Support NeoGAF

[NumberThree]

And yes, Microsoft and Sony get a fee for every streamed movie watched on their console.

I'd like to see some receipts for this one.

 

[hirokazu]

https://www.microsoft.com/playready/licensing/list/

Check these companies by what they do and ask yourself why they need a Playready licence. Edit: Notice a Bank in the list. If you read the Playready whitepaper, Playready can be used for multiple purposes not just media. What if Playready being required for Vidipath creates a scenario where it's a standard in almost every home and is the easiest to access hooks for on-line security including Banking.

What if?

You're just speculating on why Comcast or any of the other companies have licensed PlayReady and drawing your own conclusions.

You have no evidence that Comcast's licensing of PlayReady is for Vidipath or anything else to do with DLNA, and even if it does, that doesn't really say anything about launch PS4s and Xbox Ones supporting UHD. You're just jumping to further conclusions when you say it does.

 

[jeff_rigby]

What if?

You're just speculating on why Comcast or any of the other companies have licensed PlayReady and drawing your own conclusions.

You have no evidence that Comcast's licensing of PlayReady is for Vidipath or anything else to do with DLNA, and even if it does, that doesn't really say anything about launch PS4s and Xbox Ones supporting UHD. You're just jumping to further conclusions when you say it does.

1) Turn on the PS4 and look at the intellectual notices and you will see Playready and WMDRM. These are required by Vidipath.
2) The Sony PDF submitted to the FCC DSTAC had a PS3 as a Vidipath client.
3)

March 2014: DLNA publicly releases the VidiPath Guidelines, originally called “DLNA CVP-2 Guidelines"[8]
September 2014: DLNA introduces “VidiPath,” the consumer-facing brand of the guidelines, and also launches the VidiPath Certification program.[9] The certification process involves multiple steps and varying fees based upon the product.[10]
2015: Comcast launched the Xfinity for VidiPath service to prepare its subscribers for the availability of VidiPath Certified retail devices[11]

4) All Playstation Platforms to use Playready which points to a significant PS3 update
5) Use XFINITY for VidiPath to Stream Content to Your Device Without a Set-Top Box


Platforms that implement UHD BLu-ray get the use of HEVC free for non-commercial use Playready requires HDCP 2.2 for Playready porting kit 3/ND which means any platform that has a UHD blu-ray player can also support Playready 3/ND. UHD blu-ray digital bridge uses Playready ND for 1080P and 4K in home Vidipath streaming.

Platforms that implement Vidipath get the use of Playready free for Vidipath in home streaming and Comcast pays no fee to use the Playready servers for this purpose. 1080P and 4K media requires Playready ND for vidipath.

My guess is that Microsoft is providing Vidipath DRM support free to get the embedded parts of Playready in all Vidipath CE platforms which provide a DRM hook for use by other services that require security that will pay Microsoft to do so.

Yes, WMDRM is DTCP-IP for media @ 720P or lower resolution. Playready porting kits lower than three include WMDRM and do not need it as a separate routine or listing which can mean that the Playready version in the PS4 is 3. Since Playready, WMDRM and Playready ND are commercial products they do not need to be disclosed unless Microsoft has required it. So we do not know from this if Playready ND is a part of the PS4 OS to allow 1080P and 4K Vidipath streaming and the UHD Digital bridge but the PS4 has a Trustzone TEE in Southbridge (Cerney) and Playready ND porting kits were shipping to iOS and Android manufacurers Oct 2013 (iOS and Android have ARM Trustzone TEE's).

The PS4 has a custom Panasonic HDMI chip that is not listed in Panasonic's HDMI 1.4 webpage and a Trustzone TEE in southbridge. HDCP 2.2 takes place in the TEE and is mapped to the HDMI port (negotiation for HDCP is forwarded to the TEE by the HDMI chip). The HDCP 2.2 routine in the TEE is also used by Playready, Miracast, Playready ND, HDMI2 over LAN and more.

 

[jeff_rigby]

I'd like to see some receipts for this one.

I don't know the amounts that Sony and Microsoft get from Netflix for using their platform to stream Netflix to the consumer.

Playready embedded has to be ported to a platform by the manufacturer or platform owner. They get a small portion of all the fees collected by Microsoft for the use of Playready on their platform. This was part of speculation based on a future Netflix able to use the Browser HTML5 <video> MSE EME without needing an APP. Apps on the PS4, for example, now notify the platform owners server (the DRM is in the app) and this is how the fees are calculated. How are fees calculated after a streaming service can use the browser directly.

A bank using Playready for security will pay Microsoft and the platform owner gets a small fee for this also. 40 million PS4s with Playready being used for all security and DRM with a fee for every use going into Sony and Micosoft bank accounts over the life of the console is part of the on-going revenue stream.

 

[Adam Tyner]

I don't know the amounts that Sony and Microsoft get from Netflix for using their platform to stream Netflix to the consumer.

Prove that Sony and Microsoft get paid anything by Netflix for each individual streaming of a TV show or movie.

 

[jeff_rigby]

Prove that Sony and Microsoft get paid anything by Netflix for each individual streaming of a TV show or movie.

