Frankly none of this seems important to me. However, Lacero sure looks hot in that Santa hat.
Pete
Pete
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple involved in Next Gen PC to HDTV Connectivity
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
LethalWolfe said:
Video isn't the best example to be talking about when talking about resolution independence.
LethalWolfe said:
Yes. Wouldn't you like to have a 17" or 19" display that is 300 DPI (dot per inch) coupled with an operating system that can render text, controls, etc. at 300 DPI. In other words the physical dimensions of the letter "T" stays the same when displayed but instead it is drawn with 2 or more times the number of pixels (giving it better visual appearance).
Super Dave said:All of them are more poor than the executives. As for my comment, not all artists are rich. My arguments clearly don't point to the rich, but to those who are not.
David
you are right, of course.
But it is still a very good idea to undertake some kind of action against these record labels: it will definately hurt them on the long term, and in the end they will have to change their pricing policies.
I myself, a musician and producer, experienced the consequences of cd pricing and piracy. However, i think that missing out on a few bucks would never stop me from making and recording good music, and trying to get my songs played by as many people as possible. and yes, even if it means, that some copies will be pirated; i don't really care about that.
The people that DO care, are either label executives, as you say, or musicians who are in the business purely for profit.
in other words: i don't see how piracy would have a negative bearing on the quality of the music that is made. All this copy protection stuff that is being invented, will have negative effects however, as in this way, any distribution source will only host protected media...
Oh yes: before anyone starts rattling about musicians needing the record companies for stuff like distribution, promotion, etc.: this will surely become a thing of the past, because more and more music will be primarily published on the internet, and only secondarily on physical media....
All these new rules and hardware only creates one thing for pirates, a challenge and they love a new challenge all the time.
A pirate is in the market to make money and if that market if threatened they will find a way, anyway to solve that issue just to continue what they have been doing in the past. Since to them that is a profitable market, regardless of the crime.
The MPAA will never learn, they invest all this money into catching these pirates, put them in jail and fine them and the pirates will come out and do it all over again. The MPAA will then just go after another, and its impossible to catch them all, as you put one behind bars another 5 will surface and when the time done for the last person is up and (s)he is out of prison they will teach another 10 or so people to do the same just as "payback."
In the end its the honest consumer that really takes all the beating, first to pay for all this new R&D that went into all these restrictions and rules and second the limitations of viewing they own content.
The MPAA has dug they own grave, by not selling affordable media (DVD, CD) to the public. They thought of they deep pockets first and the quality and concerns of the public last.
I saw they deserve what they will get.
There is a noticeable difference between SD > HD > UHD.
In the end the public will decide since they will always be swayed towards the lower $.
A pirate is in the market to make money and if that market if threatened they will find a way, anyway to solve that issue just to continue what they have been doing in the past. Since to them that is a profitable market, regardless of the crime.
The MPAA will never learn, they invest all this money into catching these pirates, put them in jail and fine them and the pirates will come out and do it all over again. The MPAA will then just go after another, and its impossible to catch them all, as you put one behind bars another 5 will surface and when the time done for the last person is up and (s)he is out of prison they will teach another 10 or so people to do the same just as "payback."
In the end its the honest consumer that really takes all the beating, first to pay for all this new R&D that went into all these restrictions and rules and second the limitations of viewing they own content.
The MPAA has dug they own grave, by not selling affordable media (DVD, CD) to the public. They thought of they deep pockets first and the quality and concerns of the public last.
I saw they deserve what they will get.
There is a noticeable difference between SD > HD > UHD.
In the end the public will decide since they will always be swayed towards the lower $.
The future will never be hear
I used to think HDCP's only purpose was to sell expensive HDTV's and keep people from using their cheap PC monitors as televisions. But now with more and more HDCP PC monitors popping up and supposedly a lot more will be coming in 2006 most likely from Dell I'm just not sure. The new Dell 3007wfp is basically the Apple 30" ADC with HDCP support. Are there even any HDCP consumer video devices that can drive a dual link display?
As for a new standard connector... I say it's about time the industry did away with all of these physically bulky connectors with pins that can fall out or break and that you need to screw into place. HDMI is a step in the right direction. Let's just hope this new connector is even better. I would love to see the bus powered display feature make a comeback... as an industry standard of course.
