MicroSoft wants Java out of Blu-Ray
 

I saw this article which reinforces the assertion I've been making that MS just wants Java out at all costs.

From Video Business

Didn't realize that Blu-Ray wouldn't natively play in Vista. Good thing Microsoft is returning to form as the evil empire.

Another reason Blu-ray needs to win the Race in "All" it's glory. I do not want to reboot my HD box/TV/Sound System couple of Hours.

But, the are not a "Monopoly" (wink, wink...)

Technically, HD-DVD won't either. It will be similar to DVDs, where Windows will recognize that a HD-DVD disc has been entered, but won't be able to play movies off it.

Of course, if you buy a HD-DVD or Blu-Ray PC drive, you already you'll have to install the software off the disc anyway. I'm not exactly sure why this extra step is being so highly toughted by Microsoft. The only people who would have to worry about it, are those who upgrade or build computers, and those people all know how to install drivers.

If they were, they wouldn't need to be doing anything. The fact that they are trying unsucessfully to do something seems to bolster the argument that they are not a monopoly.

Well it's been a while, but it was my understanding that XP had native support for DVDs and that they played with WMP 10, although I could be wrong on that.

You're right it's not really a big deal anyway because you have to buy a player and that comes with software, but native support is always better than having to deal with 3rd party codecs.

I think you have this wrong.

Let's back up first: With current DVD, when you purchase a player, part of the cost of that player is a license to decode the disc. In WindowsXP, until you install an application to decode DVDs, you can't play DVD video. This license is also part of the purchase price of the XBox DVD playback kit. Sony bundled the license with the PS2.

The new Windows Vista OS will support HD-DVD naitively, which means you won't need to install an application just to watch movies. Of course, Windows Media Player is hardly the best playback software there is so there will probably be more fully featured software made.

With BR, since the tech isn't supported naitively, you will have to provide Windows Vista a driver to decode the discs.

WindowsXP will surely require such a system for BR and HD discs as well, unless they release a new version or update to WMP to allow naitive playback of HD-DVD.

It is a driver but not a driver like a video or sound driver. I'd imagine if these drives are ATAPI, Windows will still be able to access the files on the discs even without any special software.

What does this mean? When you buy Windows Vista, a part of the purchase price of the software goes to the HD-DVD patent owners. When you purchase that BR drive, in theory it will be a bit more expensive to cover the cost of the license.

Jim,

That would be interesting if Microsoft rubbed out some more companies by including HD-DVD movie playback. I guess its the least we can expect after they provide a firewall and virus protection.

Mordred,

XP does not playback DVDs without purchase of a plug-in.

Quote:
Jim,

That would be interesting if Microsoft rubbed out some more companies by including HD-DVD movie playback. I guess its the least we can expect after they provide a firewall and virus protection.

Mordred,

XP does not playback DVDs without purchase of a plug-in.

XP will play DVDs with Windows Media Player 10. The plug-in is already in WMP 10 so there is no need to install one.

Monopolies aren't monopolies of everything. The power company, for example, has little power outside of its area. Since HD discs will be used by PCs, however, MS has considerable pull.

Microsoft has a monopoly on the desktop OS market. Since every piece of software depends on the OS, having the full support of the OS (by drivers built-in or other infrastructure build-in) it is a huge advantage. That is how MS crushed Netscape-- by bundling a free internet browser (IE) into the OS that the user didn't have to download or install it. Since it was written and tested along with the OS, it always was ahead of Netscape because it was ready as soon as Windows was released. Big advantage. MS has a history of this type of abuse.

The examples go on and on, but one more court conviction for fun. Remember when MS was convicted because they threatened computer manufacturers (such as Dell)? MS told Dell that if Dell offered the option that their computers ship pre-installed with a Linux OS then MS was going to charge full price for Windows and MS Office software for Dell PCs-- doubling the price of some models and making it impossible to compete with other PC manufacturers.

These are reasons why I hope that whatever format MS supports fails.

Well put.

I was not aware of that. Have any links ?

Here is a lot of information from the US Dept. Of Justice:

Of course, I disagree with the "not tending to prove monopoly power" part. At the time there was a lot of pressure for the DOJ not to break MS into an OS division and an "all other software" division.

This was just one example I remembered off the top of my head. There are many others.

I think that's why I was confused. Thanks.