1) Sony calls them partners
2) Are you suggesting they allow this free?
3) From 2010 Sony was talking about their Smart TVs providing an on-going revenue stream vs selling a TV with competition for lowest price creating little to no revenue. Shortly afterward the game consoles Got Netfix streaming via a blu-ray disk (using Java) then after a firmware update, using self contained javascript engine and DRM.
4) 2010 Netfilx said they were going to use Playready, slightly later Netflix-Google-Microsoft proposed what was to become HTML5 <video> MSE EME with hooks to C-ENC DRM
5) 2011 Sony announced they were going to support Playready in all their platforms and Microsoft registered the domain name microsoft-sony.com

I could find no reference to Fees and certainly to the amount charged.

Samsung is one of the latest TV makers to shift away from its own self-designed smart TV platform to embrace a more open operating system (OS)--in Samsung's case, it's called Tizen. Also shifting to an open platform for its smart TVs this year is Panasonic, with Mozilla's Firefox OS. LG already shifted to webOS after buying the assets of that OS from Hewlett-Packard in 2014. LG shipped its first TVs featuring webOS last year.

HTML5, that has enabled app developers and LG's content partners to streamline their development across platforms,

Several TV makers, including Sony, have opted to shift from their own proprietary smart TV operating systems to Android TV, Google's smart TV platform. Android,

individual TV brands have revenue streams from their platforms to support their ongoing development." (edited for simplicity)

The above article is making a case for the competition for the revenue stream with Smart TVs vs STBs and how that revenue stream is used to make the TV OS easier for the consumer to use. The PS3, PS4 and XB1 are TV STBs and will have a more open OS that is easier to use. ALL new TVs (from 2012) have Playready DRM. All TV STBs except Apple TV have Playready DRM, this includes the PS3, PS4, XB1 and Xbox 360. Playready embedded has not been used yet for any third party apps on the PS3 and PS4.

So hanging support (delayed) is Vidipath, Playready used by third party apps, UHD blu-ray and HTML5 <video> MSE EME in the browser. Common denominator is C-ENC format and the native library support for Streaming media. The article I cited said end of September for W3C release of the EME MSE standard.

 

[Adam Tyner]

I could find no reference to Fees and certainly to the amount charged.

Figured as much.

Personally, if I could find no reference to these fees even existing, I wouldn't assert that Microsoft and Sony have to be paid a fee every single time anyone streams content from Netflix. Yet again, you fail to comprehend the difference between fact and speculation. If you're going to make a bold statement like that, be able to back it up. If you can't back it up, present your speculation as such.

 

[jeff_rigby]

Figured as much.

Personally, if I could find no reference to these fees even existing, I wouldn't assert that Microsoft and Sony have to be paid a fee every single time anyone streams content from Netflix. Yet again, you fail to comprehend the difference between fact and speculation. If you're going to make a bold statement like that, be able to back it up. If you can't back it up, present your speculation as such.

I know that it was a trick question. That fees are charged is a given and I documented an article talking about it with reference to smart TVs competing with STBs for those fees. That fees are based on use is also a given. Or do you think that just positioning an APP on the Store generates the revenue. There is such a thing as common sense.

We are outside in the consumer loop where such things are not talked about. Netflix will not release Fee schedules because they are negotiated just as you are normally forbidden to discuss wages with fellow employees.

A few years ago there was speculation on how much top positions in the PS3 menu cost Netflix and other streamers.

 

[Adam Tyner]

There is such a thing as common sense.

I agree, which is why I call bullshit on the unsubstantiated claim that Netflix has to pay Microsoft and Sony a fee for each individual stream on their devices. With as many, many devices as there are that stream Netflix, this would surely be reflected in Netflix' financials.

 

[jeff_rigby]

I agree, which is why I call bullshit on the unsubstantiated claim that Netflix has to pay Microsoft and Sony a fee for each individual stream on their devices. With as many, many devices as there are that stream Netflix, this would surely be reflected in Netflix' financials.

How do they pay?

 

[Adam Tyner]

How do they pay?

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. You made the claim, so now provide the proof. "It's common sense!" is not proof. The registration of sony-microsoft.com is not proof (or in any way relevant). Statements regarding completely different platforms that don't reference per-stream fees are not proof.

 

[jeff_rigby]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. You made the claim, so now provide the proof. "It's common sense!" is not proof. The registration of sony-microsoft.com is not proof (or in any way relevant). Statements regarding completely different platforms that don't reference per-stream fees are not proof.

You called bullshit which requires you back that up. How do they pay?

1) Free
2) By app,
3) by view
4) by the minute
5) some other method please elaborate

How do they keep track if not #1
How does the platform owner confirm? Direct with the APP on the platform which ends with HTML5 <video> or via a trusted third party like Microsoft Playready

Referencing Java being used as the engine in the first Netfix app is as relevant as Netflix-Google-Microsoft and Microsoft-Sony.com. Just interesting to me facts I spent time researching.

 

[Adam Tyner]

You called bullshit which requires you back that up.

Oh, okay. So you can make any outlandish claim you want with nothing resembling concrete evidence, but when I call you out on it, it's up to me to prove you're wrong?

If you state as fact that leprechauns obviously exist, and I demand proof, you think it's my job to prove that leprechauns don't exist rather than yours to prove that they do?

There's not a line item in Netflix's financials that states "money we don't pay Microsoft and Sony for the existence of a Netflix app". I 100% believe that if Netflix were required to pay platform holders like Sony and Microsoft a fee per individual stream, that would be mentioned in an interview, investor briefing, etc.

How do they pay?

