| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
High-Definition Movies on DVD Discs Arrive for Users of Windows XP | |
|
||
| Time: 00:04 EST/05:04 GMT | News Source: Microsoft Press Release | Posted By: Jonathan Tigner | ||
|
Microsoft Corp. today announced that 16 feature films are being released as high-definition movies on DVD discs by a variety of publishers using the high-definition video capabilities of Microsoft® Windows Media® 9 Series (WMV HD). The 16 titles include 10 IMAX movies from MacGillivray Freeman Films Inc., and movies from Artisan Home Entertainment Inc., National Geographic, Luc Besson and more. The movies will be available at retail in two-disc DVD sets that contain both the movie in standard definition for playback on any DVD player and a companion DVD disc that contains the entire feature film in high-definition video and 5.1-channel surround sound using WMV HD, for playback on a Windows® XP-based PC. In addition, leading companies today signaled they have products or services available for content owners to author, produce and/or secure additional titles using WMV HD DVD discs. With video resolution of up to 1080p (approximately six times the resolution of today's DVD video), the WMV HD titles provide a visually stunning experience on Windows XP-based PCs, including PCs powered by the new Windows XP Media Center Edition 2004 operating system. The first disc available is MacGillivray Freeman's "Coral Reef Adventure," a two-DVD set, originally created for exhibition in IMAX theaters (http://www.coralfilm.com/). In a new national promotion, Gateway Inc. is offering a free copy of "Coral Reef Adventure" for a limited time with the purchase of a qualifying Gateway PC. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 228 Last | Next |
The time now is
8:49:11 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 116 (24.173.215.234) at 1/8/2004 11:24:31 AM |
|
Better quality, better licensing terms.
It is less expensive to license WMV than MPEG-4. And now its as open a codec as MPEG-4 is. This is really cool and I think we will start seeing some wins from Microsoft on the video front with this. Its an awesome codec. |
| #2 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 1/8/2004 12:20:27 PM |
|
Has anybody actually wrote out a CD from Windows Movie Maker and tried to play it on a DVD with HighMAT?
Just curious. I have a new Panasonic DVD player that is HighMAT compatible, but the CD I create from out of the windows movie maker doesn't work on it. I'm wondering if it's because I'm using WMV 9? |
| #3 By 2459 (24.175.137.164) at 1/8/2004 1:42:37 PM |
|
Check the HighMAT logo on your player. It lists the capabilities it supports.
My guess is your player only supports audio, or audio and images, but not audio, images, and video. http://www.highmat.com/howtouseit/playback.asp This post was edited by n4cer on Thursday, January 08, 2004 at 13:45. |
| #4 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 1/8/2004 2:19:29 PM |
|
Red, WM is not as open as MPEG is. Can Sony, Dolby, AT&T, Apple, Kodak, and others contribute to it? No.
All MS has done is submit it for review to an organization that is more concerned with standards for lenses and film sizes. |
| #5 By 116 (24.173.215.234) at 1/8/2004 2:38:13 PM |
| Can i contribute to MPEG-4 Sodajerk? Can you? |
| #6 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 1/8/2004 2:40:46 PM |
| Yes, Red, you can! And I can too. Simply join mpeg-la! It's called an open consortium, where the best technology is submitted and approved in a meritocracy. |
| #7 By 116 (24.173.215.234) at 1/8/2004 3:14:10 PM |
|
heh for a second I read mediocrity.
I went to mpegla.com and couldn't find how I could join the consortium. They have a meetings link on their but you have to log into it. Can you show me how to join the consortium? I don't know if you have taken a look at the licensing terms for Windows Media but they are MUCH more attractive than MPEG-4. If you believe in meritocracy why wouldn't you prefer WM9? If its the best technology and cheaper to implement to boot, why wouldn't you like WM9? Peace, RA This post was edited by RedAvenger on Thursday, January 08, 2004 at 15:14. |
| #8 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 1/8/2004 3:21:38 PM |
|
It's not the best, and I'm not one to be sold on cheap. The only way Microsoft can spread WM is by virtually giving it away, yes, I know that. You don't need to keep pointing it out. What makes you think that would constitute a meritocracy anyway? One company dictating everything is the exact opposite of a meritocracy.
Do your own research, man (although I misspoke: mplegla represents the licensors and licensees and doesn't represent the technological element of the group... it is true: mpeg is an open consortia). |
| #9 By 116 (24.173.215.234) at 1/8/2004 4:08:49 PM |
|
Well by all metrics available I would say it is the best.
