Musing about this I know SCART doesn't allow HD - but why not? There are
so many versions why not just one more?

--
*If a turtle doesn't have a shell, is he homeless or naked?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Musing about this I know SCART doesn't allow HD - but why not? There are
so many versions why not just one more?

planned obsoexcresence*? :-)


* a way of making sure that one load of expensive useless crap has to be
ditched in favour of another even more overhyped piece of steaming
wombat turds.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Musing about this I know SCART doesn't allow HD - but why not? There are
so many versions why not just one more?

planned obsoexcresence*? :-)


* a way of making sure that one load of expensive useless crap has to be
ditched in favour of another even more overhyped piece of steaming
wombat turds.


Don't tell me I have to import wombat turd as well? I've gone right off
this BluRay stuff now. :-)

It was so much easier with SCART. LOL

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
Musing about this I know SCART doesn't allow HD - but why not? There are
so many versions why not just one more?

--
*If a turtle doesn't have a shell, is he homeless or naked?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.


Well, it could.
There's no technical reason you can't send HD over a SCART RGB.

But there's no point, because content providers increasingly decree that
analog HD must be disabled, and that you must go over HDMI which supports
DHCP. They flag the content to prevent analog HD output.

So I can't see any mfr investing in HD-over-SCART, when it just won't work
for much of the content.

--
Ron

On Sun, 07 Dec 2008 14:26:17 +0000, Ron Lowe wrote:

But there's no point, because content providers increasingly decree that
analog HD must be disabled, and that you must go over HDMI which
supports DHCP. They flag the content to prevent analog HD output.

Er, I think you mean DRM - copy protection to you & me, Digital Rights
Management to pointed haired corporate speaks.

ISTR reading recently that blu-ray copy protection had already been
cracked.

--
John Stumbles

I used to be indecisive but now I'm not so sure

"John Stumbles" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 07 Dec 2008 14:26:17 +0000, Ron Lowe wrote:

But there's no point, because content providers increasingly decree that
analog HD must be disabled, and that you must go over HDMI which
supports DHCP. They flag the content to prevent analog HD output.

Er, I think you mean DRM - copy protection to you & me, Digital Rights
Management to pointed haired corporate speaks.

I actually meant HDCP ( not DHCP! )
Which is a method of implimenting DRM.
Specifically, on the link between the player and display.

ISTR reading recently that blu-ray copy protection had already been
cracked.

It's an on-going battle.
Slysoft's AnyDVD-HD has cracked the AACS protection.
Blu-Ray retaliated with BD+.
Slysoft cracked BD+.
There's currently a new version of BD+ which Slysoft's developers claim will
take a couple of months to crack.

http://forum.slysoft.com/showthread.php?t=21985

--
Ron

In article ,
Ron Lowe ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
Musing about this I know SCART doesn't allow HD - but why not? There
are so many versions why not just one more?

Well, it could. There's no technical reason you can't send HD over a
SCART RGB.

But there's no point, because content providers increasingly decree that
analog HD must be disabled, and that you must go over HDMI which
supports DHCP. They flag the content to prevent analog HD output.

So I can't see any mfr investing in HD-over-SCART, when it just won't
work for much of the content.

So why enable it on Y Pb Pr?

--
*Oh, what a tangled website we weave when first we practice *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Ron Lowe ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
Musing about this I know SCART doesn't allow HD - but why not? There
are so many versions why not just one more?

Well, it could. There's no technical reason you can't send HD over a
SCART RGB.

But there's no point, because content providers increasingly decree that
analog HD must be disabled, and that you must go over HDMI which
supports DHCP. They flag the content to prevent analog HD output.

So I can't see any mfr investing in HD-over-SCART, when it just won't
work for much of the content.

So why enable it on Y Pb Pr?

It's only been enabled over component historically.

I think that analog option is going to dissapear in newer equipment.

--
Ron

In article ,
Ron Lowe ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Ron Lowe ronATlowe-famlyDOTmeDOTukSPURIOUS wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
Musing about this I know SCART doesn't allow HD - but why not? There
are so many versions why not just one more?

Well, it could. There's no technical reason you can't send HD over a
SCART RGB.

But there's no point, because content providers increasingly decree that
analog HD must be disabled, and that you must go over HDMI which
supports DHCP. They flag the content to prevent analog HD output.

So I can't see any mfr investing in HD-over-SCART, when it just won't
work for much of the content.

