Vista will not support Blu-ray or HD DVD playback out-of-the-box or on most PCs
By Thomas Ricker 
posted August 24th 2006 9:21AM
posted August 24th 2006 9:21AM
For all the noise Microsoft made about Vista supporting HD DVD you'd think we'd be able to play those studio-released, HD DVD titles right out of the box right? Not so childrens, at least not in Australia according to c|net. See, Mark O'Shea, a Microsoft OEM systems engineer (not exactly an executive level position, mind you) sez that version 11 of the Windows Media Player shipping with Vista will not support playback for commercial Blu-ray or HD DVD films. By this, we assume he means that WMP11 won't include the ability to decrypt AACS encoded titles. For that you'll have to use third party software like PowerDVD from Cyberlink or Intervideo's WinDVD BD, neither of which is currently available for retail but may (or may not) ship with your BD or HD DVD drive. Then it'll all work, right? Maybe, but if your media rig is pumping video over DVI or HDMI then you'd better be sure your graphics card, driver, and display all support HDCP (not just HDCP ready) if you expect to decrypt that High Definition digital signal. All assuming your CPU or GPU has the muscle to decode the HD compression codecs to begin with. Heads' spinning yet? Sure, so go ahead, lie down for a bit, we'll understand why you put off your next-gen optical PC drive purchase while the DRM gets a bit, say, more consumer friendly. Update: Oh my. Microsoft just announced that they won't support high definition playback on 32-bit versions of Vista, at all! In other words, unless you've recently upgraded to a Core 2 Duo or similar 64-bit processor, you won't be using that new Blu-ray or HD DVD drive to playback studio films when you upgrade to Vista. If that's your gig then you'd best get saving for a whole new rig, son, cause your old digs won't cut it.
[Thanks, ash]
Read -- no 32-bit support
Read -- WMP11
I think you're forgetting that Windows XP didn't support DVD video out-of-the-box either. The format's doing just fine.
true but at least I could watch a dvd movie without any issues at my good old PII 350MHz running Windows 98 after installing PowerDVD :P
no surprises there then.. any more features to lose on the vista diet... seems to be a very effective diet
Xp didnt support DVD. But, it didnt require ACSS and HDCP in hardware. Not to mention HDMI video out. Its much more convoluted to the average consumer, they are much better off getting an all in one system and leave the non-oem add on drives for the builders, HD geeks, and people who need the capacity for backup or whatever.
This has nothing to do with Vista losing yet another feature. See, for all the noise Engadget is making about MS supposedly promising HD-DVD support out of the vista box - the statements referred to say nothing of the kind. They just say that they like HD-DVD better. Actually, Ballmer himself said that Vista probably would not support HD-DVD initially but would sometime after launch:
http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/News/Details.aspx?NewsId=15568
And here comes VLC chance to get even better
You know this has to do with licensing fees associated with the decoder. XP didn't support DVD out of the box for a number of reasons, but I'm sure one of them was the fees associated with licensing CSS. No problem. It just created a market for DVD software with mpeg2 decoders.
Also, DVD was already an popular format before XP came out. It didn't NEED Microsoft's help.
It could be considered anti competitive as People wouldn't need to buy/download 3'rd party software if they got HD DVD and Blue Ray support out of the box.
OMG. Michael Dell was right again: the story with DVD support is repeating itself - now with hi-def formats.
We still wait for M$Windows to learn to burn DVDs. That's the "exclusive" functionality M$ "reserved" for Vista. God help them to deliver.
they certainly seem to want to make this next gen a pain in the ass, huh?
yuck. I want HD, but i dont want all this nonsense of "plugging the analogue hole" shit that's just going to lead to crippled devices and crappy markets.
BOOO crappy content owners.
Interesting article. Surprises after surprises rolling out for Vista before the final release.
Horray Beer!
The minute MS puts in HD-DVD/Blu-Ray support is the minute PowerDVD, etc.. start suing and claimin monoply.
This whole high definition "roll-out" has been an unmitigated fiasco. First, there is the format war, which pretty much guarantees that widespread adoption won't happen any time soon. Second is the HDCP spectre looming over everything which makes DVI/HDMI a necessity over almost universal component video.
Now we have the fact that while windows XP can handle high definition and record it (!!), from non encrypted QAM or Over the Air sources, that if we transfer this SAME content to a silver platter, all of a sudden we need a whole new world of compliance:
HDCP end-to-end AND a 64 bit version of Windows!
This is nuts!! So much for the PC being ANY sort of platform for high definition in the future with this.
