PDA

View Full Version : Disney Goes Microsoft (for digitally protected movies)


MacBytes
Feb 9, 2004, 01:36 AM
Category: Microsoft
Link: Disney Goes Microsoft (for digitally protected movies) (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20040209023641)

Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)

Approved by arn

irmongoose
Feb 9, 2004, 01:47 AM
If their movies continue to have such low quality stories as they have now, it won't matter what format they choose for anything. Disney is going down the dumps.

However, how it affects other companies in their choice on what format to choose will be interesting.



irmongoose

Bunny
Feb 9, 2004, 02:21 AM
Yep, I knew it.
Billy is always jumping into the grave.
Wow, digital movies. What a breakthrough! Pffff.
Disney has nothing to watch, especially now they are straying from Pixar.
It will not work.

Darwin
Feb 9, 2004, 02:28 AM
Im not really bothered, i agree that their films have certainly gone down hill, the only good films that seemed to come out were the ones from the partnership with Pixar IMO and now that it has ended Disney might have some trouble coming up with something new.

If they want to go with Windows Media then they can, quaility of the codec matches that of their films anyways.

alset
Feb 9, 2004, 02:32 AM
True that the movies are on a serious decline, but it's more power behind WM format. Frightening.

Dan

KC9AIC
Feb 9, 2004, 02:46 AM
Makes you wonder how Disney plans to distribute digital video online. Will it be 300 kb/s Windoze Media Player video? I can't imagine paying for such junk. Not only does Disney have some lousy movies, but even the good ones would look lousy, as quality would be almost nil. Who would pay for that?

stoid
Feb 9, 2004, 02:46 AM
Well, I guess we'll see if MS can revolutionize a distribution method as Apple did with the iTMS.

Mav451
Feb 9, 2004, 02:47 AM
uggh...WMV format being standardized. Scary.

tychay
Feb 9, 2004, 02:52 AM
Originally posted by alset
True that the movies are on a serious decline, but it's more power behind WM format. Frightening.

Really? Isn't Disney the same company that adopted then dropped those limited play disposable DVDs?

I'm pretty certain we know which way this "technology" is going.

Take care,

inkswamp
Feb 9, 2004, 03:02 AM
How many more examples do corporate "content creators" need before they understand that people don't want to rent movies and music? There may be a minority out there who prefers that but most of us want to own the copy of the stuff we pay for. I don't want to pay each time I watch nor do I want my watching habits tucked away in some marketing database. The lesson behind the stellar performance of iTunes Music Store versus Music Store X would seem to have been lost on companies like Disney.

So, given that the only compelling stuff coming from Disney lately is either from Pixar or Miyazaki, I would say that the adoption of Windows media is another nail in their coffin. Pathetic! Disney's animation was always top-notch and it's sad to watch a bunch of greedy drones run such a legacy into the ground.

Sabenth
Feb 9, 2004, 03:32 AM
do we all now own supper dupper download limit cable conections.... ???


wmv bah !!!

nope not buying this one yet

Diseny who??

Pixar hell yeaaaa and no not because of steve jobs. there movies do genraly make me laugh :D

took a few watches of nemo to really like it but deep down a good movie..

lduncan
Feb 9, 2004, 04:07 AM
So this is why Steve ditched Disney.

irmongoose
Feb 9, 2004, 04:26 AM
No, more like this is because Steve dumped Disney.

Remember though, Disney, albeit the fact that these days it's reputation is pretty bad, has a strong presence in the entertainment world. This decision could have some serious consequences. Fortunately, the chances of that happening is pretty low.




irmongoose

Sol
Feb 9, 2004, 04:29 AM
This seems like retaliation on Disney's part for Pixar's abrupt decision to end their colaboration. It is like Michael Eisner is saying to Steve Jobs: "Is that how it is going to be? Stick your QuickTime where the sun don't shine; from now on Disney is supporting Windows Media." It is not hard to imagine that one day the first seven Pixar films will be sold in the WMV format since Disney own those properties.

Having said that, downloadable movies are not going to out-sell DVD sales or rentals any time soon. Simply using the online music model for video is a sure way to a disaster. Movie file sizes are bigger than an album of AACs or WMAs and thus they need faster internet connections (with no monthly download limits like those I suffer in Australia).

What portable video devices would I use with these Disney files? Portable video devices are not very practical, or affordable yet (at least not to say).

Steve Jobs has allready pointed out the major difference between music and movies: we watch films once or maybe a couple of times (if we really like one) but we listen to the same album time and time again. I think he was hinting that a per-view model would work better with films. I would say that subscription is best suited to television feeds and Real propably dominate that now.

QuickTime seems to be dominating in film trailers now but that is no guarantee that it will be supported by the studios in the future. In the end, the format that is best for the films should win. There is no doubt in my mind that the film-makers will support the best format for their work and how they choose to screen it.

The biggest loss about the Disney and Pixar break up would be that Pixar will not get to remake any Disney films, something they could have done after Toy Story 2. They seem to be stuck in a formula but the Dali project sounded like a step in the right direction. It will propably come out in Windows Media format but one thing is for sure: it would look better on a tablet PC than a PDA device.

I hope Apple supports the tablet PCs and the PDAs soon. A version of QuickTime for the Palm OS is long over-due and Sony could diliver something special with MP4s on the PSP.

ralphh
Feb 9, 2004, 04:58 AM
The cellphone industry has been struggling to keep MS out because they know MS's penchant for putting partners in a hammerlock. Of course, Dizzy's deal to use WMV is probably not exclusive so in theory they could still distribute in QT format, but it would be expensive to use both or even just switch. This doesn't seem like a sound call.

bennetsaysargh
Feb 9, 2004, 05:14 AM
well, it was bound to happen. steve left disney, and bill is trying to salvage it. i've always loved disney movies until pixar, then the disney movie got worse, and pixar got better. don't know why, i guess after the success of toy story, they let pixar do the heavy lifting.

Photorun
Feb 9, 2004, 05:48 AM
Disney needs to fire that Eisner creep and maybe part of the board. As a company they're heading into the toilet.

ionas
Feb 9, 2004, 05:54 AM
and if ms wasnt that evul
and if the ms video codecs would not be that bad

it would have been a bad descission for pixar (by steve, loving apple more than pixar, if all stated above would have been the case)

but this time - it combines interests :)

MrMacMan
Feb 9, 2004, 06:06 AM
Urg, Those video files suck...

Why not a good DivX or something, gah, XviD...

Horrible choice and horrible DRM...

Gah, I bet once the service dies you can't open your videos.

SiliconAddict
Feb 9, 2004, 06:13 AM
Originally posted by irmongoose
If their movies continue to have such low quality stories as they have now, it won't matter what format they choose for anything. Disney is going down the dumps.

However, how it affects other companies in their choice on what format to choose will be interesting.



irmongoose

Keep in mind that Miracle is #2 at the boxoffice (http://movies.go.com/boxoffice/)

Bitch all you want about Disney. Their live action movies are fantastic and large money makers.

mactarkus
Feb 9, 2004, 06:20 AM
This news is a little scary. While we all agree that file sizes and portable video player prices make digital movie distribution over the internet prohibitive these days, the day will come when the internet is sped up way beyond what we have today. When that comes, I'd much rather punch a button on my tv's remote control and transfer a movie to my tv's 300GB hard drive in a minute than drive to Blockbuster or open a filthy DVD from a NetFlix envelope. I can then watch it on any tv or computer in the house as many times as I want until it expires. The only question is if this strategic move for Disney will matter if Disney doesn't make it that far. They will, they're an American institution.

irmongoose
Feb 9, 2004, 06:42 AM
Originally posted by SiliconAddict
Bitch all you want about Disney. Their live action movies are fantastic and large money makers.

True. I had forgotten about their live action movies... the first thing you think about when you hear Disney is animation, and their current animations are so poor that you forget they have anything good going on. Hmm... so I guess these movies to be distributed includes these movies? This is more interesting than I thought...



irmongoose

Wonder Boy
Feb 9, 2004, 06:42 AM
i don't like this. sure disney pictures have stunk recently, but the spread of wmp cant be good.

badika
Feb 9, 2004, 06:55 AM
You said it. Can you imagine what Job's reaction will be when Disney announces that their Movie Store's opening day splash will be made with Finding Nemo available for download only in WMV format. I'd hate to be in the same room during that ego implosion.