So why enable it on Y Pb Pr?

It's only been enabled over component historically.

I think that analog option is going to dissapear in newer equipment.

I'm sure it will - components were never that popular on European
equipment anyway. And HDMI is the 21st century version of SCART, I suppose.

--
*Shin: a device for finding furniture in the dark *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Musing about this I know SCART doesn't allow HD - but why not? There are
so many versions why not just one more?

planned obsoexcresence*? :-)


* a way of making sure that one load of expensive useless crap has to be
ditched in favour of another even more overhyped piece of steaming
wombat turds.

More likely because they (the content providers) only want to output HD
on something that they think can't easily be ripped...



--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

Ron Lowe wrote:
"John Stumbles" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 07 Dec 2008 14:26:17 +0000, Ron Lowe wrote:

But there's no point, because content providers increasingly decree that
analog HD must be disabled, and that you must go over HDMI which
supports DHCP. They flag the content to prevent analog HD output.

Er, I think you mean DRM - copy protection to you & me, Digital Rights
Management to pointed haired corporate speaks.

I actually meant HDCP ( not DHCP! )
Which is a method of implimenting DRM.
Specifically, on the link between the player and display.

ISTR reading recently that blu-ray copy protection had already been
cracked.

It's an on-going battle.
Slysoft's AnyDVD-HD has cracked the AACS protection.
Blu-Ray retaliated with BD+.
Slysoft cracked BD+.
There's currently a new version of BD+ which Slysoft's developers claim
will take a couple of months to crack.

http://forum.slysoft.com/showthread.php?t=21985


Now finally in this long thread we get to the point.

It's perfectly feasible to send HD content over something other than
HDMI-with-HDCP. But the MPAA don't want it - they'll let the player
shove SD out over something unprotected, but not HD - not 720 whether
interlaced or not, nor (note the number Dave) 1080. (In fact, I'm doing
as I type - the monitor I have here is 1920x1200, as many pixels across
as full HD, and more vertically. A full HD picture fits quite nicely at
the full resolution, with a half-inch black strip top and bottom).

If you don't have an HDMI connector, your player is not allowed, under
the terms of the license (sic) they agreed to, to send out HD content.
And AFAIK HDCP hasn't been cracked.

Of course, in a studio that's not an issue.

The main difference between HD-DVD and Blu-ray was BD+. The blu-ray
guys worked out that James at Sly-soft and ... err... the other guys
name escapes me, something Chinese - would be able to crack any
protection with time. HD-DVD had barely hit the market when it's single
layer of protection was cracked. BD+, on the other hand, can be
updated, and is being updated. The player manufacturers are contracted
to provide updates to fix any cracks.

But enough of this technical stuff. If you want full HD, get a set which is
- 1080p capable,
- and which will play at 25 FPS(PAL equivalent)
- and 30FPS (NTSC equivalent. Ok, you need 29.97 or whatever it is).
- And don't forget 24FPS, which is commonly used in film production.

And a PS/3.
*And an HDMI CABLE*!

Andy

"Andy Champ" wrote in message
. uk...

ISTR reading recently that blu-ray copy protection had already been
cracked.

It's an on-going battle.
Slysoft's AnyDVD-HD has cracked the AACS protection.
Blu-Ray retaliated with BD+.
Slysoft cracked BD+.
There's currently a new version of BD+ which Slysoft's developers claim
will take a couple of months to crack.

http://forum.slysoft.com/showthread.php?t=21985


If you don't have an HDMI connector, your player is not allowed, under the
terms of the license (sic) they agreed to, to send out HD content. And
AFAIK HDCP hasn't been cracked.

Indeed, but that's not the place where people are targetting their efforts.
The HDMI cable carries a very high-bandwidth uncompressed stream. That's
not what we'd choose to tap into and copy anyway.

The main difference between HD-DVD and Blu-ray was BD+. The blu-ray guys
worked out that James at Sly-soft and ... err... the other guys name
escapes me, something Chinese - would be able to crack any protection
with time. HD-DVD had barely hit the market when it's single layer of
protection was cracked. BD+, on the other hand, can be updated, and is
being updated. The player manufacturers are contracted to provide updates
to fix any cracks.

Which does not bode well for the average honest consumer. They get hit as
collateral damage.

Every few months, when you buy a new disk, you get a message that you need
to update your player firmware.