HD content will simply be relegated to that High Definition cable company DVR we all rent and secretly loathe.
Wanax is 100% correct.
This is likely due to licensing, true, but it's also Microsoft conceeding a market to avoid antitrust issues. They could give HD support for free, pushing other vendors out of business and opening up lawsuits, or they can let others have a feature that doesn't really sell the OS.
I don't see the problem. When you're buying a HD-DVD or Blu-Ray-driver in the future, it will come with an install CD with a videoplayer and drivers. Problem solved. This makes perfect sense. If MS would include all the necessary Blu-Ray software in Vista to play movies right out of the box, they'd have to increase the reail price because those licenses aren't free. MS probably thinks such a price hike to cater for a _minute_ number HD-DVD or Blu-Ray owners is not a smart thing to do, and I think they're absolutely right.
Nothing much has changed since XP...XP didn't come with a DVD decoder either. No biggee. Anyone that purchases a drive will have software that comes with it.
You are all missing the point, this is all about the content companies forcing microsoft to close down the system so that some program can't get around the DRM.
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/24/1325214
I have a 3.2 GHz P4 that is 32-bit, and my laptop has a 1.73 GHz P-M which is 32-bit as well. Neither of these has any trouble decoding and outputting HD video in any codec, INCLUDING the most computationally intensive codec out there, h264/x264 (the lappy is limited to 720p, but the desktop can do full 1080p).
Therefore, this is clearly an artificial limitation being imposed by M$. It stinks of Skype's 10-way calling that was confined to dual-core Intel procs for absolutely no reason because Intel gave Skype loads of cash to break their product for everybody but their newest product. That limit was hacked out of the program. I can only hope this happens with Vista.
Bottom line: there are plenty of perfectly HD capable processors out there that are 32-bit. While 64-bit procs might perform better, the 32-bit ones decode HD just fine. I, for one, will not be buying a new processor (or a new monitor, or a new video card) to replace the components that ALREADY ARE PERFECTLY HD CAPABLE in my PC. I cannot believe I am the only consumer to feel this way.
If this asinine limit is not hacked out of Vista, I will never upgrade. Why would anyone willingly break their computer's abilities and force themselves into almost $1000 of upgrades* by buying Vista?
*I estimate the cost of a good HDCP-equipped monitor to be ~$500, a HDMI-ready midrange video card (doesn't really exist yet) to be ~$250, and a new 64-bit proc to run ~$230, for a total of $980. Plus whatever Vista will cost.
You will be able to use non encrypted HD DVD content. The only thing it messes with is the commercial encrypted versions. Players will be availalbe like PowerDVD etc. But to watch the Encrypted HD DVD you will have to have a whole HDCP system including a special new HDCP Monitor. It checks the entire throughput for the HDCP compatability from Video CArd to Monitor. Locked from stem to stern.
@ d3:
64-bit processors have no more security embedded within them than their 32-bit brethren. Therefore, requiring 64-bit processors for this purpose has nothing to do with DRM and everything to do with arbitrary limitation to force consumers to upgrade to a newer product that is unnecessary for the job.
It's pretty much a moot point anyway: DRM is inherantly insecure due to the simple fact that you must have both the encrypted content and the encryption key in your posession. CSS was cracked, region coding was cracked (which is interesting, seeing as this was implemented on a driver level), HDCP has been cracked, and any copy protection on the PC will be cracked. I'm personally rooting for Blu-ray because it has a greater storage capacity, both theoretical limit and actual. Plus HD-DVD hasn't delivered on their 'cheaper than blu-ray media' promise yet.
@ bill:
We've all heard that before, but encryption has nothing to do witht the processor. Whether it be a 32-bit or a 64-bit proc does not matter to the "encrypted path" due to the aforementioned lack of additional security in 64-bit implementations.
For HDCP monitors and video cards, your statement is valid. For processors it is not. Make no mistake, this IS an arbitrary limit.
I'm sitting out HD-DVD anyway, except for new titles. I will not buy stuff I aleady have again- because HD-DVD will be gone much quicker than DVD, when digital delivery finally becomes standard, and then they'll charge you again.
Josh:
I don't know if I agree. First off, I think it is deliciously ironic that in order to support this ridiculous scheme, they have to "fall on the sword" and claim that 32bit windows has security flaws due to it's ability to run unsigned drivers. Flaws that might extend way beyond the ability for "malware" to subvert DRM. Do you think that they would resort to this just to help sell hardware? I have to belive they would sell more copies of Vista without this 64bit limitation.
