StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Ars wrote:
Confirming our earlier reports, some owners of HD television sets will not be able to see HD DVD and Blu-ray programming in its full glory, as the Advanced Access Content System (AACS) used by both next-gen formats has been modified to require picture degredation over analog connections.
As a result, the signal sent through analog connections will be constrained to 960x540, rather than the 1920x1080 that both Blu-ray and HD DVD are capable of.

According to the consortium backing AACS, the change is necessary because of—you guessed it—piracy.
The fear is that hordes of otherwise law-abiding citizens will take advange of analog video connections to record full-resolution copies of movies from HD DVD and Blu-ray discs and subsequently distribute them via peer-to-peer networks and other nefarious means.
To keep that from happening, any video signal that doesn't travel over a protected input (such as HDMI) will be degraded.

The AACS specification will now contain a new digital flag called the Image Constraint Token. At the discretion of the content producer, the ICT can be set to require next-gen optical players to degrade the video over analog connections. If ICT is turned off, then no downsampling will occur.

At 960x540, degraded video will still look better than standard DVDs, which generally are encoded at 720x480.
However, owners of analog 720p HD sets (and they are out there) will be getting short shrift, as their TVs are capable of 1280x720 display.
AACS is attempting to throw them a bone, as the degraded signal will then be "up converted" to 1280x720. The ultimate result will be a picture that fills the screen, but doesn't give the consumer what he or she paid for in terms of the quality.

Unlike Managed Copy, which is a mandatory part of AACS for both platforms, ICT usage will be left up to the choice of the individual studios.

So far, none of them have said they will be requiring its use for their discs. However, Disney, Warner Home Video, Paramount, and NBC Universal are considered likely candidates to require ICT.
Consumer electronics manufacturers have been unenthusiastic about supporting ITC, but will have to incorporate it into their players if they want them certified to play next-generation optical disc content.

As Ken wrote last summer, "the revolution will be televised, only it won't be in HD unless your pockets have paid for recent display technology designed with the future in mind." That future, in case you've forgotten, involves the motion picture and music industries being able to exercise maximum control over what you watch, how you watch, and when you watch it.
In the past couple of months we've seen legislation introduced to close the so-called "analog hole," resurrect the broadcast flag for television and HD radio, and ultimately limit the functionality of consumer electronics to "customary historic uses."
All this is in the guise of fighting piracy and keeping artists from starving. But the truth of the matter is that our "friends" at the RIAA and MPAA want to keep themselves at the helm of the USS Content at all costs, even if it means trampling their customers.

So far, none of them have said they will be requiring its use for their discs. However, Disney, Warner Home Video, Paramount, and NBC Universal are considered likely candidates to require ICT.

At 960x540, degraded video will still look better than standard DVDs, which generally are encoded at 720x480.

Arrow wrote:IIRC, users with DVI connectors are also out of luck, because they don't carry the DRM flags. Only systems with HDMI connections will be able to show the material in its full visual glory.

DEATH wrote: To keep that from happening, any video signal that doesn't travel over a protected input (such as HDMI) will be degraded.

At 960x540, degraded video will still look better than standard DVDs, which generally are encoded at 720x480.

At least there will be an improved res on some HD analog screens, but this really does suck for anyone with an analog screen, at the very least this could have been announced earlier so as to warn customers that everyone of them would be treated as a criminal.

Kazuaki Shimazaki wrote:I wonder how long would it be before someone invents a plug that would make the player think it is transmitting on HDMI, but isn't - it is converted into analogue right before it hits the TV.

Arrow wrote:Such a system would be illegal, and since requires an actually, physical converter box, hard to get a hold of. But I can see some enterprising folks with HTPCs getting around DRM...

Uraniun235 wrote:

Arrow wrote:Such a system would be illegal, and since requires an actually, physical converter box, hard to get a hold of. But I can see some enterprising folks with HTPCs getting around DRM...

Only illegal in the US, right? I'm sure our Canadian friends would be happy to ship them down south and make a tidy profit.

Beowulf wrote:The problem: No one makes anything that takes component video signals and digitizes them, that don't cost more than my entire current computer system.

Admiral Valdemar wrote:And then what do they do 5 more years down the line whenan even better format comes out? This is why it is pure idiocy to jump in and keep up with new technology. The fools that went for Betamax found that out, even if it was a better product. The people who have plasma TVs today will find that out. I expect the same will happen with HD media formats too, as it happened with Mini-Disc and the Philips CD-i.

Arrow wrote:

Beowulf wrote:The problem: No one makes anything that takes component video signals and digitizes them, that don't cost more than my entire current computer system.

Pretty much every HDTV I know of takes the component signal and digitizes it before it does anything to the signal, such as scaling the video to the TV's native resolution. The ADCs for the component jacks used by TVs and DACs for component jacks used DVD players and HD Decoders/PVRs already exist and are standard equipment.

Beowulf wrote:Not one that you could put into a computer so that you can actually record the video.

Beowulf wrote:The problem: No one makes anything that takes component video signals and digitizes them, that don't cost more than my entire current computer system.

phongn wrote:

Beowulf wrote:The problem: No one makes anything that takes component video signals and digitizes them, that don't cost more than my entire current computer system.

Well, the DeckLink SP is only a mere $600

ggs wrote:The sad part is TV crts SUCK SHIT compared to PC monitors. They just dont have the physical resolution that PC monitors do nor the preformance.

Plus the extra cost is mindblowing( and obviously budget blowing )

Arrow wrote:That's a big-ass breakout cable! Strip off everything but the component parts, and you're probably looking at under half the price.

theski wrote:WRONG..... try finding a 34inch computer CRT hdtv for $1000 .. both Panasonic and Sony make one...

phongn wrote:

Beowulf wrote:The problem: No one makes anything that takes component video signals and digitizes them, that don't cost more than my entire current computer system.

Well, the DeckLink SP is only a mere $600

Beowulf wrote:Decklink HD you mean. The Decklink SP doesn't have HD connectivity. So who would be buying a $600 capture card to pirate DVDs for other people? This sort of thing is definitely not in the realm of something a home user would have in their computer. It's more than the graphics card in my computer cost when released, and it's got a fairly dubious amount of usefulness...