Hmm, I wonder where Disney got the idea for a download movie store from... Anyway, Steve dropped the ball with Quick Time and internet movie files a long time ago. (the gov't dropped the MSFT anti-trust ball about the same time) His last hope is with the cell phone industry, and even that's hanging on to open standards by a thread.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Sol
[B]This seems like retaliation on Disney's part for Pixar's abrupt decision to end their colaboration. It is like Michael Eisner is saying to Steve Jobs: "Is that how it is going to be? Stick your QuickTime where the sun don't shine; from now on Disney is supporting Windows Media." It is not hard to imagine that one day the first seven Pixar films will be sold in the WMV format since Disney own those properties.

fixyourthinking
Feb 9, 2004, 07:28 AM
The board of directors and Roy Disney have publicly stated that Eisner is on his way out - I think Roy even went as far as saying he'd love for Steve Jobs to be CEO.

Eisner most likely came up with this plan as revenge - something that he is notorious for.

He approves movie projects on television networks that are unauthorized biographies, he greenlights a lot of recording contracts that "get back at press releases about his stars".

dukemeiser
Feb 9, 2004, 07:33 AM
Disney may not have anything good to offer right now. But Pixar and Disney still have two more movies to distibute. They could potentially distribute the movies online and be successful. But I doubt many kids want to see a Pixar movie on their computer and not be able to have it on DVD.

the_mole1314
Feb 9, 2004, 07:39 AM
Dose it really matter? I mean, how many people who watch Disney movies are willing to pay for them for a crappy downloadable version? Just go and buy the DVD people.

a_iver
Feb 9, 2004, 07:44 AM
Here ye, here ye. Fellow mac users throw away your windows media player and refrain from downloading it. And together we can hope to end the insanity.

Wendy_Rebecca
Feb 9, 2004, 07:53 AM
Originally posted by Sol
This seems like retaliation on Disney's part for Pixar's abrupt decision to end their colaboration.

LOL...Yeah, that's it. Disney--a multibillion dollar company--made this decision not based on the best technology available, but on the ego of Eisner.

Give me a break. Eisner doesn't give a ****** about the "Mac vs. PC" religious wars; Disney is doing what's best for Disney. Plain and simple.

Apple has a lot of catching up to do with Windows Media. Do you see any Apple technology being used in movie theatres for digital projection? Does Apple have anywhere near the market penetration of WMV (or WMA for that matter)? Windows Media 9 is an amazing, high-quality, scalable technology that is being embraced by the film and television industry on a scale Apple can only dream of.

Get used to it. And get over it.

dwishbone
Feb 9, 2004, 08:00 AM
this really just sounds like a "well screw you we dont need you anyway" kinda thing from disney. since jobs gave the finger to eisner from pixar disney, which has always been a big apple supporter, thought this would be a good way to get back at him. they pick the shotty WMV over QT.
i agree with the above posters though...if Disney's movies continue to suck eggs it dont matter what format they use. Lilo and Stitch was great...but other than that disney's traditionally animated movies havnt been good in some time.

piracy
Feb 9, 2004, 08:11 AM
Originally posted by Wendy_Rebecca
Apple has a lot of catching up to do with Windows Media. Do you see any Apple technology being used in movie theatres for digital projection? Does Apple have anywhere near the market penetration of WMV (or WMA for that matter)? Windows Media 9 is an amazing, high-quality, scalable technology that is being embraced by the film and television industry on a scale Apple can only dream of.

Get used to it. And get over it.

Uh, this isn't about Windows Media vs QuickTime. This is about Windows Media vs open, established standards, like the MPEG family, notably H.264/MPEG-4 AVC.

Windows Media is proprietary, and puts one company - Microsoft - firmly in control of your content delivery, distribution, and playback. Microsoft has made a feeble, token, empty attempt to placate the standards-based crowd by submitting Windows Media to SMPTE for approval. LOL!

Giving this much control to Microsoft and the Windows Media format is dangerous, and people aren't doing it because it's good, or better than anything else, they're doing it because they horribly misunderstand the whole concept, idea, and benefit of open standards. In the cable, satellite, and broadcast industries over the last 20 years, proprietary systems that have been implemented have failed. It is the open standards that have succeeded. Microsoft knows this, and that's why they're trying to give Windows Media the illusion of being ubiquitous. Then they set up sweetheart licensing deals that are subsidized by the profits from the rest of the company (a la Internet Explorer), in the hopes of killing opposition. Then everyone has to rely on Microsoft products with Microsoft OSes and Microsoft software, Microsoft servers, and Microsoft end-to-end solutions to deliver the content from creation to content provider to deliver to playback.

It's sad if you actually think that people going with Windows Media is a good thing. Anyone can make proprietary products in a vacuum that appear "better" than something else. If people want Microsoft to excercise the ultimate control over their content, hey, let them learn the hard way. Microsoft has shown again and again that it is intensely focused on lease-based and per use-based cost models, and you can better believe that they'll do everything they can, including lying, cheating, and stealing to force Windows Media down as many throats as possible until so many people rely on it that everyone is at Microsoft's mercy, and it's too late to switch to anything else.

MorganX
Feb 9, 2004, 08:13 AM
Originally posted by KC9AIC
Makes you wonder how Disney plans to distribute digital video online. Will it be 300 kb/s Windoze Media Player video? I can't imagine paying for such junk. Not only does Disney have some lousy movies, but even the good ones would look lousy, as quality would be almost nil. Who would pay for that?

This is dictated by the device. Portable Media centers will use 700kbs on about a 3-3.5" screen.

hayesk
Feb 9, 2004, 08:16 AM
Originally posted by Wendy_Rebecca

Apple has a lot of catching up to do with Windows Media. Do you see any Apple technology being used in movie theatres for digital projection? Does Apple have anywhere near the market penetration of WMV (or WMA for that matter)? Windows Media 9 is an amazing, high-quality, scalable technology that is being embraced by the film and television industry on a scale Apple can only dream of.

Get used to it. And get over it.

You're joking right. Windows is faaaarrr behind in the movie and entertainment business. Most productions use QT and Macs all throughout the production process. QT is so much more scalable than WMV that it is not even funny. WM9 is just another codec that doesn't match up to MPEG4 used in QT.

MorganX
Feb 9, 2004, 08:19 AM
Originally posted by Wendy_Rebecca
LOL...Yeah, that's it. Disney--a multibillion dollar company--made this decision not based on the best technology available, but on the ego of Eisner.

Give me a break. Eisner doesn't give a ****** about the "Mac vs. PC" religious wars; Disney is doing what's best for Disney. Plain and simple.

Apple has a lot of catching up to do with Windows Media. Do you see any Apple technology being used in movie theatres for digital projection? Does Apple have anywhere near the market penetration of WMV (or WMA for that matter)? Windows Media 9 is an amazing, high-quality, scalable technology that is being embraced by the film and television industry on a scale Apple can only dream of.

Get used to it. And get over it.

Hello ;)

MorganX
Feb 9, 2004, 08:24 AM
Originally posted by piracy
Uh, this isn't about Windows Media vs QuickTime. This is about Windows Media vs open, established standards, like the MPEG family, notably H.264/MPEG-4 AVC.

What's the "open standard" DRM? Exactly.

This is about DRM, streaming, content deliver, time-limits, quality at high and low bit rates, etc.

MS' DRM, Media Encoding, and Content Delivery services are pretty mature and integrated.

This is about a total business solution. And what's with the DRM thing, everyone can get over DRM-free content. Apple doesn't provide it, and no one else will from here on out either. You download music and videos you will not be able to redistribute it unrestricted. PERIOD.

the_mole1314
Feb 9, 2004, 08:28 AM
Well guys, you need to remeber that Disney has also done lots of stupid technology decisions too. Remeber those disposable DVDs? Or how about all those Disney laser disk movies?

dongmin
Feb 9, 2004, 08:30 AM
1. No, this has nothing to do with Steve Jobs and Pixar. Do you guys seriously think that this was some sort of kneejerk reaction to Pixar ditching Disney? No way, this deal must have been in the works for months. I'm sure Msoft has been on the phone with all the major studios trying to cut deals for their media format.

2. As for the quality, video compression is getting better and better every year and average bandwidth is getting wider and wider. I think streaming/downloading TV-quality video is already a reality.

3. Disney owns far more than just a handful of Pixar animations. Not only do they have a vast library of animations from over the years, they own Walt Disney Pictures, Touchstone, Miramax, Hollywood Pictures, Dimension Films, etc. Disney could also chose to make available their TV content and they own a ****load of cable stations like ESPN, History Channel, E!, A&E, etc. in addition to all the ABC and Disney channels. I think they may be the biggest media company after Time Warner.

SiliconAddict
Feb 9, 2004, 08:39 AM
Originally posted by the_mole1314
Remeber those disposable DVDs?