Either:

(1) they don't, at least not by usage (placement/promotion would be one possibility)
(2) there's a blanket fee, although I'm doubtful that's the case, or some general "we want to submit an app" fee

It's a symbiotic relationship. A TV, media-centric set top box, game console, etc. lacking Netflix looks embarrassingly incomplete. Netflix needs platforms for distribution.

 

[jeff_rigby]

Either:

(1) they don't, at least not by usage (placement/promotion would be one possibility)
(2) there's a blanket fee

It's a symbiotic relationship. A TV, media-centric set top box, game console, etc. lacking Netflix looks incomplete. Netflix needs platforms for distribution.

Which was an argument for UHD BLu-ray on the XB1 which I'm sure you wouldn't accept from me.

Sony is also in the media streaming business for profit yet they let competitors on their platform and don't charge them a fee?

Just create an app, convince the platform holder to put it on their platform and regardless of use you get paid a monthly fee from the user and the platform owner gets nothing even though you are taking customers away from their store. Or putting an APP on the Platform incurs a monthly fee regardless of use. Everyone pays the same fee for their app on a platform? Or is it by revenue generated and we are back to charge for streaming.

Are you perhaps a Bernie supporter?

 

[Adam Tyner]

Sony is also in the media streaming business for profit yet they let competitors on their platform and don't charge them a fee?

I'm not saying that money never changes hands. You stated as fact that Netflix has to pay a fee to Microsoft and Sony for each individual stream. I cannot imagine that's true, and you can provide no evidence that that's the case.

Are you perhaps a Bernie supporter?

Yikes.

 

[sploatee]

Jeff: Brexit or not?

 

[Quasar]

Either:

(1) they don't, at least not by usage (placement/promotion would be one possibility)
(2) there's a blanket fee, although I'm doubtful that's the case, or some general "we want to submit an app" fee

It's a symbiotic relationship. A TV, media-centric set top box, game console, etc. lacking Netflix looks embarrassingly incomplete. Netflix needs platforms for distribution.

Even Apple only gets a cut of subscriptions processed through their app store. If someone signs up via the web they get nothing.

In fact I seem to recall inititally it was the other way, MS paying Netflix for exclusivity on game consoles for a while.

 

[jeff_rigby]

Even Apple only gets a cut of subscriptions processed through their app store. If someone signs up via the web they get nothing.

In fact I seem to recall inititally it was the other way, MS paying Netflix for exclusivity on game consoles for a while.

I think we are now talking about two different things.

1) Salesmen and organizations get money for signing up a new customer for Netflix who can then use any platform to stream.
2) For example, they sign up on Apple TV but additionally use a Android Phone and children use a PS3 in their bedroom to stream Netflix. That's three different platforms or more.

The difference in Adam's and my view is I believe each platform gets a streaming fee which can be calculated in any number of ways but is basically by use, the more the platform uses Netflix, the more the platform owner makes from Netflix.

Adam believes the platform gets the same fee whether the app is used at all. So a broken PS3 in a closet generates revenue for Sony even though it's never used while an Apple TV in the living room that gets massive use makes the same from Netflix.

In the very near future there will be people Streaming Netflix from a browser via HTML5 <video> MSE who have no APP on a Platform. Under Adam's view they get paid nothing yet the platform owner had to port something like Playready porting kit three running in the TEE and on-going for the life of the console must insure the routines are not compromised.

In my view for Netflix using HTML5 <video> MSE and Playready DRM, Microsoft maintains a Key server and at every encryption key negotiation before streaming can take place, the Microsoft server is contacted by the Netflix routine running on the platform and Netflix is charged for this. Microsoft would be the best entity to pay the platform owner for the use of the platform TEE and the on-going work to keep it secure.

In Adam's view the platform owner gets nothing when HTML5 <video> MSE is used.

In my view a Bank can use Playready DRM to insure security in a browser and will pay a small fee to Microsoft and the platform owner collected by Microsoft. THis can be as small as pennies for each Playready server access but 80 million Sony platforms over 8 or more years and it adds up.

I've said that the PS3 and PS4 will be getting a FULL OPEN browser after the Playready port is implemented. If you look at W3C projects, Web payments are scheduled for December 2017 as a STANDARD which will then make it easier to write web pages that support a secure web payment system. Until then custom routines following different standards will be used with something like Playready

.

 

[Adam Tyner]

The difference in Adam's and my view is I believe each platform gets a streaming fee which can be calculated in any number of ways but is basically by use

A reminder of what was actually said:

And yes, Microsoft and Sony get a fee for every streamed movie watched on their console.

Nothing about "I believe..." or "I think..." in there. Stating that Microsoft and Sony collect a fee for each individual time someone streams Netflix content is different than "but is basically by use". Prove it. Netflix is a publicly traded company. You have no shortage of financial statements, investor briefings, interviews, etc. to choose from. There will obviously be little-to-no evidence of the lack of a fee, limiting how I can counter, but the existence of a per-stream fee paid by Netflix (and presumably the same would hold true in your view for Hulu, Amazon Video, etc.) to each individual platform holder absolutely would be documented. You may not be able to find the precise fee or the specific arrangements, but that platform holders are paid per-stream as a cost of doing business would be mentioned somewhere. Again, I'm not saying that no money changes hands, but I find it very difficult to believe that Netflix has to pay Microsoft and Sony a per-stream fee.

Yet again, though, I ask why you've steered this thread almost entirely towards streaming when it's called "UHD Blu-ray Game Consoles shipped in 2013".