I still think this is all about Microsoft getting in bed with the content industry so that they can start monopolizing the TV room.
I just hate how M$ is forcing everyone to get a new PC to run vista to make up for their shortcomings
Cripes almighty. Pretty soon they won't even be able to call this Windows XP Service Pack 3 anymore.
It may be me, but is the future looing more and more like A Scanner Darkly...
Only said becuase I read this article.
i mean this article
http://www.engadget.com/2005/10/17/bill-gates-sez-blu-ray-is-very-anti-consumer/
Pretty soon we will become slaves to giant corporations. You want to be able to play this disc? Oh well you'll have to sell your liver and your left pinky first. Then we'll negotiate a deal and perhaps if we still support that standard we'll let you buy it but you can't mess around with it. Sjeez ... where is this going to huh. Suddenly downloading H264 movies seems like a perfect solution to all of this extortion.
64 Bit CPU owner here so doesn't bother me. Most people running a 32 Bit system are primed for an update anyway and the ones who don't even know what it means are happy with their systems even if they have windows me on it. If you are upset by this decision than you are either a M$ hater, cheap and don't want to upgrade, or just enjoy complaining. Its not that big of a deal. It just gives the industry another reason to push 64 bit CPUs which is good. PC market takes forever for full adoption of new tech.
"Pretty soon we will become slaves to giant corporations"
Whatchu mean "Pretty soon"? Do you have a job? Are they bigger than the street its on or the town its in?
Then you're already a slave to a giant corporation.
"unless you've recently upgraded to a Core 2 Duo or similar 64-bit processor"
I think a lot of people are under the impression that the Core2 is the first 64-bit processor from intel. That is very much not true. If you've bought a new Intel based PC in the past 2 years, you most likely already have a 64-bit capable system (obviously anyone with an Athlon64 is fine too).
Every Pentium D processor supports EM64T (Intel's version of x86-64, aka AMD64). On top of that, every Pentium4 600 series processor, and every Pentium4 500 series that ends in "1" (if your processor doesn't have a "processor number", you're out of luck).
Check the spec charts here: http://www.intel.com/products/processor/pentium4/specs.htm
http://www.intel.com/products/processor/pentium_d/specs.htm
If you have a processor that has a tick in the EM64T column, you're good to go with Vista x64 Edition.
I really don't care. I think teh only people who do are the ones who just bought a new 32bit Core Duo system.
The way I figure it, HDDVD or Blu-Ray palyers aren't going to become mainstream in desktops and laptops for at least another 2-3 years simpley because of their current price and lack of market saturation. But in a few years all systems will support 64bit and alot of people will be upgrading/buying their machines by then anyway. Possibly even a lot of people who just bought new machines this year. And anyone who is buying a new machine right now shouldn't be buying anything less then a 64bit system, otherwise they're just asking for incompatibility in the future.
So I don't really see what the big deal is.
Especially those poeple who are saying "I'll never upgrade" don't kid yourself, of course you will, it's just a matter of time. In few years you're going to want something new to play with and you'll need a new machine anyway, so unless you switch to Mac or Linux...
Doesn't bother me much, I use Fedora Core Linux and my 1Ghz Pentium III works just fine for DVDs and I'm sure it'll do fine for BD-DVD and HD-DVD. I'm so glad I finally abandoned Windows a little over 6 months ago.
Straight from Microsoft's Website: http://blogs.technet.com/windowsvista/archive/2006/08/24/450081.aspx
Clarifying Windows Vista Support of Protected HD Content in 32-bit Systems posted Thursday, August 24, 2006 4:09 PM by nwhite
The community is buzzing with reactions to APC Magazine’s article regarding playback of protected High Definition content in 32-bit versions of Windows Vista. However, the information shared was incorrect and the reactions pervading the community are thus (understandably) ill-informed.
The real deal is that no version of Windows Vista will make a determination as to whether any given piece of content should play back or not. The individual ISV providing the playback solutions will choose whether the playback environment, including environments that use 32-bit processors, meet the performance requirements for playback of protected High Definition content.
So what does that mean?
It is up to a particular ISV to determine which environments are suitable for their playback solutions. Not Windows Vista, and not Microsoft. To help ISVs make the playback determination, the OS will expose a list of any unsigned drivers on the system; nevertheless, it remains up to the ISV to determine whether playback will be enabled.
In other words, nothing has changed with respect to Microsoft’s policies or development plans for protected HD playback -- which we addressed at WinHEC this past May -- and nothing has been cut from Windows Vista in this regard.