*a shiver runs down his spine* Divx. Oh god I'm thankful that that never caught on. It would have made MS's monopoly look like a startup.

rlarose
Feb 9, 2004, 08:40 AM
This news byte inspired me to write my daily editorial today on this matter at my Think Code (http://www.think-code.com/think-discussions/viewtopic.php?p=2367) website this morning. It is kind of lengthy, so I won't repost it here. It basically concurs with everything said here, with a little bit of slander against Eisner and Gates (as always)... It also references how Disney has been hitting the news lines as much as the Jacksons these past few months!

shake
Feb 9, 2004, 08:46 AM
Originally posted by Wendy_Rebecca

Apple has a lot of catching up to do with Windows Media. Do you see any Apple technology being used in movie theatres for digital projection?

what are you talking about? digital projection in movie theatres? using Windows Media format? yu have got to be joking!

as a post-production engineer in the film/tv industry, i can assure you that the only pc in our studio is for the secretary. and even she has quicktime on it! Quicktime is far superior because it uses open standards (like a previous post said). if i am going to watch a movie, i will rent or buy it. i am not going to download it. thats very gay (excuse my language). just imagine the quality of video you would be getting! oh my! look at the clarity!

c'mon people. you would have to download a huge file if you were downloading a movie. streaming? yeah, right. i can see the movie stalling right now, turning into a nice slideshow. i think i'll dust off my betacam...

piracy
Feb 9, 2004, 08:50 AM
Originally posted by MorganX
What's the "open standard" DRM?

DRM Reference Model 1.0, also administered by MPEG LA, for H.264/MPEG-4 AVC.

I'm not disputing that Windows Media appears an attractive solution to some. I'm just saying that the proprietary road isn't the road people should want to travel when it comes to creation, storage, delivery, and viewing of your content. Sure, use proprietary tools and platforms, but the delivery and format should be completely open.

gwuMACaddict
Feb 9, 2004, 08:50 AM
sad

Wendy_Rebecca
Feb 9, 2004, 08:51 AM
Originally posted by dongmin
1. No, this has nothing to do with Steve Jobs and Pixar. Do you guys seriously think that this was some sort of kneejerk reaction to Pixar ditching Disney?

Yeah. They do. That's how unaware life is for many in the RDF.

Microsoft has the technology and resources to kick Apple's a**. Here are a few examples:


Sundance features to show in Windows Media 9 Series (http://www.uemedia.net/CPC/2-pop/printer_6232.shtml)

Broad Industry and Device Support (http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/hwdev/tech/DMD/default.mspx)

Windows Media to be a SMPTE Standard? (http://www.streamingmedia.com/article.asp?id=8501)

An excellent overview of Windows Media 9 (http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/wm9series.asp)

I'm not making any value judgements here, or worshiping at the altar of either technology. But as Steve Martin once said, "Truth is truth. You can't have opinions about truth".

piracy
Feb 9, 2004, 08:51 AM
Originally posted by SiliconAddict
*a shiver runs down his spine* Divx. Oh god I'm thankful that that never caught on. It would have made MS's monopoly look like a startup.

You say you're thankful those never caught on as if it was 50 years ago. This technology is brand new. It simply hasn't caught on *yet*.

Wendy_Rebecca
Feb 9, 2004, 08:54 AM
Originally posted by shake
what are you talking about? digital projection in movie theatres? using Windows Media format? yu have got to be joking!

No, I'm not joking. For someone supposedly in the industry, you are so out of touch it's scary. YES, I'm talking about Windows Media being used for digital projection in movie theatres.

Please get informed before you spout your ignorance:

Windows Media and Digital Projection (http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/content_provider/film/digitalcinema.aspx)

Here's a real-world example (http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2003/apr03/04-03LandmarkTheatresPR.asp)

piracy
Feb 9, 2004, 08:59 AM
Originally posted by Wendy_Rebecca
Yeah. They do. That's how unaware life is for many in the RDF.

Microsoft has the technology and resources to kick Apple's a**. Here are a few examples:


Sundance features to show in Windows Media 9 Series (http://www.uemedia.net/CPC/2-pop/printer_6232.shtml)

Broad Industry and Device Support (http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/hwdev/tech/DMD/default.mspx)

Windows Media to be a SMPTE Standard? (http://www.streamingmedia.com/article.asp?id=8501)

An excellent overview of Windows Media 9 (http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/wm9series.asp)

I'm not making any value judgements here, or worshiping at the altar of either technology. But as Steve Martin once said, "Truth is truth. You can't have opinions about truth".

Why don't you try responding to my post instead of posting this drivel. Your tone is getting close to trolling, and I'll assume you are trolling unless you say something intelligent.

That Windows Media has been submitted to SMPTE is meaningless and laughable. There is no guarantee it will be accepted, and this is merely a token gesture to attempt to calm management fears about Windows Media not being a "standard". Unfortunately, even if it does happen, Microsoft will continue to independently "improve" Windows Media, and no other vendor will be able to independently make useful (legal) tools for authoring, encoding, or maniplulating Windows Media.

It's no feat to make proprietary end-to-end solutions that are better than the competition. Heck, Apple is the prime example. What IS a challenge is to make excellent solutions using open, established standards developed and agreed upon by scores of experts, and that's the road Apple has been heading down.

Building great products around standards is the only way to ensure openness and interoperability.

Do you want a single company in control of all content creation, encoding, storage, DRM, delivery, decoding, and playback? It used to be that the mere fact of something NOT being an open standard was an automatic deal-killer. Microsoft is apparently being successful in convincing decisionmakers that this is no longer important. I watch with amusement when people get roped in to Microsoft marketing or products that appear the best thing since sliced bread at first, only to find out later on that it always equals more money and less innovation, and then everyone is kicking themselves wondering why there aren't any other options.

ralphh
Feb 9, 2004, 09:10 AM
Microsoft has the technology and resources to kick Apple's a**.

What you're not getting, friend, is that MS will leverage themselves into a position to kick Disney's a**, followed by the rest of the industry.

piracy
Feb 9, 2004, 09:15 AM
Originally posted by Wendy_Rebecca
No, I'm not joking. For someone supposedly in the industry, you are so out of touch it's scary. YES, I'm talking about Windows Media being used for digital projection in movie theatres.

Please get informed before you spout your ignorance:

Windows Media and Digital Projection (http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/content_provider/film/digitalcinema.aspx)

Here's a real-world example (http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2003/apr03/04-03LandmarkTheatresPR.asp)

Oh, man, thanks for waking me up with some laughter this morning.

Even for a Windows Media shill, you're so out of touch that it is indeed scary.

All technical people in the industries of cable broadcast, satellite broadcast, content creation, content delivery, STB engineering, and pretty much anything related are running as fast as they can from Windows Media - no matter how "good" it appears - and are cringing every time another company or organization gets duped by Microsoft's marketing of Windows Media. Why? Because it is NOT a standard, and ONE company controls everything. Industry experts realize this spells disaster, yet Microsoft continues to woo executives and sign more hapless souls onto Windows Media. It might take years, but this will all blow up right in their faces, and everyone will belatedly and forlornly long for the days of video standards bodies, which will no longer exist because Windows Media has taken over.

If that's what you want, at least come out and say it. This is not anti-Microsoft or anti-Windows Media. This is about the danger of trusting one company with every aspect of YOUR content. Microsoft promotes this as putting content owners in control, but that's false. The only entity that it puts in control is Microsoft, and people are apparently to stupid to learn from Microsoft's clear and demonstrated history of its desire to excercise ultimate, closed control over anything it can get its hands on.

MorganX
Feb 9, 2004, 09:17 AM
Originally posted by piracy
DRM Reference Model 1.0, also administered by MPEG LA, for H.264/MPEG-4 AVC.

I'm not disputing that Windows Media appears an attractive solution to some. I'm just saying that the proprietary road isn't the road people should want to travel when it comes to creation, storage, delivery, and viewing of your content. Sure, use proprietary tools and platforms, but the delivery and format should be completely open.

I hear you, but if it's not an ISO standard it's proprietary. Defacto industry standards are proprietary. Apple's Fairplay licensed DRM is proprietary.

It really doesn't matter whether you use open standards to build a proprietary solution, it's still proprietary.

I agree with DRM being a universal standard, however I think delivery and format will be driven by competition and quality and there won't be a single solution.

MorganX
Feb 9, 2004, 09:25 AM
Originally posted by piracy

All technical people in the industries of cable broadcast, satellite broadcast, content creation, content delivery, STB engineering, and pretty much anything related are running as fast as they can from Windows Media - no matter how "good" it appears - and are cringing every time another company or organization gets duped by Microsoft's marketing of Windows Media.

Except for Disney, ESPN, all music stores other than iTMS, CinemaNow, and the pr0n industry. Sorry, couldn't resist.