For what it's worth, here's someone from Hulu responding to this question:



Also:





Golly! Which of our stances are best represented by those statements?

And yes, Microsoft and Sony get a fee for every streamed movie watched on their console.

- or -

which is why I call bullshit on the unsubstantiated claim that Netflix has to pay Microsoft and Sony a fee for each individual stream on their devices. With as many, many devices as there are that stream Netflix, this would surely be reflected in Netflix' financials.

Either:

(1) they don't, at least not by usage (placement/promotion would be one possibility)
(2) there's a blanket fee, although I'm doubtful that's the case, or some general "we want to submit an app" fee

t's a symbiotic relationship. A TV, media-centric set top box, game console, etc. lacking Netflix looks embarrassingly incomplete. Netflix needs platforms for distribution.

I should have clarified that by "usage", I continued to mean "per stream".

 

[Kyzer]

I doubt Netflix pays royalties to every platform that supports netflix. Its probably the other way around. Its in MS and Sonys best interest to make sure Netflix supports their platforms.

 

[SystemUser]

This thread is totally derailed, but didn't Microsoft require that you have XBL Gold (paid) membership to use Netflix streaming originally? Why would MS put Netflix behind the paywall, if Netflix generates revenue per view for Microsoft?

 

[jeff_rigby]

Yet again, though, I ask why you've steered this thread almost entirely towards streaming when it's called "UHD Blu-ray Game Consoles shipped in 2013".

This in response to your question about Microsoft's lack of reason to have HD and UHD Blu-ray on the XB1. It helps make the platform attractive and the center of Living room use. They make money on Services and Streaming fees are part of that.

1) The platform gets the use of HEVC free for non-commercial use if they have a UHD BLu-ray drive. Non-commercial use will be in a browser and 4K Antenna TV. UHD support gets HTML5 in the platform. UHD BLu-ray Digital bridge gets Playready in the platform.
2) In the same Vein, Microsoft does not charge Comcast for the use of the Playready servers for in home Vidipath streaming. This to help get Vidipath accepted which gets more Playready supported platforms in the home.

Playready can be used multiple ways including DRM for ATSC 3 with the Player properly parsing media to support DRM and Flags. This allows a more open Platform. A more open platform with a full browser can be used for commercial purposes protected by Playready which generates fees for Microsoft.


The cite only talks about Per unit shipped where there is more information.

I remember when the Sony servers were down Netflix would not work. This indicates Netfix and Sony were tracking use. Now many services are only available on the primary console when Sony servers go down.

You didn't respond to Netfix from the browser. How does the Platform owner get compensated? With UHD Capable platforms they have HTML5 and with UHD BLu-ray with digital bridge or Vidipath they have Playready. Netfix will require Playready embedded very soon for 4K and some new features. They will drop 1080P support on platforms without Playready embedded (speculation).

 

[jeff_rigby]

NEW - HDHomeRun VIEW on 2016 Samsung TVs (RUI)
Postby nickk » Tue Jun 21, 2016 11:14 pm

HDHomeRun VIEW will now run directly on 2016 Samsung TVs that feature RUI support. For example the Samsung UN40KU7000.

The full HDHomeRun DVR user interface, direct on the TV, no app or set top box required.

RUI = Vidipath and the Samsung TV is the first RUI/Vidipath client while Comcast has by FCC mandate all their Cable TV DVRs as Vidipath servers since June 2015.

Older Samsung smart TVs to 2013 should be getting firmware updates. Sony's 2016 Android TVs should support RUI first then some of the older TVs firmware updated. The New XB1 S should get this and then the Launch XB1, PS4 and PS3 should be firmware updated later. This because the NEW TVs and Game consoles have an OS that was developed to support this while the older platforms need much of the OS changed/firmware updated.

Sony sent a PDF to the FCC DSTAC showing the following:

RVU uses a Picture of the UI (no mention of the DRM used) Satellite TV supports this and the PS3 already supports it.
RUI/Vidipath uses HTML5 for the UI and HTML5 <video> with WMDRM and Playready, The PS4 has this listed in the Intellectual notice.
RUI Cable TV server starts with a Cable TV DVR and then direct from a Cable Modem using Passage and Playready.

Antenna TV ATSC 1 and 3.0 RUI/Vidipath servers should start selling late 2017. LG already has a prototype.

Since UHD Blu-ray uses APIs for HTML5 <video> which are also used for RUI and I believe the HTML5 <video> MSE EME standard was what was holding up both we should see UHD BLu-ray coming to PCs and the Game Consoles soon. The first has been announced as the XB1 "S".

 

[Adam Tyner]

You didn't respond to Netfix from the browser. How does the Platform owner get compensated?

There's no evidence that they do, nor is there anything to suggest that they even would be compensated (beyond perhaps new registrations through that platform, promotions, etc.; certainly not a per-stream fee!).

This exists entirely as an unsubstantiated assertion you're making. I had no trouble finding quotes from a Hulu product manager about the business of online streaming that are at odds with your outlandish claims. Why can't you find any quotes supporting that Microsoft, Sony, TV manufacturers, etc. are paid a fee for each individual stream on services like Netflix?

If I buy a book on my PC and read it in the Kindle app on my iPad, does Apple get paid a fee by Amazon? Your whole line of reasoning is nonsense.

I remember when the Sony servers were down Netflix would not work.