You might have a different definition of best though... I don't see how I can change MPEG-4. I have done some research and like I said i couldn't find a way to "join" MPEG. I am not the one that said I could contribute to MPEG. You are. If you can't back up your statement then I will disagree until proven otherwise. Microsoft has multiple ways that you can influence their format. You can send requests to MSWish or WMWish which are read by real people. What more do you want than that. Saying MPEG4 is anymore of a standard than WM9 is simply not true any more. It used to be yes but not anymore. Any person can license the technology for incorporation into their products. The MPEG4 standard is done. I can't influence MPEG4 any more... I really dont understand how anyone can claim MPEG4 is any more standards compliant than WM9. |
| #10 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 1/8/2004 5:13:30 PM |
|
Oooooh, you can ask, hope, and pray Microsoft does something! Oh boy, that's open.
MPEG is definitely more of a standard; MPEG is a working group of ISO/IEC in charge of developing international standards, has been around for over 10 years, is represented by 300 experts, 20 countries, and numerous companies (including Microsoft). I don't need to demonstrate perfectly self-evident and easily discovered facts. You claimed first that WM was an open standard, and it simply is NOT. This post was edited by sodajerk on Thursday, January 08, 2004 at 17:16. |
| #11 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 1/8/2004 6:15:57 PM |
|
Hey, idiot, he called it "open" first; I told him it wasn't "open" without refering to a standard; then Red said it was open and a standard, then I said and continue to say that it is neither open or a standard. Get it, idiot.
Note to Admins: please notice that parker has called me an idiot TWICE today before I even began to address him directly. Okay... edit away! |
| #12 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 1/8/2004 8:01:34 PM |
|
I am not so sure if having an "open standard" in this realm is beneficial to consumers, actually. "Standard" often means lowest-common-denominator (in some cases it's great, in other cases it's a handicap), but most importantly here, in consumer electronics you don't necessarily want a "standard" that is continually shifting according to a consortium representing a lot of different interests. Looking at all the trouble that people have getting the right codecs for various other "open" video compression technologies; that's trouble enough for the end user of a PC. But take a non-upgradeable consumer electronics video player (DVD, VCD, whatever), and you need a reasonably stable technology. Not that I'm saying they aren't doing that with MPEG4, but if Sony, Dolby, AT&T, sodajerk, et al were all winning approval of their own extensions/modifications or introducing their own variants of the standard--as sodajerk claims is the benefit of the "open standard" characteristic of MPEG4--it'd be a total mess for consumers.
"Open standard" is a very loaded phrase, and many people have developed a somewhat blind emotional attachment to it. Yes, many times it's often desirable, but there are also many situations in which it's not. |
| #13 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 1/8/2004 8:18:45 PM |
|
you retarded moron, yes, in his first post he said: "its as open a codec as MPEG-4 is."
and what did I say in my first reply post, moron? Idiot, I said: "Red, WM is not as open as MPEG is." the first time I used "standard" in reference to either mpeg or WM was after Red had said: "Saying MPEG4 is anymore of a standard than WM9 is simply not true any more... The MPEG4 standard is done... I really dont understand how anyone can claim MPEG4 is any more standards compliant than WM9," you moron! Don't call me "Mr. Potty Mouth", moron, when your first contribution to this subject was: "No you idiot," you freakin retard. This post was edited by sodajerk on Thursday, January 08, 2004 at 21:05. |
| #14 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 1/8/2004 8:24:29 PM |
|
bluvg, do you have any clue what you are talking about or are you trying to throw up a smokescreen on purpose?
Two key points: 1. MPEG-4 was built to allow the addition of profiles and codecs to its base layers without affecting compatibility. There are numerous examples of this already (the 3GPP codecs added recently for cellphones, etc...; the soon to be added H.264 and AVC codec,etc...) 2. you are describing some non-existent process that is the complete opposite of the mpeg process. They go through a number of drafts, solicit recommendations, solicit feedback, test alternatives, choose in subgroups which are the best technologies. The fact is: mpeg is very stable for content producers, chip manufacturers, codec developers, content distributors, satellite manufacturers, cable providers, device manufacturers, cellphone providers, computer manufacturers, software developers, et al.... each of the specs developed has actually been very advanced and very far-looking using the best technologies from the best providers, which is why, in part, their significance is not understood for many years. that is why, despite whatever recent gains made by WM, many of you are unaware of how entrenched and how far ahead mpeg really is. Jesus... I was toying with Red, but I'll provide some info and links... This post was edited by sodajerk on Thursday, January 08, 2004 at 21:03. |
| #15 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 1/8/2004 8:25:17 PM |
|
The Moving Picture Coding Experts Group (MPEG) was established in January 1988 with the mandate to develop standards for coded representation of moving pictures, audio and their combination. It operates in the framework of the Joint ISO/IEC Technical Committee (JTC 1) on Information Technology and is formally WG11 of SC29.