Java
Feb 9, 2004, 09:31 AM
Oh yes! Just what Disney needed. A partnership with a company that innovates :)

Mr. Anderson
Feb 9, 2004, 09:31 AM
This is a strange turn of events - however, I can just see then newest bit of hardware from M$ coming out soon - The Mickey Mouse......it has meaning at many levels, its almost profound :D

:rolleyes:

D

MorganX
Feb 9, 2004, 09:33 AM
Originally posted by shake
if i am going to watch a movie, i will rent or buy it. i am not going to download it.

You will if you want to download it to a PVP or PMC, or video iPod. Streaming, how about streaming one for a flight. Don't want to keep it, just watch it and forget it.

People said the same thing about music....

Java
Feb 9, 2004, 09:35 AM
Originally posted by Wendy_Rebecca
No, I'm not joking. For someone supposedly in the industry, you are so out of touch it's scary. YES, I'm talking about Windows Media being used for digital projection in movie theatres.

Please get informed before you spout your ignorance:

Windows Media and Digital Projection (http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/content_provider/film/digitalcinema.aspx)

Here's a real-world example (http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2003/apr03/04-03LandmarkTheatresPR.asp) Interesting that both articles come from Microsoft's site.

SilentPanda
Feb 9, 2004, 09:35 AM
Too bad we probably can't realisticly stream Pixlet files... although I've never even seen a Pixlet file...

iggyb
Feb 9, 2004, 09:43 AM
Originally posted by MorganX
You will if you want to download it to a PVP or PMC, or video iPod. Streaming, how about streaming one for a flight. Don't want to keep it, just watch it and forget it.

People said the same thing about music....

If Apple comes out with a video iPod, I highly doubt it will support WMV files....

A big difference between music and video is the file size. I don't know if it will work or not, but it just seems too big to worry about the hassle right now. I guess we'll see soon enough.

redeye
Feb 9, 2004, 09:46 AM
It is -SO- not smart to start a feud with Disney.
Eisner jumping into bed with Gates?
Wonderful.

I have to be diplomatic with *******s
or I go down the tubes.

I only hope that Jobs will get in there and
make the peace with Eisner.

shake
Feb 9, 2004, 09:48 AM
windows media sucks. period.
if they have theatres with "windows media projectors", good. they are dumb for buying into that crap. the theatres are probably owned by microsoft anyway...

piracy
Feb 9, 2004, 09:48 AM
Originally posted by MorganX
I hear you, but if it's not an ISO standard it's proprietary. Defacto industry standards are proprietary. Apple's Fairplay licensed DRM is proprietary.

It really doesn't matter whether you use open standards to build a proprietary solution, it's still proprietary.

I agree with DRM being a universal standard, however I think delivery and format will be driven by competition and quality and there won't be a single solution.

That's not correct. MPEG, SMPTE, JPEG, NTSC, ISO, ANSI, and more, are all open standards bodies in various forms. The industry at large has collectively decided that the products of these bodies meet the conditions and requirements for being considered open standards. MPEG family codecs are not proprietary, for example. DRM Reference Model 1.0 is a proposal for an open DRM standard. These processes take time: that's why it's easier for proprietary solutions to come out ahead. The standards process is tedious and sometimes slow, and for (usually) good reason: it ensures that the specification meets everyone's needs and expectations, and that everyone can implement and use it as they see fit (within licensing guidelines), which promotes interoperability as well as innovation and competition.

This is not about whether Apple's (Veridisc's) FairPlay is proprietary, or about QuickTime vs Windows Media.

This is about Microsoft vs everyone else. This is about closed, proprietary products controlled by one company, vs open accepted industry standards accessible to all.

QuickTime is *one* product - one product of thousands from numerous companies and institutions - that implements open MPEG family standards. Who can implement Windows Media? No one, without Microsoft.

Look at the MPEG members. Doesn't anyone realize that any one of them could independently sit down and develop proprietary codecs, hardware, and software, and have a really great end-to-end solution for, say, TV delivery? If they did, and it was closed, no one would use it. And if they started forcing it down peoples' throats, there would be a ******** revolt in the industry. Why is it any different when it's Microsoft? It's all the more insidious: it has the *illusion* of not being traditionally proprietary, because multiple hardware vendors can use the technologies, and they're not complaining. But what is present every step along the way, in every device, with an unending and growing stream of money heading straight back to one company? Proprietary, closed Windows Media.

No one is debating the the quality or technical merits of Windows Media 9, viewed in and of itself. The problem is that it's NOT OPEN. It puts control in the hands of ONE company. This is the whole reason standards and standards bodies exist in the first place: to cooperatively create needed standards for the benefit of all. If people can't see what's going on here, they're blind.

And submitting Windows Media to SMPTE is putting the cart in front of the horse. Even if it IS accepted, no one else will be able to meaningfully use Windows Media without using a Microsoft product, because Windows Media will NOT stay static, and will render the "standard" useless before it's even created. Real standards are not implemented until AFTER they become standards; this is because they're not expected to change, until a new standard emerges or the original standard is extended or amended.

And someone said that Windows Media is way ahead of QuickTime. Wow, talk about missing the ******** point: the MPEG family is WAY ahead of Windows Media in terms of use and adoption. Like, universes ahead. Microsoft is trying to change that. Someone might say "well, it's because Windows Media 9 is a lot better/easier/whatever than MPEG-X for purpose Y." Um, again, missing the point of standards. ANYONE can sit down and develop a proprietary solution that's better than some "standard". But up to now, people wouldn't adopt it, precisely because it's proprietary, closed, and puts one company in control.

But Microsoft can slide this stuff through with the complicity of hardware makers who really don't care about "standards" just as long as they keep selling their goods, and executives at entertainment companies who don't realize the world of hurt they'll be in when Microsoft has got everyone by the balls when everything is running the glorious Windows Media.

MorganX
Feb 9, 2004, 10:14 AM
Originally posted by piracy
QuickTime is *one* product - one product of thousands from numerous companies and institutions - that implements open MPEG family standards.

And does not meet the needs of those building solutions using Windows Media and MS DRM.

You're basically saying wait for someone to create and open standard to meet the needs to digital content delivery and protection. That may never happen in an integrated affordable fashion.

That is why software companies, like Microsoft, sell their solutions. That's the business. Apple should get into it.

Technology doesn't always 'wait' for everyone to catch up. Especially in a competitive market. Just because something is free doesn't mean it's better, or meets the needs of the consumer. If you don't want to buy from Microsoft, just say that and be done with it. You ARE going to buy from someone.

MorganX
Feb 9, 2004, 10:15 AM
Originally posted by shake
windows media sucks. period.

Please expound?

jwhitnah
Feb 9, 2004, 10:22 AM
Originally posted by inkswamp
How many more examples do corporate "content creators" need before they understand that people don't want to rent movies and music? There may be a minority out there who prefers that but most of us want to own the copy of the stuff we pay for. I don't want to pay each time I watch nor do I want my watching habits tucked away in some marketing database. The lesson behind the stellar performance of iTunes Music Store versus Music Store X would seem to have been lost on companies like Disney.

So, given that the only compelling stuff coming from Disney lately is either from Pixar or Miyazaki, I would say that the adoption of Windows media is another nail in their coffin. Pathetic! Disney's animation was always top-notch and it's sad to watch a bunch of greedy drones run such a legacy into the ground.

I and many people I know have no interest in owning MOST movies I we watch. I prefer to rent. I can only stand to watch most movies once. Music on the other hand, I think, most people want to own, not rent.

Awimoway
Feb 9, 2004, 10:41 AM
Originally posted by adzoox
The board of directors and Roy Disney have publicly stated that Eisner is on his way out - I think Roy even went as far as saying he'd love for Steve Jobs to be CEO.

You beat me to it. Anyway, I'm not too worried because hopefully Disney will come to its senses after his ouster.

ryanw
Feb 9, 2004, 10:42 AM
Originally posted by KC9AIC
Makes you wonder how Disney plans to distribute digital video online. Will it be 300 kb/s Windoze Media Player video? I can't imagine paying for such junk. Not only does Disney have some lousy movies, but even the good ones would look lousy, as quality would be almost nil. Who would pay for that?

People said the same thing about iTMS AAC. I tihnk there are enough people out there that don't care about quaility these days where this isn't an issue. To think, you come home from watching "The Little Mermaid 5" and the kids are being roudy and they want to watch it again. You can sit ALL the kids in front of the 21" monitor and sit on chairs in the computer room and have them all sit calmly and not break anything in the office.

Ok, so as we put a sceneio in place, can't you see it just being awesome?