Not on the PS4, if it's set as the current user's primary console. Tons of people were still using Netflix during the big DDoS attacks on PSN.

Also, the YouTube apps require being signed into PSN and Xbox Live. Are Sony and Microsoft collecting a fee for every YouTube video streamed as well?! The PS4 web browser at least at one time required being signed into PSN. Is Sony collecting a fee from every website in existence? I work on digital properties for USA TODAY, and we've never been sent a bill by Sony.

 

[Magwik]

This thread is totally derailed, but didn't Microsoft require that you have XBL Gold (paid) membership to use Netflix streaming originally? Why would MS put Netflix behind the paywall, if Netflix generates revenue per view for Microsoft?

Because they need something to make Gold appealing to people who don't play just multiplayer. Party Chat was also locked behind gold. It was all just a huge fucking scam. Nothing to do with any sort of Netflix fee.

 

[LichtenbergFigures]

So what would be the point of the Xbox One S then Jeff, if the OG Xbox One could do UHD bluray with a FW update?

Seems to me that releasing the XBO-S is actually a pretty smart move from MS. They know they cannot really get back the gamers that moved over to Playstation (at least not until Scorpio arrivs), so instead have taken the opportunity to push out a slimmer model with the UHD/4K capabilities so that at the very least they might get some people whom want a cheap UHD player to take the plunge. I know I'm tempted.

If OG Xbox One already supports UHD bluray then surely MS are just throwing away money with the slim for no reason.

If the original consoles can be FW updated for UHD bluray then surely there would be a big song and dance about it, as it'd be a pretty marketable feature. Yet there's not a peep about such a scenario.

 

[jeff_rigby]

There's no evidence that they do, nor is there anything to suggest that they even would be compensated (beyond perhaps new registrations through that platform, promotions, etc.; certainly not a per-stream fee!).

This exists entirely as an unsubstantiated assertion you're making. I had no trouble finding quotes from a Hulu product manager about the business of online streaming that are at odds with your outlandish claims. Why can't you find any quotes supporting that Microsoft, Sony, TV manufacturers, etc. are paid a fee for each individual stream on services like Netflix?

If I buy a book on my PC and read it in the Kindle app on my iPad, does Apple get paid a fee by Amazon? Your whole line of reasoning is nonsense.

Not on the PS4, if it's set as the current user's primary console. Tons of people were still using Netflix during the big DDoS attacks on PSN.

Also, the YouTube apps require being signed into PSN and Xbox Live. Are Sony and Microsoft collecting a fee for every YouTube video streamed as well?! The PS4 web browser at least at one time required being signed into PSN. Is Sony collecting a fee from every website in existence? I work on digital properties for USA TODAY, and we've never been sent a bill by Sony.

They were tracking the users interest to help target advertising in the near future.

 

[jeff_rigby]

So what would be the point of the Xbox One S then Jeff, if the OG Xbox One could do UHD bluray with a FW update?

Seems to me that releasing the XBO-S is actually a pretty smart move from MS. They know they cannot really get back the gamers that moved over to Playstation (at least not until Scorpio arrivs), so instead have taken the opportunity to push out a slimmer model with the UHD/4K capabilities so that at the very least they might get some people whom want a cheap UHD player to take the plunge. I know I'm tempted.

If OG Xbox One already supports UHD bluray then surely MS are just throwing away money with the slim for no reason.

THE XB1 S is a slim just like the Xbox 360 slim (refresh to manufacture cheaper) except this time they are increasing CPU and GPU performance rather than disabling for compatibility.. HDR support for Video is in the ARM TEE which the XB1 and PS4 launch support. Extra CPU and GPU for games to generate HDR is what the XBOX slim supports over the XB1 launch. Both will have UHD Blu-ray with HDR, both will support ATSC 3.0 with HDR. It's likely the XB1 launch will support HDR with games but that will impact the resolution or FPS while the "S" shouldn't.

If the original consoles can be FW updated for UHD bluray then surely there would be a big song and dance about it, as it'd be a pretty marketable feature. Yet there's not a peep about such a scenario.

We already know the XB1 Slim is more powerful to support HDR in games, what else is there? We know the XB1 Scorpio is going to be much more expensive and that requires the XB1 "S" as a entry level console. For the PS4, the Launch serves that purpose to the PS4 NEO which should still sell for less than Scorpio.

For the same reason we still don't have CD and Sony initially tried to tell we wouldn't have DLNA is I think the reason we haven't heard about the Launch consoles supporting UHD BLu-ray. DLNA is absolutely needed for Vidipath and Sony always had plans to support that but they knew it was 3 years in the future so they tried to NIX support for it.
DLNA/Vidipath will support Push from a handheld or PC which requires it be embedded in Southbridge and always loaded, that's coming with Vidipath (see above post 523).

 

[Gamezone]

Without having to read the entire thread, what's the status on thus subject? Are these consoles able to read UHD discs with an firmware update?

 

[mitchman]

They were tracking the users interest to help target advertising in the near future.

Citation needed.

 

[wesleyshark]

Without having to read the entire thread, what's the status on thus subject? Are these consoles able to read UHD discs with an firmware update?

Depends on who you ask lol

 

[Gamezone]

Depends on who you ask lol

I just don't see any logical reason to hold such features locked behind updates in 2016.

 

[Adam Tyner]

Without having to read the entire thread, what's the status on thus subject? Are these consoles able to read UHD discs with an firmware update?

