Related link: http://www.streamingmedia.com/article.asp?id=8605
"Finally, it's hard to minimize the importance of the DVD Forum's provisional approval for Microsoft's VC-9 technology, essentially Windows Media Video 9, along with two other technologies, H.264 and MPEG-2, as mandatory on next-generation playback devices."
Wow. I just wrapped up the manuscript on my upcoming book on Internet Video where I have a whole chapter on MPEG-4 as a wonderful standards organization, fighting against the forces of proprietariness. However, I began to see the writing on the wall when so many $39 DVD players began playing both .asf and DivX ;-) movies. It's not like Microsoft used dirty tricks to force the low-end DVD players to include Windows media - they did it because all the ripped movies were in these formats. Thus, it really was driven by customer demand, and with that DVD foothold, it's not surprising that the DVD forum has now blessed Windows media .
Another factor working for the 'proprietary' Windows media standard is that it has really become a de-facto standard, which is more powerful than a real standard. Video CD, Super Video CD, CD-Text, MP3, all sort of organically have become standards... none blessed by the standards bodies really until after they make good penetration in the marketplace.
A third factor is the speed of computers, and the ability to flash the rom of DVD players, or simply sell new ones. With DVD's at $12-$25 and DVD players themselves around $39, it's easy to see how ridiculous the pricing game is. Give away the hardware and sell the software. Thus, the original goal of video standards, to ensure that 1994's DVD player will play 2004's DVDs" becomes less relevant when WalMart can practically bundle the DVD player if you buy 5 DVD's. And, whereas it used to be that a computer couldn't play MPEG-2, only special hardware chips, the Moore's law has made it so now it's easier to make a sort of general-purpose DVD player, which could have a new codec added by updating some software and flashing the ROM. It's not that customers will flash the ROM for their DVD players - they'll just go buy new ones. It's that there's no cost to the manufacturer to create essentially a brand new product - just software - and voila, you can ship a "NEW" version of your DVD player, this one playing Super-Duper Video CD's that are MPEG-4 burned to a CD-R, etc. etc. etc." Thus, the economics of "ship now and patch later" work in the hardware world; you DON'T have to get the unit perfect before you ship it; and new codecs CAN be "downloaded" on demand (by having customer buy a new DVD player).
This may spell doom for MPEG in the mobile space too. While we definitely need to agree for at least 18 months at a time what the current video codec is, Macromedia is aggressively pushing mobile-Flash out to cell phones; Sorenson has it's MPEG-4 and Non-MPEG-4 codecs both of which make it money; and Microsoft can change it's codec constantly and pretty much count on all the devices catching up.
Plus, the incentive of hardware vendors *is* to get you to purchase a new device. Thus, a standard that allowed yesteryears device to play today's content is NOT aligned with the financial incentives of any hardware manufacturer (resulting in landfills full of digital electronic trash). If new, faster codec (software) requires new, faster cellphone (hardware), Nokia and everybody else is delighted - sell new phones
As a recycler with a stack of 1980's computers that still operate, and printers from the 80's that still print postscript, it could be really argued that it's not just MPEG-4, but any large deliberative 'standard' that could be at risk, because Moore's law, plus mass consumerism and economies of scale, have reduced the friction of adopting new standards to a minimum.
Hardware is irrelevant now; firmware is king.
Wow.
Software will completely take over hardware eventually, no? Comments?
Categories
Web
Comments (9)
Read More Entries by Damien Stolarz.
here is an wonderful product WinXMedia DVD MPEG/AVI/Audio Converter can Convert DVD to MPEG1/2 AVI(DivX, XviD, MPEG4, YUV...) , check it and enjoy!
The author is a Microsoft basher
Of course the DVD "standard" itself is proprietary and require (for each of the different "standard" formats) license fees.
That's the reason why manufacturers are asking customers to pay for firmware upgrades that add new formats for writing, they need to pay the fee on every single download of that firmware themselves and are just passing on the cost.
Re: "they did it because all the ripped movies were in these formats"
My ripped movies experience is stale - my last consistent work in this area was in 2001-2002, when the movies were either in old DivX ;-) (which WAS MS MPEG-4v3 + MP3 in an AVI candy shell) or was the new real MPEG-4 DivX codec. We actually worked with the DivX guys, opimized some of their code for the Altivec on Macintosh.
I remember in that time period, there was a lot of hybrid situations, where MS codecs, both audio and video, were being used.
I also imagine that perhaps a lot of the high quality rips are put out in mpeg4, but a lot of home ripping for personal archival use is probably in MS codec - realize, it's free, no hoops to jump through, easily exported by whatever capture tools ship with the computer, etc. So I would imagine there's a lot of VHS-tape type material that end users have never bothered to upload, because it's their own Simpsons episodes or Sex in the City or whatever, on CD that they can later play in their $39 DVD player.
That's what I suspect... also, there is 1-2 year lead time in all this hardware stuff, so by the time I saw DVD players with all these features, I knew there must be a market of people with media to play in these formats.
I know that MS was working to make better-than-DVD (like 4 movies on one DVD) 1-megabit bitrate video for several years, so whatever partnerships they were doing in this direction had an influence as well.
The author is a Microsoft basher
Ummmm... I put proprietary in 'quotes' which means I didn't really 'mean' proprietary. I could have said quote-unquote "proprietary" with double quotes. The whole point I was trying to make was that although MS gets criticised for being "proprietary" (where proprietary = bad), in fact the broad, consumer-driven and popular use of their codec means that is became a defacto-standard (defacto standard = good).
If merely discussing prevailing views of a topic and contrasting them is bashing, I... apologise. I never meant to bash them. I thought I was saying sort of nice things. Heck, the whole article is sort of MPEG-4 loses MS wins. Please forgive me.
The author is a Microsoft basher
By proprietary he is referring to the control of the technology. Although MPEG$ implementations require licensing, the technical format is arbitrated by a committee. His beef and usage of 'proprietary' refers to a codec/format or whatever that is controlled, implemented and distributed by one private company.
The author is a Microsoft basher
Usual disclaimers apply - IANAL, etc.
It all depends on what you mean by 'proprietary'. MPEG standards are set by ISO/IEC MPEG, which asks all submitters to sign a statement saying that they will license their patents on 'reasonable and non-discriminatory' terms.
The author is a Microsoft basher
I don't think the author is fair in his article, and he is misinforming people about the facts. For example he misuses the word 'proprietary' to differentiate Microsoft from others. It is quite known that mpeg 4 is also proprietary and that you have to pay a license to use it. So I think the author is really trying to confuse people and spread some FUD regarding Microsoft.
Re: "they did it because all the ripped movies were in these formats"
I suspect that the overwhelming popularity of DivX and MPEG-4 is precisely the reason why the DVD forum is now giving their blessings to Windows media.
Re: "they did it because all the ripped movies were in these formats"
where have you seen a wmv ripped movie?
As far as I can tell, divX and mpeg4 are more popular (check your favorite P2P software or http://suprnova.org/ ).