Ok, all sarcasm aside, I don't feel that a computer monitor is a good format to sit the family down and watch a movie. Or even a child or two. The movie download market is only viable if you can transfer it to a SVCD or DVD to watch in the living room like most 'movie pirates' do. Not to sit and watch on your computer monitor.

synergy
Feb 9, 2004, 10:42 AM
Even the Washington Post pegs the move to go around Apple:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A25247-2004Feb9.html

choogheem
Feb 9, 2004, 10:56 AM
If this is the nail in the coffin for Disney, I wouldn't mind being in the coffin then. All I'm saying is $27 billion in revenue isn't bad - not to say they aren't still evil, but $27 billion, come on.

Disney 2003 financial report (http://disney.go.com/corporate/investors/financials/annual/2003/i/fh/fh_int.html)

I also agree that this could be bad for Quicktime. Nothing like two giants pushing a product onto everyone else. Joe Dufus says "Hey everyone else uses pcs, so why don't I" instead of looking at what the best format truly is would quite possibly pick the one that the "big guys" are using.

Stoid - sweet avatar (much better than mine :D )

bennettsaysargh - I love that link, excellent humor
How many forum members does it takes to change a light bulb? (http://www.annoyances.org/exec/show/article09-208How many forum members does it takes to change a light bulb?)

ITR 81
Feb 9, 2004, 11:15 AM
ME needs to step his dumb arse down.
He's killing the company.
Who the hell wants to watch a MS digital film when they can watch a THX or Dolby Digital film??

NOT ME!

MorganX
Feb 9, 2004, 11:35 AM
Originally posted by ITR 81
ME needs to step his dumb arse down.
He's killing the company.
Who the hell wants to watch a MS digital film when they can watch a THX or Dolby Digital film??

NOT ME!

I really can't believe this. This is Macrumors, where Apple and innovation are synonymous. Yet, you all have no vision. Do you really believe that the sole future of secure media content delivery will be to the big screen in your living room?

Ever heard of a cell phone, PDA, Portable Video Player, Personal Media Center, rumors of Video iPod (though Apple would use a proprietary delivery schema also, read: their own).

Come on guys.

3-22
Feb 9, 2004, 11:37 AM
i don't know why so many negative votes and concerned comments... This is going to be a great disaster and i hope to have a front row seat. I smell the next Circuit City/DiVX laser disc disaster...

With Microsoft and Disney, they will have a serivce so restrictive and lousy it will become a joke. I can see it now... Movies I can download and watch on one computer the size of a postage stamp for $15.

mrsebastian
Feb 9, 2004, 11:43 AM
come on, ms can have disney. they haven't created a true classic for quite some time (it was all pixar). that said, i'm sure apple is and has been talking to all the major studios about bringing downloadable/streaming video content to the web. considering the success if the itms model, i'm sure something is already in the works. does anyone recall what program steve was talking about (keynote a year or 2 ago) being used at pixar, so they could easily transfer and watch full resolution movies? personally i think apple has found a breach in the m$ monopoly and that is digital media.

3-22
Feb 9, 2004, 11:50 AM
Originally posted by MorganX

Ever heard of a cell phone, PDA, Portable Video Player, Personal Media Center, rumors of Video iPod (though Apple would use a proprietary delivery schema also, read: their own).

Come on guys. [/B]

I just don't see the market, and I don't see how it's visionary for a small video player. iPod is successful because you can use it anywhere; while you work, while you drive, excercise, hooked up to your stereo, etc. A small video player would have limited use. Who would have time to sit down and watch a movie or show on it? Can't do it at work, in the car, etc. Now if I could hook up the video player to my entertainment center that would be cool. (but that's still a very limited role compared to an iPod) If watching TV on tiny screens is so popular why doesn't everyone run around with little 2" color TVs for $70. Not too mention the lack of broadband internet options in most of the world. (over time this will get better, but as of right now most people don't have anything better then dial-up)

I know everyone is jumping up and down for a video ipod but I just don't see it. I think it would be a flop, in the long run. But maybe i'm missing something... I'd rather see the iPod evolve more into a PDA and maybe even phone. (All in one solution with lots of storage) Maybe even download songs while on the road from iTunes...

Oh well, my $0.02 anyway....

mrsebastian
Feb 9, 2004, 11:50 AM
Originally posted by 3-22
i don't know why so many negative votes and concerned comments... This is going to be a great disaster and i hope to have a front row seat. I smell the next Circuit City/DiVX laser disc disaster...

With Microsoft and Disney, they will have a serivce so restrictive and lousy it will become a joke. I can see it now... Movies I can download and watch on one computer the size of a postage stamp for $15.

that's a good point. kinda funny that it was so hard for anyone ('cept apple) to come up with a good business model that the masses will accept for music. when you consider that you can find dvds even cheaper than cds sometimes, this should be a reall challenge for di$ney and m$.

whatever
Feb 9, 2004, 11:52 AM
Now everyone here is a film critic. Let's see the two biggest movies of 2003. Disney's Nemo and Disney's Pirates of the Caribbean.
What was the #2 movie this week?
You might not like Disney movies but... You also use a Mac (only joking). But kids do and they are the largest target audience to movies.

Whatever

mrsebastian
Feb 9, 2004, 11:56 AM
Originally posted by 3-22
I just don't see the market, and I don't see how it's visionary for a small video player. iPod is successful because you can use it anywhere; while you work, while you drive, excercise, hooked up to your stereo, etc. A small video player would have limited use. Who would have time to sit down and watch a movie or show on it? Can't do it at work, in the car, etc. Now if I could hook up the video player to my entertainment center that would be cool. (but that's still a very limited role compared to an iPod) If watching TV on tiny screens is so popular why doesn't everyone run around with little 2" color TVs for $70.

I know everyone is jumping up and down for a video ipod but I just don't see it. I think it would be a flop, in the long run. But maybe i'm missing something... I'd rather see the iPod evolve more into a PDA and maybe even phone. (All in one solution with lots of storage) Maybe even download songs while on the road from iTunes...

Oh well, my $0.02 anyway....

much agreed. until there is a video format widely accepted like mp3 for music and has insane compression, it just doesn't make sense. you're absolutely right that the only way it will work is if you could hook it up to your entertainment center. essentially your digital media library on the go. which brings up another issue having enough space for more than a movie or two and a couple of albums.

add 2 more cents to the total :)

SiliconAddict
Feb 9, 2004, 11:56 AM
Originally posted by Java
Interesting that both articles come from Microsoft's site.

And your point? The fact is that the tech is being used in, limited, real world settings. Who cares if its on Microsoft's site, Apple's site, fark.com, or theonion.com. If its being used NOW which is the point. The audio video codec quality is high enough to do this which would be unheard of 5 years ago.

Now if you are talking pros and cons of having a proprietary standard that is a diff discussion. In any other setting I wouldn't care if the software was proprietary or not.
But as everyone other the the PC zealot, who buries their head in the sand and preachs the word of MS, knows that you need to take this into consideration when you deal with a slimeball company like Microsoft who would sell their collective mothers to a whore house to make a buck.
Whenever I read news on MS I always ask THE question: What angle are they trying to play because something as simple as giving a browser away for free has a way of blowing up in the markets face. Witness the lack of conforming to standard in IE and the virtual standstill of new versions as a prime example.

Dahl
Feb 9, 2004, 12:01 PM
Originally posted by SiliconAddict
Keep in mind that Miracle is #2 at the boxoffice (http://movies.go.com/boxoffice/)

Bitch all you want about Disney. Their live action movies are fantastic and large money makers.
Then again:
Disney animated movies are not going anywhere. :rolleyes: They still have a huge library of classic movies and they do make hit movies that are animated. The problem with Disney is that they want to make sequels for everything, most of them bad. If I recall correctly, they can make their own sequels for Toy Story if they please. That would probably suck.

mrsebastian
Feb 9, 2004, 12:03 PM
Originally posted by whatever
Now everyone here is a film critic. Let's see the two biggest movies of 2003. Disney's Nemo and Disney's Pirates of the Caribbean.
What was the #2 movie this week?
You might not like Disney movies but... You also use a Mac (only joking). But kids do and they are the largest target audience to movies.

Whatever

i'm not film critic, i just play one on the web ;) that was my point though, that disney hasn't created anything on their own in a very long time. all their computer animated films have been by pixar and pirates was done jerry bruckheimer (spelling?). essentially disney had nothing to with the creative process, just the licensing and/or distribution. their biggest money making partnership (pixar) just went bye, bye. so my point is their future looks pretty bleak and m$ is getting on a sinking ship with captain jack sparrow.

swaldman
Feb 9, 2004, 12:07 PM
Who cares? History has proven that the best format does not necessarily become the standard. If you want to buy the movie and play it on your computer then it will be in the format they sell it.

