is a messy place when it comes to "intellectual property." The United States has some of the most restrictive laws because Hollywood and the recording industry have a lot of clout in Congress. (One reason they have such influence is that movies and recorded music are some of our most successful export products.) So, to take DVDs as a case in point, it's illegal in the US to distribute "anti-circumvention (http://chillingeffects.org/anticircumvention/)" technologies which are designed to break encryption methods used to protect intellectual property. That's why Ubuntu doesn't distribute the technologies required to break CSS encryption on DVDs as part of the standard distribution. It would be illegal to ship an Ubuntu CD into the US if libdvdcss2 were included.

However there are many other jurisdictions around the world that have not implemented a similar ban. In those countries there is nothing prohibiting you from importing and using something like libdvdcss2. Thus you end up with the system we have today, where technologies like those in ubuntu-restricted-extras are available for downloading by the enduser but not distributed as part of the official release. Essentially we're on the "honor system" where someone living in the US like me can download the tools to defeat an encumbered technology like DVDs at my own legal risk.

(One legal question that I believe has never been answered concerns source code. As source code is a written work, restricting its distribution raises clear freedom-of-speech issues. Even if it's illegal to distribute a compiled binary library like libdvdcss2, is it also illegal to distribute the source code required to compile such a library? I've seen this question raised in some discussions about encumbered software technologies, but I don't believe it has been litigated in the US.)

Technologies like H.264 and MP3 have different restrictions; both of these are patented in the US. So, again, it is illegal to ship a piece of software that can encode or play an H.264-encoded video without paying the consequent patent royalties. Microsoft cannot really avoid paying these fees since it's based in the US and distributes Windows in this country. Once again, though, many other nations do not recognize the validity of software patents, so it's not illegal to import software like ffmpeg or the x264 encoder suite into those countries. And again the honor system also applies. In theory I should pay MPEG-LA (http://www.mpegla.com/main/default.aspx) for my copies of mplayer, ffmpeg and the like, because they contain implementations of the patented H.264 codec. If I wanted to be perfectly legal, I could buy the gstreamer implementations of these technologies by Fluendo (http://www.fluendo.com/) from Canonical (http://shop.canonical.com/product_info.php?products_id=244).

If you're curious about these issues, I suggest reading the biography of Jon Lech Johansen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Lech_Johansen) (aka "DVD Jon") at Wikipedia. He was involved with the original efforts to defeat CSS encryption on DVDs and also worked on VLC. The chillingeffects.org (http://chillingeffects.org/) site has a lot of material on these matters as well, though mostly from an American perspective.


MS probably gets a cut of the Pie

or they are trying to raise awareness so people know who to blame when they buy dvd/blueray players that require you to purchase a codec to use them

Neither of these remarks are correct. Microsoft earns nothing from the distribution of VLC, and raising awareness has nothing to do with their decision either. MS simply cannot avoid legal liability for distributing licensed technologies without paying royalty fees. There's no hidden agenda here at all.

3rdalbum
May 5th, 2012, 11:49 AM
I remember installing either Vista or Seven and it not coming with DVD decryption support. I had to insert the CD that came with my DVD drive and install the software.

Besides, even if Eight is the first Windows without DVD decryption, all OEMs will customize the preinstall image to include it. All DVD burners will include a disc with software. No biggie.

SeijiSensei
May 5th, 2012, 12:54 PM
In fact, I wondered if there was some pressure from OEMs for Microsoft to remove DVD support so they could get third-party player manufacturers to pay them to include trial software. OEM revenues from third parties has grown considerably over the years. Arrangements where third parties pay the OEM to install a trial version of a player benefit both parties. This is how antivirus software has been distributed for quite a while now, and why antivirus providers were none too happy about the arrival of Microsoft Security Essentials.

alexfish
May 5th, 2012, 01:21 PM
Lucradia's answer concerning reverse engineering is pretty much on target, but the legal situation is much more complex.


However there are many other jurisdictions around the world that have not implemented a similar ban. In those countries there is nothing prohibiting you from importing and using something like libdvdcss2. Thus you end up with the system we have today, where technologies like those in ubuntu-restricted-extras are available for downloading by the enduser but not distributed as part of the official release. Essentially we're on the "honor system" where someone living in the US like me can download the tools to defeat an encumbered technology like DVDs at my own legal risk.