I used to think HDCP's only purpose was to sell expensive HDTV's and keep people from using their cheap PC monitors as televisions. But now with more and more HDCP PC monitors popping up and supposedly a lot more will be coming in 2006 most likely from Dell I'm just not sure. The new Dell 3007wfp is basically the Apple 30" ADC with HDCP support. Are there even any HDCP consumer video devices that can drive a dual link display?
As for a new standard connector... I say it's about time the industry did away with all of these physically bulky connectors with pins that can fall out or break and that you need to screw into place. HDMI is a step in the right direction. Let's just hope this new connector is even better. I would love to see the bus powered display feature make a comeback... as an industry standard of course.
You got wrong. You cannot play ENCRYPTED HD content if both the player and the screen are not HDPC compatible. How could anyone limit in a technical level forbid playing what is not encryptedCreepyArcade said:
So, to sum up, all HD displays can play non-encrypted streams, but only HDPC HD displays can play both encrypted and non-encrypted streams.
Porchland said:
There already was/is a huge round of piracy for TV shows - most BT sites have tons of TV shows you can download in case you forgot to set your VCR. Granted, they are commercial free, which *is* illegal, but still.
And of course I get "The Office" for free - OTA [over the air] TV is still free, as long as I own a TV. If "The Office" was on HBO or another paid channel, then that's a different story. But OTA TV is paid for by the advertisers. All iTunes does is allow someone to buy a commercial free version of a free OTA show in case they missed it the night it aired. It's a great idea, but it's been going on for years on the BT sites. In Europe esp., downloading TV shows is a very popular thing to do.
Don't use OTA TV as an example of why DRM is good...it's one of the few cases where DRM really has no right to be applied, since the original product was given away for free.
/vjl/
What it all boils down to is: Big corporations want to take away our freedoms and rob us blind.
What the article boils down to is: Apple might end up being one of those "big corporations" that screws us.
Trusted Computing, DRM, HDCP, Kernel Locking, all this stuff, all of it, are weapons against consumers. Those big CEOs and executives don't care about being fair, they just want as much money as possible.
Don't put it past them to try and lock out unencrypted stuff from sources other than their own.
If the MPAA and RIAA were really fair or at least decent human beings they'd do stuff like this to curb piracy.
1. Stop being greedy. They don't need their millions of dollars of salaries.
Stars shouldn't be paid so much for absolutely trival amounts of work.
2. Stop producing utter crap that is purposely bastardized to appeal to the lowest common denominator.
3. Produce quality entertainment. How hard is it to find a new idea or new work? Stop remaking crap.
4. Stop charging absorbent prices for DVDs. $30 for two hours? Effin cripes. I can buy games like Half-Life 2 or Halo 2, spend about the same amount of cash as two movies and have fun for years. $30 for two hours? $50 for years? Seems a bit unfair.
5. Stop cramming "anti-piracy" junk into our stuff. Stop encrypting our stuff.
6. Stop lying about it being "anti-piracy" when its becoming more and more apparent with every minute that its lock-in tactics.
7. Stop sueing medium and low income families. Must make you feel like a big man RIAA, sueing a mother of 7. Good for you. See you in hell.
8. Stop trying to guilt people into your methods.
9. Stop tampering with our freedoms. I paid for the content, I should be able to decide what I can or cannot do with it.
10. Stop hindering progress.
11. Stop being *ssholes and people will have more respect and might likely stop pirating as much.
If RIAA and the MPAA stopped being total idiots and ******s, people probably would feel worse about stealing their content.
What the article boils down to is: Apple might end up being one of those "big corporations" that screws us.
Trusted Computing, DRM, HDCP, Kernel Locking, all this stuff, all of it, are weapons against consumers. Those big CEOs and executives don't care about being fair, they just want as much money as possible.
Don't put it past them to try and lock out unencrypted stuff from sources other than their own.
If the MPAA and RIAA were really fair or at least decent human beings they'd do stuff like this to curb piracy.