Why anyone would want to sit and what a movie in a work chair is beyond my imagination. I prefer the comfort of my couch and my dvd player.

Move on my friends.

Dahl
Feb 9, 2004, 12:33 PM
Originally posted by swaldman
Who cares? History has proven that the best format does not necessarily become the standard. If you want to buy the movie and play it on your computer then it will be in the format they sell it.

Why anyone would want to sit and what a movie in a work chair is beyond my imagination. I prefer the comfort of my couch and my dvd player.

Move on my friends.
I agree.

We are miles from standards and user habits, but I find myself watching DVD's on my monitors often these days. Then again, it's probably because I don't have a killer set up in my living room ( yet )

fixyourthinking
Feb 9, 2004, 12:46 PM
Originally posted by Wendy_Rebecca
LOL...Yeah, that's it. Disney--a multibillion dollar company--made this decision not based on the best technology available, but on the ego of Eisner.

Give me a break. Eisner doesn't give a ****** about the "Mac vs. PC" religious wars; Disney is doing what's best for Disney. Plain and simple.

Apple has a lot of catching up to do with Windows Media. Do you see any Apple technology being used in movie theatres for digital projection? Does Apple have anywhere near the market penetration of WMV (or WMA for that matter)? Windows Media 9 is an amazing, high-quality, scalable technology that is being embraced by the film and television industry on a scale Apple can only dream of.

Get used to it. And get over it.


In most cases I would say you're right, but in this case you are way off target. Quicktime is BY FAR the best video player, and BY FAR the easiest to use and setup on both the Windows platform and the Mac - and from what I've been reading, possibly linux soon - although linux users have options to view Quicktime content.

I would love to see ANY site that makes the comparisons vs quicktime you do - your assertions are just blatant opinion or either ficticious.
-------------------------------
"Please get informed before you spout your ignorance:

Windows Media and Digital Projection"
____________________

"Interesting that both articles come from Microsoft's site." = ha ha ha

Crazy how Microsoft also says WMA is superior and "more standard" than AAC and that they have the best flight sim, the best document processor, the best movie making software, the best OS, in the words on the office page = "most affordable office suite" (cough $499 cough)

Moonlight
Feb 9, 2004, 01:12 PM
Disney is being mismanaged in every aspect, this comes as no suprise....

www.savedisney.com

lilblueimac
Feb 9, 2004, 01:19 PM
If I remember correctly, Disney has ALREADY made a Toy Story sequel: Buzz Lightyear of Star Command (http://disney.go.com/disneyvideos/animatedfilms/buzzlightyear/) . But does anybody other than my 4 year old neighbor know about it? Apparently not. Luckily, the show was not well-known enough to discredit the Pixar films.

synergy
Feb 9, 2004, 01:19 PM
Originally posted by whatever
Now everyone here is a film critic. Let's see the two biggest movies of 2003. Disney's Nemo and Disney's Pirates of the Caribbean.
What was the #2 movie this week?
You might not like Disney movies but... You also use a Mac (only joking). But kids do and they are the largest target audience to movies.

Whatever

Two biggest movies were Nemo and Lord of the Rings.
But aside from that Pirates was a not too far number 3.

http://www.imdb.com/Sections/Years/2003/top-grossing

As for the number 2 movie this week, consider the fact there is not much new to go head to head against it. Number 2 flick with 19 million in box office take does not make it a runaway success.

http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/040208/leisure_boxoffice_1.html

That being said certainly Disney is a powerhouse in the entertainment field. But since Pixar has walked away for Disney there is talk of other media giants like Comcast and TimeWarner being talked about as potential buyers of Disney.

ALoLA
Feb 9, 2004, 01:25 PM
I wonder if this is the last straw that Disney shareholders need to boot Eisner? And if Steve gets the nod, can he undo this mess? Can they turn around and dump WM for QT? :)

MorganX
Feb 9, 2004, 01:29 PM
Originally posted by 3-22
I just don't see the market, and I don't see how it's visionary for a small video player. iPod is successful because you can use it anywhere; while you work, while you drive, excercise, hooked up to your stereo, etc. A small video player would have limited use. Who would have time to sit down and watch a movie or show on it? Can't do it at work, in the car, etc.

You can't use it while driving, but what about kids in the back seat? How about doing cardio at the gym, built into treadmills maybe? Salesman, carrying commercials. Desktop instructional video in schools. Download this weeks lecture to your Portable Media Center.

Now if I could hook up the video player to my entertainment center that would be cool.

Samsung's Portable Media Center has TV Out, probably composite; gotta put those slide shows on the big screen.They have audio out as well. Remember, they also replace high capacity audio jukeboxes. They all have built-in desk stands, like a picture frame.

(but that's still a very limited role compared to an iPod) If watching TV on tiny screens is so popular why doesn't everyone run around with little 2" color TVs for $70.

They incorporate the functionality of high-capacity MP3 players. I doubt very seriously a Video iPod would not have the same audio playpack capabilites as a music only iPod.

You can't select your content with TVs. And everywhere you'd want a TV usually has one (Plane, Doctor's office, Gym). People don't really want to take a TV, now, they may want to take Cable-TV, but that's not available in a portable set yet. Portable TVs also have extremely poor reception no matter how big the rabbit ears, so you're only getting 2 or 3 snowy channels at best.

Not too mention the lack of broadband internet options in most of the world. (over time this will get better, but as of right now most people don't have anything better then dial-up)

There are over 20 million broadband users in the US, and growing. Sell to 10% of that market and you're a smashing success.

I know everyone is jumping up and down for a video ipod but I just don't see it. I think it would be a flop, in the long run.

I don't see that they will have much of a choice. With PVPs and PMCs arriving with form factors close to the iPod, acting as video players and high capacity MP3 players in the price range of the high-end audio segment, they will have to evolve the iPod or die IMO.

My prediction is that by Summer, a high end audio-only device will cost no more than $300, and that with some built-in photo and limited video playback. We'll see, it will be interesting. I don't like to gamble but I think betting Apple is developing a response to PVPs and PMCs is a sure thing.

hulugu
Feb 9, 2004, 01:52 PM
Originally posted by Wendy_Rebecca

Apple has a lot of catching up to do with Windows Media. Do you see any Apple technology being used in movie theatres for digital projection? Does Apple have anywhere near the market penetration of WMV (or WMA for that matter)? Windows Media 9 is an amazing, high-quality, scalable technology that is being embraced by the film and television industry on a scale Apple can only dream of. Get used to it. And get over it.

Wow, I call astroturf and if not you should call MS marketing and ask for a job.
But, I do agree that Eisner's decision probably doesn't have anything to do with Mac vs. PC but rather he his hoping desperately for a new revenue stream since his animation studios as well as ABC have been losing money for the last few years. Couple that with Roy Disney's campaign to get rid of Eisner and you can see Eisner's got something to worry about.
BTW, name two theaters that are using WMV for projection, or two examples of WMV embracing by television and film. And please explain why WMV is scalable?
I think I smell marketing speak; maybe cut and pasted from some WMV PR.

MorganX
Feb 9, 2004, 01:55 PM
Originally posted by ALoLA
I wonder if this is the last straw that Disney shareholders need to boot Eisner? And if Steve gets the nod, can he undo this mess? Can they turn around and dump WM for QT? :)

They may boot him, but not for this. He just created new markets for Disney's content.

20M+ US broadband users for streaming/downloading
92% of all installed PCs for whatever...
3 - Portable media centers shown at CES by major manufacturers (iRiver, Creative, Samsung), More than 8 Portable Video Players

MorganX
Feb 9, 2004, 02:05 PM
Originally posted by hulugu

BTW, name two theaters that are using WMV for projection, or two examples of WMV embracing by television and film. And please explain why WMV is scalable?
I think I smell marketing speak; maybe cut and pasted from some WMV PR.

I don't know about the theatres, someone else posted links. I knew nothing about that, pretty interesting.

Television - Foxnews.com ACCESS, ESPN Motion (really sweet)

Film - Disney, Time Warner

Scaling - WM9 Encoder can produce video for PDAs to HDTV, various bitrates, all excellent quality IMO. 320x240@700k is very acceptable to me. It will only get better. It's as easy as pie to create multiiple use output including streaming.