(One legal question that I believe has never been answered concerns source code. As source code is a written work, restricting its distribution raises clear freedom-of-speech issues. Even if it's illegal to distribute a compiled binary library like libdvdcss2, is it also illegal to distribute the source code required to compile such a library? I've seen this question raised in some discussions about encumbered software technologies, but I don't believe it has been litigated in the US.)
.

Can only say this , you can but a dvd player or buy a media-centre , that plays ?
you can buy a computer + dvd , then required codecs to run , but this where the hole thing falls apart . literally by the seams of it's pants..

Remember buying "Legitimate copy of DVD" , put the DVD into dvd player , , buy the way this was XP ,
the dvd auto loaded the DVD player + the codecs , but whould the dam thing run on Linux ,:confused:
As for some legitimate rights as the end user , Then should have the Legitimate Rights to play the dvd on Linux , END OF .The Industry can only blame them selves for this Fiasco ,

NEXT Fiasco will be Blue ray.

forrestcupp
May 5th, 2012, 01:40 PM
It's really not a big deal that they will have a version without DVD decryption being included. How many netbooks and tablets do you think are going to use DVD decryption? I'm sure they'll have upgraded versions that include it, just like they do now.


Please excuse my ignorance... How can VLC etc. offer these playback options for free but microsoft has to pay for codec licensing?A concise version of what SeijiSensei said. They use libdvdcss2, which circumvents CSS encryption, which is illegal in the U.S. Microsoft are bullies, but they're not stupid enough to openly do anything illegal. They have to pay license fees to include DVD decryption.


MS probably gets a cut of the Pie

or they are trying to raise awareness so people know who to blame when they buy dvd/blueray players that require you to purchase a codec to use themSony gets all of the DVD pie. It's simply that Microsoft just doesn't want to pay unless they get compensation.


Thus you end up with the system we have today, where technologies like those in ubuntu-restricted-extras are available for downloading by the enduser but not distributed as part of the official release. Essentially we're on the "honor system" where someone living in the US like me can download the tools to defeat an encumbered technology like DVDs at my own legal risk.libdvdcss2 is so questionable that you don't even get it in restricted-extras anymore. Now they have some library included in it that somehow only allows for playback without completely circumventing the CSS encryption. You have to get libdvdcss2 from Medibuntu.

Bandit
May 5th, 2012, 02:52 PM
If companies want people watching their DVDs, they should encode using free codecs. That's what I say.

Otherwise, pirated copies is what we'll be seeing.

LOL, I agree they should be using free codecs. But removing the encryption will just make it easier. But IMHO the encryption they have now isnt going to stop anyone who really wants to duplicate dvd. Only person it will keep honest is your average use-pc-for-photos-and-email person.

The MPA acts like the internet has hurt the industry. Which IMHO for what its worth is a load of poo. When I was growing up I remember almost every house having a full bookshelf full of copied VHS tapes with 2 to 3 movies on each one copied from HBO, sCinamax or local movie rental store.
I actually see a lot less of that now.

forrestcupp
May 5th, 2012, 03:14 PM
If companies want people watching their DVDs, they should encode using free codecs. That's what I say.

Otherwise, pirated copies is what we'll be seeing.

Most people in the world watch DVDs on DVD Players. DVD players include licensed decryption. So if that's what most people use to watch DVDs, why would they care to use free codecs and lose sales from more pirating?

Lucradia
May 5th, 2012, 05:49 PM
If companies want people watching their DVDs, they should encode using free codecs. That's what I say.

Otherwise, pirated copies is what we'll be seeing.

And I also said that Microsoft can stop DVD Playback everywhere by simply doing a few code changes to drivers and more. The only way you'd probably play DVDs if Microsoft did all the changes, would be through a Virtual Machine or installing Ubuntu or Linux aside Windows. (Probably one of the reasons behind the BIOS Lockdown system)

Next they'll disallow virtual machines on Home Editions and RT / Starter. Forcing people to get Pro or Ultimate or Enterprise.

23dornot23d
May 5th, 2012, 08:53 PM
One day they will be phased out anyway ..... and the streaming method will be the way to get films

https://www.google.com/search?client=ubuntu&channel=fs&q=dvd+phased+out&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

Starting to make sense now .....

szymon_g
May 5th, 2012, 10:00 PM
And I also said that Microsoft can stop DVD Playback everywhere by simply doing a few code changes to drivers and more. The only way you'd probably play DVDs if Microsoft did all the changes, would be through a Virtual Machine or installing Ubuntu or Linux aside Windows. (Probably one of the reasons behind the BIOS Lockdown system)

Next they'll disallow virtual machines on Home Editions and RT / Starter. Forcing people to get Pro or Ultimate or Enterprise.

thats a load of BS
you have no idea about Secure Boot, do you?