Starting from its first meeting in May 1988 when 25 experts participated, MPEG has grown to an unusually large committee. Usually some 350 experts from some 200 companies and organisations from about 20 countries take part in MPEG meetings. As a rule, MPEG meets three times a year (in March, July and November) but meets more frequently when the workload so demands. In 1998 it will hold 5 meetings, all lasting 5 days. A large part of the MPEG membership is made of individuals operating in research and academia. Even though the MPEG environment looks rather informal, it has to be borne in mind standards can be of high strategic relevance. It should be no surprise that operation of ISO standards committees is carefully regulated by "Directives" issued by ISO/IEC and "Procedures for the Technical Work" issued by JTC1. MPEG exists to produce standards. Those currently produced by ISO are indicated by 5 digits (the ISO number for MPEG-1 is 11172 and for MPEG-2 is 13818). Published standards are the last stage of a long process that starts with the proposal of new work within a committee. These proposals of work (NP = New Proposal) are approved at Subcommittee and then at the Technical Committee level (SC29 and JTC1 respectively, in the case of MPEG). When the scope of new work has been sufficiently clarified, MPEG usually makes open requests for proposals. So far proposals have been requested for MPEG-1 Audio and Video (July 1989) MPEG-2 Audio and Video (July 1991) MPEG-4 Audio and Video (July 1995) Synthetic/Natural Hybrid Coding (March 1996) and others. |
| #16 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 1/8/2004 8:25:57 PM |
|
Depending on the nature of the standard documents of different nature may be produced. For Audio and Video coding standards the first document that is produced is called a Verification Model (VM). In MPEG-1 and MPEG-2 this was called Simulation and Test Model, respectively. The VM describes, in some sort of programming language, the operation of the encoder and the decoder. The VM is used to carry out simulations to optimise the performance of the coding scheme. When MPEG has reached sufficient confidence in the stability of the standard under development, a Working Draft (WD) is produced. This is already in the form of a standard but is kept internal to MPEG for revision. At the planned time the WD has become sufficiently solid and becomes Committee Draft (CD). It is then sent to National Bodies (NB) for ballot. If the number of positive votes is above the quorum, the CD becomes Final Committee Draft (FCD) and is again submitted to NBs for the second ballot after a thorough review that may take into account the comments issued by NBs. If the number of positive votes is above the quorum the FCD becomes Final Draft International Standard (FDIS). ISO will then hold a yes/no ballot with National Bodies where no technical changes are allowed. The document then becomes International Standard (IS).
A WD usually undergoes several revisions before moving to CD stage. A key role is played by "Core experiments" where different technical options are studies by at least two different partners. Each revision involves a large number of experts who draw the committee's attention to possible errors contained in the document. Moreover, depending on the nature of comments that usually accompany National Body votes, important changes may have to be made on documents when they progress from CD to DIS and from DIS to IS. The net result is that standard produced by MPEG are of very high quality. No single error was discovered in MPEG-1 and small errors, better described as items of text of dubious interpretation, were found in MPEG-2 Video and MPEG-2 Audio. Corrections are produced using the "Corrigendum" process. In MPEG-2 Systems, Video and Audio it was found useful to introduce some new features that built upon the standards as originally released. This was done using the "Amendment" process defined by ISO. For MPEG-2 Audio it has been found useful to produce a new revision of the standard. A large part of the technical work is done at MPEG meetings, usually lasting one full week. Several hundreds contributions are submitted by members by electronic means to the MPEG FTP site. Delegates are then able to come to meetings without having to spend precious time to study other delegates' contributions at the meeting. The meeting is structured in Plenaries (4 hours on Monday morning, 2 hours on Wednesday morning and all the afternoon of Friday) and in subgroup meetings. About 150 documents are produced at every meeting that capture the agreements reached. Particular importance assume "Resolutions" which document the outline of each agreement and make reference to the documents produced, and "Ad-hoc groups", groups of delegates working on some specified area of work, usually until the following meeting. Ad-hoc groups work by e-mail and in some exceptional cases they are authorised to hold physical meetings. Output documents, too, are stored on the MPEG FTP site. Access to input and output documents, however, is restricted to MPEG members |
| #17 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 1/8/2004 8:27:02 PM |
|
Participate in mpeg (if you're actually qualified to assist):
http://www.chiariglione.org/mpeg/hot_news.htm Calls for Requirements Call for Requirements for the MPEG-21 Architecture and MPEG-21 IPMP Call for Proposals Call for Proposals on Scalable Video Coding Technology MPEG-21 Event Reporting Call for Proposals Final Call for Proposals for MPEG-21 IPMP Call for Proposals on MPEG Graphics API Draft CfP on Lightweight Scene Representation Call for comments Call for Comments on Draft MPEG-21 Conversion Descriptor Requirements Verification tests Report of The Formal Verification Tests on AVC (ISO/IEC 14496-10 | ITU-T Rec. H.264) General The MPEG reference software can be downloaded from the ISO site Other documents of interest can be found under Working documents |
| #18 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 1/8/2004 8:28:09 PM |
| dkg, besides that coughing problem, do you have some learning or visual impairment that prevents you from understanding what a meritocracy is? |
| #19 By 116 (24.173.215.234) at 1/8/2004 9:12:30 PM |
|
OK all of your links are to MPEG-21 their multimedia framework not MPEG-4. How do I participate in changing MPEG-4?