1. Stop being greedy. They don't need their millions of dollars of salaries.
Stars shouldn't be paid so much for absolutely trival amounts of work.
2. Stop producing utter crap that is purposely bastardized to appeal to the lowest common denominator.
3. Produce quality entertainment. How hard is it to find a new idea or new work? Stop remaking crap.
4. Stop charging absorbent prices for DVDs. $30 for two hours? Effin cripes. I can buy games like Half-Life 2 or Halo 2, spend about the same amount of cash as two movies and have fun for years. $30 for two hours? $50 for years? Seems a bit unfair.
5. Stop cramming "anti-piracy" junk into our stuff. Stop encrypting our stuff.
6. Stop lying about it being "anti-piracy" when its becoming more and more apparent with every minute that its lock-in tactics.
7. Stop sueing medium and low income families. Must make you feel like a big man RIAA, sueing a mother of 7. Good for you. See you in hell.
8. Stop trying to guilt people into your methods.
9. Stop tampering with our freedoms. I paid for the content, I should be able to decide what I can or cannot do with it.
10. Stop hindering progress.
11. Stop being *ssholes and people will have more respect and might likely stop pirating as much.
If RIAA and the MPAA stopped being total idiots and ******s, people probably would feel worse about stealing their content.
zwilliams07 said:
If you scaled back on the ignorant rants and people might care about what you are saying.
Lethal
LethalWolfe said:
Oh, how that stings. Call me ignorant while you accept them taking control of what you can, and cannot do with your property.
Would you buy a car if the car company only allowed you to drive to the store and work?
Super Dave said:Sorta. I worked in retail for 6 years before doing web design to pay the bills through university. Every night when I was leaving, the security guard would check my bag. I didn't like it, but I put up with it. What should the company do if the majority of theft is always internal?
Further, 90% of my friends steal music and don't think twice about it. How about your friends? All it took was the ability to get away with it and their ability to say "everyone does it." Sure these same people won't rob a bank, but why? Because it is morally sanctioned, and because they wouldn't get away with it. Moral relativism has corrupted the minds of the contemporary world so much that theft is considered "ok."
Nonetheless, if you want to blame DRM on someone, you're right to blame it on the companies. After all, the thieves may be the reason that the companies added a lock, but the company itself still had a choice. But ask yourself "what would I do?" Would you be allowing everyone to steal your stuff, knowing thatas the younger generation got older and the old people who don't understand the technology die offit would only get worse?
If you want to complain about unfair DRM (DVD's inability to make ANY rips), fine. But if you want to complain about DRM as a concept at all, come up with a better model. Trust obviously doesn't work, as evident by the rampant piracy of music. So what's the better option?
An immanent critique (one that makes no suggestions) is not useful here. What is needed are suggestions for a better model of DRM that will be both fair to those of us who are not crooks, while at the same time keeping those who will steal whatever they can get away with under wraps so that pricing does not skyrocket.
Ideas people!
David
Nice idea but in my country you can´t steal music unless you sale it. You pay a surcharge over all the CD and DVD you buy in compensation to be able to make copies at your heart content from any source and that include a P2P network.
So the DRM is try to steal from me so I have to pay the surcharge anycase but can´t make the copies.
The DRM in DVD was consider legal due to the existence of the analog hole that allowed to circumvent it.
ZorPrime said:huh?
W. Virginia State Board of Education v Barnette and Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studio, Inc. are precedents that haven't been overturned... there may have been adaptation and modification of the exercise clause of the 1st Amendment but Fair Use is Protected Speech and is Legal, at least here in America.
Edit/Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer or advocate of "piracy" and my comments do not constitute any legal advice or others point of view because I have no clue.
You missed what I said. Of course fair use is legal, that's what makes it fair use. What I was pointing out is that the DMCA and Fair Use conflict on the issue as to wheter or not you can rip your own movies for display on your own devices. Any way you look at it, that constitutes fair use, but the DMCA says it is ALWAYS illegal to "break" the encryption on a DVD for any purpose, even one that falls under fair use policies.
Therefore it is possible to exercise fair use and still be a criminal in the process.