I'm sure I'm starting to sound like a marketer now. I just don't like dissing something because it's not branded Apple. And Mac users talking about "I don't see the market yet," "wait for open source to catch up," as hypocritical. Where's the "Think Different" modus operandi now?

nascarcm24
Feb 9, 2004, 02:16 PM
The only good movie that Disney has put out that doesn't have a Pixar relationship would have to be Pirates Of The Caribbean: The Curse Of The Black Pearl. Really good movie. One of my fav. but other than that....the movies with out pixar suck!

bennetsaysargh
Feb 9, 2004, 02:20 PM
Today Landmark Theatres and Microsoft Corp. announced that they are equipping 177 screens in all 53 Landmark Theatres across the United States with digital cinema playback systems based on Microsoft® Windows Media® 9 Series.
i have never heard of that line of cinemas. plus, only 53 theaters total out of the entire US? come on now.



Originally posted by lilblueimac
If I remember correctly, Disney has ALREADY made a Toy Story sequel: Buzz Lightyear of Star Command (http://disney.go.com/disneyvideos/animatedfilms/buzzlightyear/) . But does anybody other than my 4 year old neighbor know about it? Apparently not. Luckily, the show was not well-known enough to discredit the Pixar films.

they made it animated and it was horrible. sorry, just my opinion. i actually watched a show of that with my brother.



some people need to realize windows media player for mac plays the movie, and then quits. it's not like it is on a PC if yo have ever used it. they haven;t even put in proper DRM decoders in the mac version. that's another reason why i would not want to use WMA or WMV. another reason is the quality is not good. it stalls a lot. (yet again on macs). how can they do this and not fix these problems? it is way grainier (sp) than QT when it is enlarged also.

MorganX
Feb 9, 2004, 03:02 PM
Originally posted by bennetsaysargh
i have never heard of that line of cinemas. plus, only 53 theaters total out of the entire US? come on now.


Oh, the irony... :D

Engagebot
Feb 9, 2004, 03:05 PM
Originally posted by inkswamp
How many more examples do corporate "content creators" need before they understand that people don't want to rent movies and music? There may be a minority out there who prefers that but most of us want to own the copy of the stuff we pay for. I don't want to pay each time I watch ...

Umm, sorry, but video rentals are here to stay. most people dont want to necessarily buy a dvd they have no intention of watching over and over. you get a movie, you watch it, and you're not out $20+ .

Mord
Feb 9, 2004, 03:08 PM
what 16 mupets rated this a positive?

you think this has anything to do wih apple droping disney the fact that they wanted to use wmp formats

MorganX
Feb 9, 2004, 03:08 PM
Originally posted by nascarcm24
The only good movie that Disney has put out that doesn't have a Pixar relationship would have to be Pirates Of The Caribbean: The Curse Of The Black Pearl. Really good movie. One of my fav. but other than that....the movies with out pixar suck!

I suppose children's critiques are more important. And what about all the TV productions.

Most of Disney's best are timeless. I'm seeing lots of Lilo and Stitch, Kim Possible is everywhere now, PowerRangers, I even think they produce NBA Inside Stuff.

Give me more reason to be down on Disney than the Pixar flap.

Dahl
Feb 9, 2004, 03:41 PM
Originally posted by MorganX
I suppose children's critiques are more important. And what about all the TV productions.

Most of Disney's best are timeless. I'm seeing lots of Lilo and Stitch, Kim Possible is everywhere now, PowerRangers, I even think they produce NBA Inside Stuff.

Give me more reason to be down on Disney than the Pixar flap.
Agree, Disney's own TV production is doing well ( ESPN, huge $maker ). So is many of their low budget movies ( Freaky Friday, Princess Diaries, H. Duff stuff etc. ) They actually make more $ on those films than the huge productions like "Pirates".

Dahl
Feb 9, 2004, 03:45 PM
Originally posted by Engagebot
Umm, sorry, but video rentals are here to stay. most people dont want to necessarily buy a dvd they have no intention of watching over and over. you get a movie, you watch it, and you're not out $20+ .

I agree.
Look at Netflix, they are changing the industry.
http://www.forbes.com/business/newswire/2003/12/21/rtr1188669.html

Sure, some people want to buy their DVD's, but most couldn't care less.

MorganX
Feb 9, 2004, 04:02 PM
Originally posted by Dahl
Agree, Disney's own TV production is doing well ( ESPN, huge $maker ).

Didn't know Disney produced ESPN. ESPN Motion which relies on WMV9 is sweet. Probably not a knee-jerk reaction after all. However, I'm sure they took advantage of the opportunity to announce it in time to jab back.

mrsebastian
Feb 9, 2004, 04:07 PM
Originally posted by Dahl
I agree.
Look at Netflix, they are changing the industry.
http://www.forbes.com/business/newswire/2003/12/21/rtr1188669.html

Sure, some people want to buy their DVD's, but most couldn't care less.

i agree, we already have rentals through local stores, by mail via netflix, and pay-per-veiw by sat/cable companies (which from what i gather are already working on extended libraries for ppv). that makes me wonder further how such a venture by m$ and di$ney could work?! what's the point, what's the benefit compared to what's already available? they might make a few bucks just because it's something new, but unless their service can do something better than what's available, or fill a niche not currently tapped, it's already over before it starts.

bryanc
Feb 9, 2004, 04:09 PM
Who now has the strength to stand against the combined armies of Sauron^H^H^HEisner and Saruman^H^H^HGates?


....cue Hobbits...


Anyone else get a kick out of the big Apple logo at the end of the LotR credits?

Cheers

Corpus_Callosum
Feb 9, 2004, 04:41 PM
There seems to be some high-powered negotiations going on.

What do you think? Disney using DRM/Microsoft as a threat or punishment to Jobs for Pixar pulling away from Disney?

Or perhaps Pixar pulling away from Disney because of the impending Microsoft/Disney media deal threatening future video distribution from Apple (ala iTunes)?

Or perhaps Microsoft jumping in after bad blood between Pixar and Disney in order to take advantage of Disney's anger to nix Apple?

Whatever it is, I will guarantee that it is related, and Apple is not the winner here.

daRAT
Feb 9, 2004, 04:42 PM
How many Disney movies do you all watch?

Hell I haven't seen a Disney flick in over a year.

The reason SJ backed out is becuase this could wipeout Apple (asset wise), whereas MS could weather a total flop.

Look for Xbox's to come preloaded with like 5 Disney flicks they are non-transferable and expire in a month, just to wet the buyers appetite.

And no, I do NOT think this will really get off the ground, it could be MS tweaking SJ's nose :P He needs that once in a while :)

tychay
Feb 9, 2004, 05:16 PM
Originally posted by MorganX
You will if you want to download it to a PVP or PMC, or video iPod. Streaming, how about streaming one for a flight. Don't want to keep it, just watch it and forget it.

People said the same thing about music....

The difference is we had transistor radios before the walkman, the Walkman before the Discman, and the Discman before the iPod. There is an established success of consumers wanting to listen to music in a portable stereo device.

How quickly we forget the failures of the small televisions, the Watchman, those TV glasses that came out of Japan that made you look like a dork on the morning commute, and the now-current portable DVD/LCDs. Can you say niche?

Video iPod? Please! Next thing you'll be telling me that those Microsoft watches will be a big hit because companies like Fossil and Suntoo make them. (Or that they'll offer Windows Media streaming on your watch. To reference my next post: "There are 200 million watch wearers in the U.S., if we can just capture 1% of that market!")

Similarly we to soon forget the failures of DIVX and the disposable DVD (forgot the name)--as well as the success of VHS and DVD.

Right now, there is a huge "market" for downloadable pirated music and a growing market for downloadable purchased music. All the while, it appears that streamed/rented music content is on the outs (take a look at the latest quarterlies from Real and Roxio).

Yes, there is a large "market" for pirated video content. The difference is, people are downloading it once from pirate networks and then doing distribution a bit more prosaically (selling it in DVD/VCD format on the streets of China, for instance).

"Ah!" you say, but that is simply a bandwidth issue. To which, I quickly point to South Korea, a country with 90% broadband saturation that is 30x faster than our country's "broadband" (the U.S.), a Windows monoculture, and probably the most efficient piracy network in history.

And yet, they still buy and rent their movies on DVD and pirate their movies in VCD.

Yes, every so often a Netflix, or a Tivo, or a iTunes Music Store comes along and changes the way we deal with our digital content (notice the media formats of all three examples are open standards). But by and large, most things hit the floor with a thud.

Given the track record of Disney and Microsoft for innovation, I have no doubt how this one will hit.

(I am saying nothing about the success/failure of Windows Media overall. After all, we haven't touched on content creation and editing, the prevalence of WMP on cell phones (my cell phone uses RealPlayer and my PDA uses QuickTime and I'd watch a blockbuster movie on neither), etc.)