Merk42
May 5th, 2012, 10:15 PM
gstreamer fluendo plugins are free by the way via synaptic and whatnot. (Maybe not everything can be played, but there's still a gstreamer0.10-fluendo package, which doesn't require payment.)And is such a package completely legal to get without payment in the US?

Lucradia
May 6th, 2012, 12:11 AM
And is such a package completely legal to get without payment in the US?

It didn't have an exclamation point when PiTiVi asked to download MP3 support, so apparently it is.

jedimasterk
May 6th, 2012, 03:50 AM
Good. I welcome Microsoft's decision to educate users on the nature of nonfree codecs and anticipate an appropriately reduced purchase price. The precedent was set with Windows 7 Starter Edition, which didn't include DVD decryption. This is the better route for the consumer, because the necessity of DVD playback depends on the hardware and the user, not the version of the operating system.

Purchase price may be cheaper for Windows 8. But on the flip side hardware is a different story. Some manufactures already feel that they may need to charge more, do to touch enabled screens. And they don't think sales will really kick off to 2013. So all and all it will be about the same, if not more.

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/computers/will-windows-8-pcs-cost-too-much-at-launch/7998

jedimasterk
May 6th, 2012, 04:05 AM
I'm also sure that OEMs will include a free stripped down Nero suite, with the DVD codec. Or some DVD/Media Center replacement that includes all kinds of tool bars and spam to load, during install. Or 30 day evaluations before you need to register, to get extra features that people will need (typical free Windows software requirements). But who knows!. :lolflag:

alexfish
May 6th, 2012, 04:17 AM
Reading some of that has giving me more food for thought "Cost" , Although have been thinking more and more about the ARM platform ,

Don't need to think any more.. ARM+gpio pins + UBUNTU , At least will have the Freedom to use a computer
The way I wish. ... then can say it's "Our Idea" and not "My Idea" ...:lolflag:

synaptix
May 6th, 2012, 04:18 AM
Others are griping about the inability to play DVDs.

http://www.videolan.org/vlc/index.html

have fun for free.

Bandit
May 6th, 2012, 04:27 AM
IMHO DVD drives themself should come with built in decryption codec into the hardware. Seriously I didnt have to pay extra when I bought my DVD player for my TV......

Lucradia
May 6th, 2012, 05:07 AM
IMHO DVD drives themself should come with built in decryption codec into the hardware. Seriously I didnt have to pay extra when I bought my DVD player for my TV......

ad infinitum.

forrestcupp
May 6th, 2012, 08:00 PM
One day they will be phased out anyway ..... and the streaming method will be the way to get films

That's what I've been thinking. DVDs are at the end of life, and I don't think Blu-Rays will ever be as widespread. We're already coming into the age of streaming.

Lucradia
May 6th, 2012, 08:20 PM
That's what I've been thinking. DVDs are at the end of life, and I don't think Blu-Rays will ever be as widespread. We're already coming into the age of streaming.

Physical media that can be shipped however, will never die. As evidence in Sony's continued development of HVDs. (And, believe it or not, Microsoft supporting it.)

scouser73
May 6th, 2012, 09:02 PM
I've always uninstalled Media Centre and gone for VLC.

23dornot23d
May 6th, 2012, 11:00 PM
Sony and Adobe Collaborate on Professional Content Production Tools (http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/201204/12-061E/index.html)

From here

http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/

Not that it means a lot yet ..... but the Flash Player not being supported for Linux and all
seems that something new is happening.

Holographic has been in the pipe line for long enough and some people have interactive
setups touching and moving holographic objects in real time ...... not saying that is within reach yet -
but would be interesting to see where they do head next with visual technology -
they always appear to be knocking on the door of true 3D (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0KM8lzRCoQ) .... this was over one year ago
so where are they now with this ......