Phil Spencer and Frank O'Connor from Microsoft say "no" about the launch Xbox One.

Masayasu Ito from Sony says "no" about the launch PS4.

jeff_rigby says they're all lying or don't know what they're talking about.

 

[wesleyshark]

I just don't see any logical reason to hold such features locked behind updates in 2016.

That's because there are no logical reasons to hold back features that aren't there to be unlocked.

 

[Magwik]

Without having to read the entire thread, what's the status on thus subject? Are these consoles able to read UHD discs with an firmware update?

Frank O'Connor from 343 said the current XB1 is not capable of UHD playback in this thread. So it's a no unless you're Jeff.

 

[jeff_rigby]

Citation needed.

Everyone is doing it and a big feature of ATSC 3.0 is the ability to target advertising via the Internet and substitute for the commercial coming in over Antenna TV. When you browse websites, they are doing that now and there are databases kept and that information sold on your interests to target advertising. The Advertiser pays extra for targeted advertising.

There are Sony patents on this. There are patents to also make the commercial fun.

System for converting television commercials into interactive networked video games

Well, we’ve mentioned before that recent patents from top tech companies show significant potential for changes in the way they advertise. From Amazon’s “stalking” patent to Sony’s latest stop-play advertisement design, the race is on to see who can hit the market first. Newest to the lineup is Microsoft with a patent for “targeting advertisements based on emotion.”


The concept itself isn’t entirely new. Companies have tracked our web trails for years, bidding on key search terms and doing anything possible to climb the results ranks. Microsoft, however, is proposing a slightly different approach using the Kinect.

 

[ScherzoPrime]

Did Yoshida ever walk back the 4k Blu Ray talk officially? I know that was something they were talking about Spring/Summer of 2013, but they kind of just... stopped.

I don't think the base PS4 is UHD capavle, fwiw.

 

[Mendrox]

Prove that Sony and Microsoft get paid anything by Netflix for each individual streaming of a TV show or movie.

That's no question that money is in here. Nothing is free.

I just don't see any logical reason to hold such features locked behind updates in 2016.

You don't? Companies fuck with consumers in that regard all the time (cars are my favourite example of this, many cars are tuned by hacking the software nowadays). Everything has a source from him so I believe that both consoles are able to do this, but they just didn't unlock that in regards to the future (Sony = new players to sell, MS = new feature update? now new console)

 

[jeff_rigby]

Frank O'Connor from 343 said the current XB1 is not capable of UHD playback in this thread. So it's a no unless you're Jeff.

1) MS VP Yusuf Mehdi told Forbes there is no hardware restriction at all to the 2013 XB1 supporting 4K and UHD blu-ray
2) Letters to the EU power board published on the Internet April 2016 say the Launch PS4 and XB1 are UHD Capable and the PS3 is HD capable
3) June 2015 Microsoft updated the Launch XB1 OS to support HEVC profile 10
4) Phil Spencer said the XB1 "S" to launch August 2016 will be the first to support UHD BLu-ray. Which many take to mean the Launch consoles can't. I believe it means the XB1 "S" will be the first, the others are getting firmware updates later.
5) Frank O'Conner has said the Launch XB1 can't support UHD or UHD Blu-ray for many reasons. The no UHD support by O'Conner directly contradicts with official documentation stating they are UHD capable and the firmware update supporting HEVC profile 10..
7) Ito, a Sony VP, said the PS4 does not have HEVC and the PS4 drive can'r read a version two disk with three layers. This could be accurate if both require a firmware update which we know HEVC requires as Microsoft did for the Launch XB1.

Adam and others have been distorting and or ignoring facts posted in this thread as they accuse me of doing. Who do you believe...well you can't make that call without actually reading cites and weighing their value.

 

[Nictel]

Maybe the processor is too weak to support 4K but the rest of the codecs and hardware is in there?

Also Netflix paying for every movie streamed is on the same level as Google paying for every search.. It does not happen. It is a strategic partnership, both partjes benefit.

 

[Adam Tyner]

That's no question that money is in here. Nothing is free.

Well, Sony and Microsoft get something out of it too.

I'm not saying that money isn't changing hands in some way (perhaps a blanket fee, rev share for new subscribers directly through these platforms, etc.). I do not believe that Netflix is being charged by platform holders per individual stream from their service. If every platform holder (including smart TVs) were being paid by Netflix per stream, that'd total tens of millions (hundreds of millions?) of dollars. There would be evidence of this in Netflix's financials or investor outreach. As far as I can tell, there is not.

4) Phil Spencer said the XB1 "S" to launch August 2016 will be the first to support UHD BLu-ray. Which many take to mean the Launch consoles can't. I believe it means the XB1 "S" will be the first, the others are getting firmware updates later.

Who's distorting or ignoring facts again? Let's quote Phil Spencer directly:

With upgrading the HDMI technology in the box, we're able to support 4K video streaming. So we said, okay, if we're going to support 4K video streaming, let's also put a UHD Blu-ray drive in there for 4K disc, so you can watch video in 4K.

The one definitive feature that's different is HDR. So, with the increased HDMI capability, it has the ability to support High Dynamic Range.

Those sure do sound like physical changes to me rather than a firmware update.

