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

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 |
\================================================= ================/

"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

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.

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.

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.