I can't wait to see what happens when they finally close the "analog hole" (which I've heard some talk about, although I can't say that I understand the technology needed to plug it)/
The DRM in on-line music is annoying but not oppressive since it does not prevent me from backing up my own content or producing lower quality versions of the content in other formats - burn to CD, rerip. I'm not a big fan of DRM in any form, but it doesn't scafe me enough to get ticked about it.
The DRM on DVD movies is both annoying and oppressive since it restricts my fair use. It is currently impossible to make a copy of a DVD without breaking the DRM, or reducing the quality of the copy (via analog copy). It is also illegal to scale it down and transfer it to my iPod (or whatever portable device I may have) because I have to "break" the DRM to do so.
My suggestion to the movie industry is to find a way to DRM their stuff without interfering with my fair use rights as a consumer. The bottom line is that movie piracy is already rampant and their boneheaded restrictive DRM is not stopping that. All it is doing is making honest people into criminals, as they circumvent DRM in order to maintain their own fair use rights.
It should be incumbent on the MPAA to prove why such a restrictive DRM is required in order to protect their assets. It should not be incumbent on me to prove why my fair use rights should not be impinged upon.
dernhelm said:You missed what I said. Of course fair use is legal, that's what makes it fair use. What I was pointing out is that the DMCA and Fair Use conflict on the issue as to wheter or not you can rip your own movies for display on your own devices. Any way you look at it, that constitutes fair use, but the DMCA says it is ALWAYS illegal to "break" the encryption on a DVD for any purpose, even one that falls under fair use policies.
Therefore it is possible to exercise fair use and still be a criminal in the process.
I'm sorry for the mix up.
I actually agree with you, about how the DMCA contradicts fair use.
I was trying to state my opinion that the DMCA doesn't take precedence over previous Supreme Court rullings, at least in my ethical thought. The DMCA hasn't been tested constitutionally, yet... I guess one could argue that parts of the DMCA are actually not legal as applied to the previous Supreme Court rulings. Therefore, if one were to constitutionally test the DMCA it would likely fail. IMHO the Supreme Court has the final say, unless the constitution is amended, so those sections of the DMCA that contradict fair use are mute, until the Supreme Court reverses itself by upholding portions of the DMCA that contradict earlier precedence.I also totally agree with you that it bites that certain powers to be have been trying to criminalize ones rights.
Chundles said:
Are there any TV screens (not computer screens like Apple's) out there that are true HD resolution (1920 x 1080)? I've not seen any so don't all these screens compromise the quality of real HD content? Perhaps there will be an adapter box so that systems that don't meet the new specs can play something from new HD or BluRay disks--or they'll just throw a lower resolution copy of the content for such systems.
finchna said:
Yep, there are native 1080i/p TV monitors out there. I have a Mistubishi 1080p DLP HDTV, mine is the WD-52627 with HDMI/HDCP.
Sears sells one. You can check it out here
Oh, but thats the consumer's opinion. Thier idea is that its NOT your stuff, its thiers, and you have no right to do what you want with it; you have the right to do what they want you to do with it.zwilliams07 said:
In the future it seems that you can own nothing, everything is rented, worse than communism if you ask me! At least in communism it supposed to be free!
But my point is that at some point the added resolution will be pointless for most cases because people will not be able to see the added detail.shawnce said:
Lethal
SiliconAddict said:
I understand the argument of price. Thirteen dollars seems expensive for buying 60 minutes worth of sound. After all, we hear sound all day and it's free.
However, theft is not justified even if you don't agree with the price. I think iPods are expensive. Using your argument I would be justified in stealing an iPod.
Piracy happened because technology made it more feasible. I remember the days of dubbed tapes, making a copy of a friend's CD at 1x and all the other ways I got free music.
Consumers need to realize the problem isn't with the greedy companies, it's with themselves. It makes no sense for RIAA companies to provide their products at cut-rate prices. After all, they are a business. Supply and demand, etc.
Most Western counties have stopped viewing music as a good, but instead as a necessity. This is the first problem.
Really the fault lies on both sides. Consumers don't want to admit they're part of the problem. Once they realize music is no different than any other good they buy things will get better. It isn't like I can make a backup pair of pants in case the Levi's I bought rip.