The no UHD support by O'Conner directly contradicts with official documentation stating they are UHD capable

The "official documentation" (EU power consumption letters with their own random definition of what "UHD-capable" means, and of which UHD capability in and of itself has zero bearing) is vague to the point of being meaningless, and your Yusuf Mehdi quote is from 2013, nearly three years before the launch of UHD BD. You're dismissing Frank O'Connor as not knowing what he's talking about purely, 100% because you don't like what he's saying. If he were agreeing with you, you'd be quoting him relentlessly. You've certainly placed much higher significance on a lot less.

7) Ito, a Sony VP, said the PS4 does not have HEVC and the PS4 drive can'r read a version two disk with three layers. This could be accurate if both require a firmware update which we know HEVC requires as Microsoft did for the Launch XB1.

About HEVC in particular, Ito said that a dedicated HEVC decoder could be incorporated into a revision of the PS4. Why would Sony go to the lengths of including a dedicated HEVC decoder in one version of a PS4, do some sort of firmware rejiggering for earlier versions (if that's even possible at the levels demanded by Ultra HD Blu-ray), and then maintain two distinct methods of HEVC decoding? Why not just say "Neo is UHD; old PS4s are HD"? You've never been able to supply any sort of response to this.

 

[jeff_rigby]

Did Yoshida ever walk back the 4k Blu Ray talk officially? I know that was something they were talking about Spring/Summer of 2013, but they kind of just... stopped.

I don't think the base PS4 is UHD capavle, fwiw.

Yoshida said the PS4 is 4K capable but said nothing about blu-ray. There is less support for the PS4 supporting UHD blu-ray than for the XB1 but Sony makes money off UHD blu-ray sales and Microsoft doesn't.

Sony has a BDA licence for every type of blu-ray player from PC to game console to embedded player and they have a PC UHD licence for a BD-ROM4 spec drive (reads version 2 disks and three layers) which should be a firmware update to a modern BD-ROM3 drive. No licence is apparently required for an Embedded drive (Game Console is considered embedded) Embedded and Game console platform owners manage pairing the drive and all DRM. PCs must make provisions for pairing drives and must follow standards that use APIs from APU and dGPU drivers provided by AMD and Microsoft for the HTML5/OpenGL UI. Microsoft must use AMD drivers to support a Player/DRM in the TEE and provide APIs to a UHD Player for their use.

 

[jeff_rigby]

Well, Sony and Microsoft get something out of it too.

I'm not saying that money isn't changing hands in some way (perhaps a blanket fee, rev share for new subscribers directly through these platforms, etc.). I do not believe that Netflix is being charged by platform holders per individual stream from their service. If every platform holder (including smart TVs) were being paid by Netflix per stream, that'd total tens of millions (hundreds of millions?) of dollars. There would be evidence of this. As far as I can tell, there is not.

Who's distorting or ignoring facts again? Let's quote Phil Spencer directly:

Those sure do sound like physical changes to me rather than a firmware update.

About HEVC in particular, Ito said that a dedicated HEVC decoder could be incorporated into a revision of the PS4. Why would Sony go to the lengths of including a dedicated HEVC decoder in one version of a PS4, do some sort of firmware rejiggering for earlier versions (if that's even possible at the levels demanded by Ultra HD Blu-ray), and then maintain two distinct methods of HEVC decoding? Why not just say "Neo is UHD; old PS4 are HD"? You've never been able to supply any sort of response to this.

You must not understand the technology as you ignore my posts on it.

ALL versions of the XB1, PS4 and AMD APUs use Xtensa DPUs as accelerators for ALL codecs. This is why the AMD codec is called UVD for Universal Video Decoder. HEVC is just a software routine running in the Xtensa DPU. The Xtensa accelerator is also used for vision processing and OpenVX because codec encoding and decoding use many of the same routines and Xtensa DPUs are up to 100X more efficient at this than a CPU.

HEVC (h.265) requires about 1.5X the processing power that h.264 requires. Only if Sony goofed and didn't include a Xtensa DPU powerful enough for HEVC would HEVC not be supported in the Launch PS4. Cadence provided the Xtensa packages for the PS4, XB1 and AMD APUs. They also provide the libraries to design custom DPUs, the FPGAs to test the finished designs on and Codecs to run on them.

Xtensa DPUs can also be used for the UHD blu-ray digital bridge to convert from UHD to HD or the reverse. They can be used to distort the video out for VR goggles.


HDR for UHD media happens in the TEE and does not need special hardware beyond what is already there. HDR for games needs more CPU/GPU but once in the frame buffer it's just video that the HDR routine in the TEE applies to video based on the display feedback. This need to apply HDR to the video to match the display capability is why HDR is not already part of the Video. It will always be separate as long as displays differ in their capabilities. HDMI negotiation passed through a HDMI2 chip to the TEE include the HDCP 2.2 key, resolution and HDR capability of the display. The TEE is just a memory and processor protected area on an ARM bus and in memory that all DRM sensitive routines run on and in.

What Phil or Ito say has to fit with how the hardware works or it's obviously Salesman speak or NDA distortions. Finally Sony has said the 2015 revision PS4 will be sold alongside NEO going forward to the next PS4 refresh (typically 2 years) or 2019 with the PS5. Considering Sony's investment in UHD blu-ray it does not make sense that, at least the 2015 version should support UHD blu-ray. But this is denied as it fragments and makes difficult consumer understanding for what the individual PS4's support.

 

[Adam Tyner]

What Phil or Ito say has to fit with how the hardware works or it's obviously Salesman speak or NDA distortions.