Honestly, WM has already made huge inroads and will continue doing so. Anyways thanks for the links. Interesting. |
| #20 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 1/8/2004 9:43:39 PM |
|
Red, the simple answer is: you don't. You aren't qualified. You are a kid in his 20s from Texas. There are 300+ of the top AV professionals that have been working on this issue for the past 15 years already involved. You have to be certified by the ISO to be a representative of standards for your country or put forward by some commercial enterprise as a qualified expert in some aspect of mpeg-4 that needs input. But there are tons fo links on the web. Group meetings, requests, proposals, etc...
Maybe I'm underestimating you though; maybe you've got some brilliant brainstorm they've been waiting for, and they await your attendance at the next meeting. ...or you could just submit it to MSWish and wish for the best... Ha, ha, ha, hilarious, man! I only copied the MPEG-21 because that's where most of the work is happening now. MPEG-4 is pretty good to go... It's jsut a matter of adding additional profiles and codecs (mostly UTI standards) like H.264 and AVC. (H.263, 3GPP and many others were already recently added.) This post was edited by sodajerk on Friday, January 09, 2004 at 12:43. |
| #21 By 116 (24.173.215.234) at 1/9/2004 1:20:37 AM |
|
Thats true. I have the brainstorm but if they wont have me then its their loss. They dont know what they are missing out on!
I do however like being called a kid. Even better is childish, and recently I have been told I am young in business and argumentative. But I won't let comments like that keep me from ruling the world! Peace, Ra |
| #22 By 1845 (67.161.212.73) at 1/9/2004 1:39:47 AM |
|
"Yes, Red, you can!"
"Red, the simple answer is: you don't. You aren't qualified." Hmm, I thought it was this nice and open, anyone can get in, type of a thing. Seems you've contradicted yourself, jerk. "It's not the best..." Why don't you tell us, from a techincal perspective, what you find wrong with the WM9 codecs. If they aren't the best, why not? I'm not interested in the standards politics. Just on the technical basis of the codec, why is WM9 no the best? Then, if you will, explain what is the best and why. |
| #23 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 1/9/2004 12:48:24 PM |
|
There is no contradiction at all, Bob. Again, it is a meritocracy. If you have something worthwhile to add, are an expert, are working for a huge telecommunications firm, software developer, AV specialist, whatever, and your expertise is needed, you would certainly be allowed to participate.
Being open doesn't mean any retard gets to start inserting meaningless, useless, crappy code. Saying you need to be qualified and certified is not negating the idea of openness. By no means does open equal walk off street, unqualified... This is even the case in the open source world: you can modify to your hearts content, that doesn't mean your changes get included in the core distribution, just that you can (and have to) submit your changes, and at the core level of the project they make decisions about what modifications are best to make. It took me all day yesterday to explain some very basic and obvious stuff (mpeg is an open standard; WM is not). Maybe I'll get to your question about WM's limitations next week. This post was edited by sodajerk on Friday, January 09, 2004 at 12:51. |
| #24 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 1/9/2004 1:01:25 PM |
|
sodajerk, thanks for the standards lecture. I am aware of how most standards processes work.
This is sort of what I was getting at: http://www.dealerscope.com/doc/278947293472507.bsp |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 228 Last | Next |
The time now is
8:49:11 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