Justinelectric
May 7th, 2012, 02:58 AM
I'll just stick with ubuntu using VLC.

neu5eeCh
May 7th, 2012, 03:36 AM
Seems like a sound (and purely) business decision on Microsoft's part. They're no Canonical and Ballmer is no Shuttleworth. MS has always been about making $. At this point, it's the only thing Ballmer is good at.

KiwiNZ
May 7th, 2012, 05:17 AM
Another Tea cup tempest, just install your media player of choice. Solved.

lisati
May 7th, 2012, 05:38 AM
Physical media that can be shipped however, will never die. As evidence in Sony's continued development of HVDs. (And, believe it or not, Microsoft supporting it.)

Exactly.

A month or two back, my mother-in-law commented that she likes the stuff I've done for her on VHS (my paraphrase of what she said, referring to what some might see as "home movies")....

Adrian98
May 7th, 2012, 12:06 PM
Interesting .... keep dropping things off one by one - say they are extras and charge for them ..... ( Will people keep falling for it ? do they have a choice !!! )

Thats a little like having a car ...... pay for additional items ..... you want windows too .... whoah ..... they are all extras you know .....

The thing is the main use of a computer is its ability to do many things ....

What .... a radio ...... erm .... let me check in the brochure ..... sorry thats another 30 $ .....

You had it in the last one ....... for FREE ...... lols ....... :lolflag: you must be talking
Open Source ..... they still share things ..... but find a way to make sure that the video playback is choppy and does not play at all well on their systems .... even though they
bought the top of the range graphics cards .....

Then soon ...... people will all have to pay for any new MEDIA PLAYERs ......

I wonder if there is a new idea to make HD available for all (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2144275086/lib-ray-non-drm-open-standards-hd-video-format) that will be open source and end the restrictions ..... more restrictions means more innovation ..... surely .... ;) ..... who knows.

that's right due, These folks should understand , earning more than limits may lead to the degradation. it's like they are trying to churn out the money from folks as mjuch as possible by stating anything for the money! :popcorn:

forrestcupp
May 7th, 2012, 03:55 PM
Holographic has been in the pipe line for long enough and some people have interactive
setups touching and moving holographic objects in real time ...... not saying that is within reach yet -
but would be interesting to see where they do head next with visual technology -
they always appear to be knocking on the door of true 3D (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0KM8lzRCoQ) .... this was over one year ago
so where are they now with this ......

Wow! I've seen most of that before, but the 2 person display is pretty amazing. They have it to where the screen can be showing two different things to two different people, and because of head tracking, they will keep seeing the same thing even if they switch spots. That's pretty wild.

23dornot23d
May 7th, 2012, 06:32 PM
And imagine the implications for advertising .....

Each person is visually id'd and the adverts change to suit the person ...... now where did I see this before .....

Possibly in a Film ...... think it was Minority Report ..... where the adverts changed to suit the viewer ......

Always look for reasons why they would want to be able to do this ...... MONEY and marketing is driving what the designers do with the graphics ....

Wonder how long it will be before its included in real systems ..... would a DVD be able to hold the information and would a sensing device be able to give a number to a person and change the type of film to suit the persons likes based on their computer advertising and interests profile
( in the FUTURE = saved by one of the leading Search Engines ) ..... lols ..... :lolflag:

Primefalcon
May 8th, 2012, 12:08 AM
no huge biggy, just dowload vlc if you use windows, problem solved

Lucradia
May 8th, 2012, 06:30 PM
no huge biggy, just dowload vlc if you use windows, problem solved

Again, until they do something similar to what they did in Windows 7 Beta, which literally disallowed third-party codecs (and software) to play desired video feeds. I know, I had the beta, and couldn't use stuff like Theora / Vorbis or encoding via ffmpeg via CamStudio. (Nor use ffmpeg for decoding via WMP.)

forrestcupp
May 9th, 2012, 12:43 AM
Again, until they do something similar to what they did in Windows 7 Beta, which literally disallowed third-party codecs (and software) to play desired video feeds. I know, I had the beta, and couldn't use stuff like Theora / Vorbis or encoding via ffmpeg via CamStudio. (Nor use ffmpeg for decoding via WMP.)

As far as I know, it was only Windows Media Player that didn't allow it. They can't control what a 3rd party media player will allow.

Lucradia
May 9th, 2012, 09:12 PM
As far as I know, it was only Windows Media Player that didn't allow it. They can't control what a 3rd party media player will allow.

It disallowed camstudio to encode though =/ Which means it had the power to disable at the codec level.