What's the drop-dead date when you'll accept that the launch consoles cannot play back Ultra HD Blu-ray discs if there's not already a firmware update by then? You've said mid-October as an absolute latest before and end of the year elsewhere. Is that still the case?

You must not understand the technology as you ignore my posts on it.

I very much believe that even if it's technically possible, that's no guarantee that Sony and Microsoft will go the lengths necessary to support it. Reserving that capability makes console refreshes more straightforward to market and greatly streamlines engineering efforts. That's why I treat speculation as speculation and fact as fact, and you confuse them as one and the same.

 

[mitch1971]

If ever post needs a TLDR, it's this one. My head hurts.

 

[jeff_rigby]

What's the drop-dead date when you'll accept that the launch consoles cannot play back Ultra HD Blu-ray discs if there's not already a firmware update by then? You've said mid-October as an absolute latest before and end of the year elsewhere. Is that still the case?

Yes. XB1 "S" launching August is unusual. Baring any other reason did they target the 8th month for China?

I very much believe that even if it's technically possible, that's no guarantee that Sony and Microsoft will go the lengths necessary to support it. That's why I treat speculation as speculation and fact as fact, and you confuse them as one and the same.

HEVC profile 10 is the hardest to support feature needed for UHD Media and The Launch XB1 console already supports it. By comparison, HDCP 2.2 is just software that was already available in 2012 on ARM trustzone TEE supported phones and tablets and it can be used unchanged. The only thing needed for the XB1 is a HDMI chip that supports HDMI2 timing and passes through negotiations to the TEE.

Considering the effort made for HEVC a HD blu-ray drive daughter board that also supports version two disks is not more expensive than a HD board that doesn't.

I believe you not understanding what UHD blu-ray requires of the hardware makes you feel it would be difficult to support. The AMD APU in the XB1 and PS4 is much more powerful than needed to support HEVC, the discussions are about a low power HEVC codec that is required to run in the TEE. The DDR3 memory in the XB1 has to have IOMMU/ARM trustzone management and there was no ARM IOMMU or Memory controller for GDDR5 in 2013. Add to that that GDDR5 uses too much power to be used as the memory for Network standby and you have why the XB1 didn't use GDDR5 and why Sony moved the ARM IP out of the PS4 APU to southbridge with it's own DDR3 memory.

 

[mitchman]

Everyone is doing it and a big feature of ATSC 3.0 is the ability to target advertising via the Internet and substitute for the commercial coming in over Antenna TV. When you browse websites, they are doing that now and there are databases kept and that information sold on your interests to target advertising. The Advertiser pays extra for targeted advertising.

There are Sony patents on this. There are patents to also make the commercial fun.

System for converting television commercials into interactive networked video games

That´s not evidence for the claim you made that Sony is tracking sites people visit for ad purposes. Companies patents all kind of things of which most is never used in any product (I know, I have a few with my name on it). You keep making statements as if it´s facts based on very shaky hints here and there.

 

[jeff_rigby]

That´s not evidence for the claim you made that Sony is tracking sites people visit for ad purposes. Companies patents all kind of things of which most is never used in any product (I know, I have a few with my name on it). You keep making statements as if it´s facts based on very shaky hints here and there.

Can you, as a web designer, come up with a better reason for: "The PS4 web browser at least at one time required being signed into PSN."

 

[LichtenbergFigures]

THE XB1 S is a slim just like the Xbox 360 slim (refresh to manufacture cheaper) except this time they are increasing CPU and GPU performance rather than disabling for compatibility.. HDR support for Video is in the ARM TEE which the XB1 and PS4 launch support. Extra CPU and GPU for games to generate HDR is what the XBOX slim supports over the XB1 launch. Both will have UHD Blu-ray with HDR, both will support ATSC 3.0 with HDR. It's likely the XB1 launch will support HDR with games but that will impact the resolution or FPS while the "S" shouldn't.

We already know the XB1 Slim is more powerful to support HDR in games, what else is there? We know the XB1 Scorpio is going to be much more expensive and that requires the XB1 "S" as a entry level console. For the PS4, the Launch serves that purpose to the PS4 NEO which should still sell for less than Scorpio.

For the same reason we still don't have CD and Sony initially tried to tell we wouldn't have DLNA is I think the reason we haven't heard about the Launch consoles supporting UHD BLu-ray. DLNA is absolutely needed for Vidipath and Sony always had plans to support that but they knew it was 3 years in the future so they tried to NIX support for it.
DLNA/Vidipath will support Push from a handheld or PC which requires it be embedded in Southbridge and always loaded, that's coming with Vidipath (see above post 523).

I know XB1 S is a slim refresh, my question is what purpose does it serve if the OG XB1 would support UHD anyway? There simply wouldn't need to bother with a refresh. Obviously, in previous generations slim versions have always happened, but with Neo and Scorpio on the way, if the original consoles could support UHD, it seems like a waste of money to bother with a slim.

If we're continuing down this route of OG consoles being UHD compatible, then the only defining feature of the XB1 S would be its HDR in games support, but only if we're accepting that the OG One wouldn't have HDR.

So what you're saying is Sony and MS have kept quiet about the OG consoles UHD support because they want to you to upgrade to Neo/Scorpio/One S? Why would Sony keep quiet about CD support?

For the record, I'd love for the OG consoles to get this firmware, I'm just not convinced at all.

 

[Shin Johnpv]

round the circle goes
Jeff always ignoring the truth
no Firmware update