BTW, I seriously doubt this news has anything to do with Pixar/Disney. Microsoft and Disney have a long history together. Doesn't anyone remember the Disney flop, Go.Com? Where is it now? MSN. Where is ESPN hosted? MSN. What format is video content delivery for Disney, ABC and ESPN delivered on? Windows Media.

tychay
Feb 9, 2004, 05:28 PM
Originally posted by MorganX
There are over 20 million broadband users in the US, and growing. Sell to 10% of that market and you're a smashing success.

I find the rest of your arguments interesting, but this is dotCom mathematics. I should know, I've heard this a thousand times: for instance, in Startup.Com, the guy keeps saying "Government is a x trillion dollar business." Yawn!

Also the US, while the largest future market for this, is not the country to test on. The broadband and cell phone market in the United States expects have low saturation and bandwidth and the consumer here expects all capital expenses to be amortized in the cost of the service, which makes it incredibly hard to enter into with a new technology.

hulugu
Feb 9, 2004, 05:38 PM
Originally posted by MorganX
I don't know about the theatres, someone else posted links. I knew nothing about that, pretty interesting.

Television - Foxnews.com ACCESS, ESPN Motion (really sweet)

Film - Disney, Time Warner

Scaling - WM9 Encoder can produce video for PDAs to HDTV, various bitrates, all excellent quality IMO. 320x240@700k is very acceptable to me. It will only get better. It's as easy as pie to create multiiple use output including streaming.

I'm sure I'm starting to sound like a marketer now. I just don't like dissing something because it's not branded Apple. And Mac users talking about "I don't see the market yet," "wait for open source to catch up," as hypocritical. Where's the "Think Different" modus operandi now?

No, you managed to avoid market speak, but still gave some facts, I didn't disagree with the premise, necessarily but Wendy's rather astroturf-I-cut-and-pasted-MS-PR.

Personally, I do think a market is developing for On-demand Video, and I think that the PVR/Video iPod will become huge, eventually. Think of what everyone said about the Mp3 player, many comments on the web ranged from 5Gb, who will want to carry that much music, to the CD is the best format, who would want to download music. Oh wait, who would want to pay for music when you can just simply pirate it?
Apple should get into this market, just as they have with the iTMS, leveraging a great bit of hardware with an easy-to-use service. Quicktime is a great application, and Apple take note, port a full-kick-ass version to Linux. I don't care, personally, but Linux appears to be the future of the computer world, and getting in the door while MS monkeys-around is good policy. Plus you dial into the open-source groups who are very good at writing software for OSX; not as good as Apple, but good nonetheless.
Quicktime, as I understand, also is scalable, however WMV is more omnipresent than QT.

MorganX
Feb 9, 2004, 06:01 PM
Originally posted by tychay
I find the rest of your arguments interesting, but this is dotCom mathematics. I should know, I've heard this a thousand times: for instance, in Startup.Com, the guy keeps saying "Government is a x trillion dollar business." Yawn!



Bad analogy, in the example you give, you have one customer, Government (if you're talking US only). A service or product that is enabled by or enhanced by broadband in the US gives you 20 million possible customers and more than one product/vendor to sell to them. The broadband is just the delivery mechanism.

The demographics, which I don't have probably support the fact that homes with broadband are also most likely to purchase high end personal digital devices and download content.

Look at iTMS, probably reaches a small percentage of people, 1 million iPods and probably mostly those with broadband. But it's doing quite well.

MorganX
Feb 9, 2004, 06:42 PM
A lot of heavy hitters and gearing up for DRM and On-Demand content delivery.

Nokia leads bid to control mobile DRM standards (http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/64/35430.html) .

This is interesting too, looks like the computer industry is going to have to buddy up with household names.

We want a Sony media server (http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/51/35432.html)

rdowns
Feb 9, 2004, 07:42 PM
Originally posted by ALoLA
I wonder if this is the last straw that Disney shareholders need to boot Eisner? And if Steve gets the nod, can he undo this mess? Can they turn around and dump WM for QT? :)

Where do these SJ heading up Disney rumors come from? As a very hands on CEO of Apple, he hardly has the time to run a major media company. Talk about spreading oneself too thin.

elgruga
Feb 9, 2004, 10:12 PM
Are we really discussing Disney and Microsh*t?

Heres two old crappy companies, full of greed, empty of ideas, desperate in their death throes.

Who needs 'em? I dont, for one.

tychay
Feb 9, 2004, 11:32 PM
Originally posted by MorganX
Bad analogy, in the example you give, you have one customer, Government (if you're talking US only).

Actually, it wasn't an analogy, it was an example. There are a lot of customers since you aren't talking about the Federal government only. There are municipalities (cities, townships, counties, villages, borroughs), states, etc.

Referring to the size of the market "20 million customers" and then the expected capture "10%" is how a lot of dotComs started and failed. For instance, people spend millions of dollars a year on their pets, therefore... Pets.com Petstore.com etc.

iTunes Music store dominates downloadable music (80% of sales) and yet the entire downloadable music category has yet to capture 0.1% (one tent of one percent) of the purchased music market! And this is considered a success.

That's because new markets do not replace old ones, they supplement it. Expected capture is always overestimated, it assumes the old way of doing things simply keels over and died.

The same goes for your digital delivery of content to PDAs and cell phones and even broadband customers.

fixyourthinking
Feb 10, 2004, 07:44 AM
Pets.com went out of business because of poor management NOT because they weren't pulling in LOTS of money. In fact, as far as revenue, it remains one of the most successful dotcoms ever. It was the overspending on multimillion dollar ad campaigns, luxurious perks for execs, and the lack of reinvestment into warehousing locations that killed pets.com. Not to mention - triumph the insult dog didn't like them!

http://www.formetopoopon.com/

MorganX
Feb 10, 2004, 07:49 AM
Originally posted by tychay
iTunes Music store dominates downloadable music (80% of sales) and yet the entire downloadable music category has yet to capture 0.1% (one tent of one percent) of the purchased music market! And this is considered a success.

Exactly.

tychay
Feb 12, 2004, 03:20 AM
Originally posted by adzoox
Pets.com went out of business because of poor management NOT because they weren't pulling in LOTS of money. In fact, as far as revenue, it remains one of the most successful dotcoms ever.

Yawn! How do you think they got the money for their campaign? Based on arguments just like the one above "People spend $x on their pets, if we can capture 50% of the market (because of course nobody is going to go to brick and motor stores anymore), then..."

What are those revenue numbers worth when you lose money on every sale because all people do is buy dog food and kitty litter which is insanely cheap and insanely heavy? (I'd have thought you'd have realized this after trying to ship some of your DVForge stuff.)

(And don't give me the loss leader B.S. A company like Best Buy uses CDs as a loss leader. But compare the price of CDs to the price of a washing machine or an overpriced BOSE entertainment system, monster cabling, or those insurance policy extensions?)

And who was the winner in the online pet space? A brick and motor store that was a late mover (PeTSMART).

Whenever anyone talks about the potential market, it doesn't mean you should throw common sense out the window. The same thing goes with this article.

Given the history that every attempt to deliver video on a tiny device has failed to achieve traction--small CRT televisions, Watchman, portable DVD, steroglasses, video on Palm, etc--whats the evidence that thistime is going to be different? How is broadband delivery of video going to supplant BlockBuster and Netflix?

(When I used NetFlix I'd get about a DVD a day. That works out to 8GB/day. If I download 1/4 that bandwidth on my DSL, my ISP will send me a threatening letter and then if I trip that invisible meter again, they'll cut me off. Don't believe me? Do a net search for your broadband provider and "bandwidth limit" or "bandwidth abuse".

The problem isn't the amount of trunk, the problem is the last mile which nobody in this country wants to lay because we have an acceptable copper and cable infratructure that is "good enough". Besides, in countries where they've solved the last mile problem (Japan and Korea) and where broadband saturation is in 4x as many homes (Korea), they still haven't found a good model for home delivery of movie content.

And then in areas where you avoid the bandwidth problem by having a pathetically small display (cell phones and PDAs), you have to laugh at the family crowding around my Nokia 3650 to watch Beauty and the Beast at $8 a download + extra monthly service fees. Heck, I had a classmate of mine from Caltech start a company that had this capability 4 years ago*. Showing off black and white and later color video on my Palm back was cool for about the first ten minutes. Last year on my Nokia... honestly... what is more interesting, receiving a picture message or a stupid Disney trailer that you've already seen ten times on television, in the theatre, and on Apple's QuickTime website?

I wish Disney and Microsoft luck, but the fact is, it isn't innovative and its good money will say it'll fail.

Take care,

terry

* FirePad, go look it up. Then again, I'm told Bill Gross (of Petstore.com fame and CEO of idealab) is one too. So I guess my alma mater is full of people with no common sense in business.