So are standalone player mfrs going to support and provide BD+ firmware
updates for all their models indefinately?

I think we all know the answer to that.

"I'm sorry, sir, we no longer produce that model. That was last year's
model. If you want to play the latest releases, may I suggest you update to
our not-quite-obsolete player 2009? "

Meanwhile, the 'bad guys' who they are *trying* to target just rip it with
AnyDVD-HD and remove all the silly DRM nonsense anyway.

--
Ron

"Andy Champ" wrote in message
. uk...

8

But enough of this technical stuff. If you want full HD, get a set which
is
- 1080p capable,

Not good enough.. there are plenty of TVs out there that will accept 1080p
but don't have enough pixels to display it.

dennis@home wrote:
Not good enough.. there are plenty of TVs out there that will accept
1080p but don't have enough pixels to display it.


*I* don't call that 1080p capable. But your right to warn that some
salesmen might.

Andy

Ron Lowe wrote:
Meanwhile, the 'bad guys' who they are *trying* to target just rip it
with AnyDVD-HD and remove all the silly DRM nonsense anyway.

http://forum.slysoft.com/showthread.php?t=21985

Andy

In article ,
Andy Champ wrote:
not 720 whether
interlaced or not, nor (note the number Dave) 1080.

Sorry - I'd just been working on a new MDF for this monitor...

--
*A cubicle is just a padded cell without a door.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Andy Champ" wrote in message
. uk...
Ron Lowe wrote:
Meanwhile, the 'bad guys' who they are *trying* to target just rip it
with AnyDVD-HD and remove all the silly DRM nonsense anyway.

http://forum.slysoft.com/showthread.php?t=21985

Andy


er,. yes indeed.
That will be why I said:

There's currently a new version of BD+ which Slysoft's developers claim
will take a couple of months to crack.

http://forum.slysoft.com/showthread.php?t=21985

Ron Lowe wrote:
"Andy Champ" wrote in message
. uk...
Ron Lowe wrote:
Meanwhile, the 'bad guys' who they are *trying* to target just rip it
with AnyDVD-HD and remove all the silly DRM nonsense anyway.

http://forum.slysoft.com/showthread.php?t=21985

Andy


er,. yes indeed.
That will be why I said:

There's currently a new version of BD+ which Slysoft's developers
claim will take a couple of months to crack.

http://forum.slysoft.com/showthread.php?t=21985


Missed that. 5 weeks and counting...

Andy

er,. yes indeed.
That will be why I said:

There's currently a new version of BD+ which Slysoft's developers claim
will take a couple of months to crack.

http://forum.slysoft.com/showthread.php?t=21985



I've got a lot of confidence in thise guys at slysoft.

The arrogance of Richard Doherty of the Envisioneering Group that BD+ would
take 10 years to hack, and was then ( in its then form ) hacked by slysoft
in some weeks was astounding.

Of course, the thing with BD+ is that is's an ever-moving target.

A game of cat-and-mouse.

And as I say, the people who *really* suffer are regular consumers, who just
want their stand-alone players to play the genuine disks they have bought.
Every few months, they will need to upgrade their player firmware to play
the latest releases. Is that acceptable in the consumer arena?

The techno-classes ( us ) will update our firmware no problem.
The 'bad boys' ( us / not-us ? ) will simply wait a month or 2 occasionally
untill slysoft have got if fixed.

This stuff affects the genuine users far more than it inconveniences the bad
guys is by basic point.

--
Ron

Ron Lowe wrote:
er,. yes indeed.
That will be why I said:

There's currently a new version of BD+ which Slysoft's developers
claim will take a couple of months to crack.

http://forum.slysoft.com/showthread.php?t=21985



I've got a lot of confidence in thise guys at slysoft.

The arrogance of Richard Doherty of the Envisioneering Group that BD+
would take 10 years to hack, and was then ( in its then form ) hacked by
slysoft in some weeks was astounding.

Of course, the thing with BD+ is that is's an ever-moving target.

A game of cat-and-mouse.

And as I say, the people who *really* suffer are regular consumers, who
just want their stand-alone players to play the genuine disks they have
bought. Every few months, they will need to upgrade their player
firmware to play the latest releases. Is that acceptable in the
consumer arena?

The techno-classes ( us ) will update our firmware no problem.
The 'bad boys' ( us / not-us ? ) will simply wait a month or 2
occasionally untill slysoft have got if fixed.

This stuff affects the genuine users far more than it inconveniences the
bad guys is by basic point.

Indeed. I always feel that even from the advent of ordinary DVDs the
consumer has been victim of a sophisticated "bait and switch" con.

We were all sold on the convenience of true random access to our films -
no need to wind though bits you don't want to see etc - jump straight in
where you want. Plus loads of "special features". It interesting to see
now the format dominates just haw many controls they try to impose. You
must watch the copyright warnings, the trailers, and any amount of other
crap to get to the main menu even, an the player controls are disabled
until the producer of the disk deems it allowable for you to have the
use of your own player again. Even many of the so called special
features are nothing more than advertising for more of their wares.

(still full credit to Techtronics who chipped the first DVD player I
bought more than a decade ago - it still plays and defeats every attempt
at region coding, or player control restrictions) ;-)

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

John Rumm wrote:
Ron Lowe wrote:
er,. yes indeed.
That will be why I said:

There's currently a new version of BD+ which Slysoft's developers
claim will take a couple of months to crack.

http://forum.slysoft.com/showthread.php?t=21985



I've got a lot of confidence in thise guys at slysoft.

The arrogance of Richard Doherty of the Envisioneering Group that BD+
would take 10 years to hack, and was then ( in its then form ) hacked
by slysoft in some weeks was astounding.

Of course, the thing with BD+ is that is's an ever-moving target.

A game of cat-and-mouse.

And as I say, the people who *really* suffer are regular consumers,
who just want their stand-alone players to play the genuine disks they
have bought. Every few months, they will need to upgrade their player
firmware to play the latest releases. Is that acceptable in the
consumer arena?

The techno-classes ( us ) will update our firmware no problem.
The 'bad boys' ( us / not-us ? ) will simply wait a month or 2
occasionally untill slysoft have got if fixed.

This stuff affects the genuine users far more than it inconveniences
the bad guys is by basic point.

Indeed. I always feel that even from the advent of ordinary DVDs the
consumer has been victim of a sophisticated "bait and switch" con.

We were all sold on the convenience of true random access to our films -
no need to wind though bits you don't want to see etc - jump straight in
where you want. Plus loads of "special features". It interesting to see
now the format dominates just haw many controls they try to impose. You
must watch the copyright warnings, the trailers, and any amount of other
crap to get to the main menu even, an the player controls are disabled
until the producer of the disk deems it allowable for you to have the
use of your own player again. Even many of the so called special
features are nothing more than advertising for more of their wares.

(still full credit to Techtronics who chipped the first DVD player I
bought more than a decade ago - it still plays and defeats every attempt
at region coding, or player control restrictions) ;-)

Their stealing of our time and convenience is a crime against an
innocent consumer. I have no pirate (or otherwise dodgy) DVDs. But I am
jolly tempted to if that means I don't have to decide to watch something
several minutes ahead of time just so that they can force my machine to
play those clips/warnings. And it seems especially bad when it is a
multi-DVD series...

--
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
www.thyromind.info www.thyroiduk.org www.altsupportthyroid.org

Rod wrote:


Indeed. I always feel that even from the advent of ordinary DVDs the
consumer has been victim of a sophisticated "bait and switch" con.

We were all sold on the convenience of true random access to our films
- no need to wind though bits you don't want to see etc - jump
straight in where you want. Plus loads of "special features". It
interesting to see now the format dominates just haw many controls
they try to impose. You must watch the copyright warnings, the
trailers, and any amount of other crap to get to the main menu even,
an the player controls are disabled until the producer of the disk
deems it allowable for you to have the use of your own player again.
Even many of the so called special features are nothing more than
advertising for more of their wares.

(still full credit to Techtronics who chipped the first DVD player I
bought more than a decade ago - it still plays and defeats every
attempt at region coding, or player control restrictions) ;-)

Their stealing of our time and convenience is a crime against an
innocent consumer. I have no pirate (or otherwise dodgy) DVDs. But I am
jolly tempted to if that means I don't have to decide to watch something
several minutes ahead of time just so that they can force my machine to
play those clips/warnings. And it seems especially bad when it is a
multi-DVD series...

There are some discs where I have ended up making a stripped out[1] copy
of my original which I keep in the same case - and play instead of the
original since it is so much quicker and simpler to get to the bit you want!

[1] DVDShrink is good in that respect - you can re-author a disk to just
include the main movie and nothing else if you want. Particularly good
if you buy any ex-rental DVDs, as many of these seem to have the most
irritating restrictions and often lack any worthwhile extras.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

Their stealing of our time and convenience is a crime against an innocent
consumer. I have no pirate (or otherwise dodgy) DVDs. But I am jolly
tempted to if that means I don't have to decide to watch something
several minutes ahead of time just so that they can force my machine to
play those clips/warnings. And it seems especially bad when it is a
multi-DVD series...

There are some discs where I have ended up making a stripped out[1] copy
of my original which I keep in the same case - and play instead of the
original since it is so much quicker and simpler to get to the bit you
want!

[1] DVDShrink is good in that respect -

I also have done this.
I use backup DVDs in the car, so the kids don't damage the originals.

I prefer to watch back-ups, since they skip straight to the movie.
I find it an irritant nowadays to have to wade through the crap.

[1.1] Slysoft's CloneDVD is also good in this respect.

--
Ron

Rod wrote:
Their stealing of our time and convenience is a crime against an
innocent consumer. I have no pirate (or otherwise dodgy) DVDs. But I am
jolly tempted to if that means I don't have to decide to watch something
several minutes ahead of time just so that they can force my machine to
play those clips/warnings. And it seems especially bad when it is a
multi-DVD series...


Trouble is there are people out there making a business of copying DVDs
- and this stuff slows them down. The MPAA reckon that they do lose
sales through illegal copies, and that it's worth them paying people to
try to stop it. And that it's worth putting scary stuff on the front of
the disc to remind you that if you copy it, you *are* breaking the law -
even if you don't agree with the law, you're still breaking it.

Don't forget, movies are expensive to make, and if they don't make
profit they'll stop making them.

Yes, it's a PITA. Just like the locks on my doors.

Andy

Andy Champ wrote:
Rod wrote:
Their stealing of our time and convenience is a crime against an
innocent consumer. I have no pirate (or otherwise dodgy) DVDs. But I
am jolly tempted to if that means I don't have to decide to watch
something several minutes ahead of time just so that they can force my
machine to play those clips/warnings. And it seems especially bad when
it is a multi-DVD series...


Trouble is there are people out there making a business of copying DVDs
- and this stuff slows them down. The MPAA reckon that they do lose
sales through illegal copies, and that it's worth them paying people to
try to stop it. And that it's worth putting scary stuff on the front of
the disc to remind you that if you copy it, you *are* breaking the law -
even if you don't agree with the law, you're still breaking it.

Don't forget, movies are expensive to make, and if they don't make
profit they'll stop making them.

Yes, it's a PITA. Just like the locks on my doors.

Andy

I know! But does it really slow them down more than marginally? Sitting
here waiting until House M.D. Season 4 DVD gets to a sensible price
increases the temptation to buy a pirate vesion of some sort. (The legit
version seems to be going up again.) It already feels a bit rich
charging the same for the truncated season (16 episodes) as they did for
the full seasons (24 episodes).

--
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
www.thyromind.info www.thyroiduk.org www.altsupportthyroid.org

Andy Champ wrote:
Rod wrote:
Their stealing of our time and convenience is a crime against an
innocent consumer. I have no pirate (or otherwise dodgy) DVDs. But I
am jolly tempted to if that means I don't have to decide to watch
something several minutes ahead of time just so that they can force my
machine to play those clips/warnings. And it seems especially bad when
it is a multi-DVD series...


Trouble is there are people out there making a business of copying DVDs
- and this stuff slows them down. The MPAA reckon that they do lose
sales through illegal copies, and that it's worth them paying people to
try to stop it. And that it's worth putting scary stuff on the front of
the disc to remind you that if you copy it, you *are* breaking the law -
even if you don't agree with the law, you're still breaking it.

Don't forget, movies are expensive to make, and if they don't make
profit they'll stop making them.

Yes, it's a PITA. Just like the locks on my doors.

Andy

You can really trace the decline in the music industry to the rise of
the cassette tape.

I know, I was working in it, and essentially record sales plummeted when
the cassette came along.

And have never recovered. It wasn't so much organised piracy, as every
student copying his mates Lp's onto cassettes.

There seems to be no way out of it now.

Like software, its too darned easy to copy unless you put in so many
hoops that it becomes liable to fail in legitimate situations.