Are the afflicted players capable of receiving online updates, or will the owners have to wait for a disc from the manufacturer?

No ethernet ports on the Samsung, AFAIK.



A better question:

If that's the case that the Java is the issue, does this confirm what has been long rumored? That when discs come out authored in profile 1.1/2.0 that existing players won't be able to play them AT ALL, even the main feature?

There has been response and one at that providing a positive solution. This being said, I don't have much time to respond in detail to your question right now as I have to leave in a few minutes but will do so when I come back tonight.

I would like to remind you however that part of the reason Fox delayed a few of their titles is precisely so they could ensure compatibility with Java not BD+ as some claim. This spurred a wave of speculations as to Fox's commitment, etc which are purely in the realm of science fiction.

The info posted by the insiders indicates that the issue will be resolved, shortly I assume.

As to your latest inquiry, the answer is no, it does not confirm anything regarding profile 1.1 and 2.0. authored discs. The speculation that these won't play AT ALL is just that...a speculation unsupported by any factual information. Everything I have read and personally inquired about at Blu-Ray.com indicates that such discs will be playable on the current crop of 1.0 players sans some of the interactive features. It is also to be noted that some of the available players will be upgraded to fully support the new format requirements (PS3, etc.).

So for now I would leave the speculations out and focus on the fact that only two brands of players have been affected by Java's inclusion and BOTH OF THOSE will be compatible via firmware upgrade. As to the time frame I will monitor the insiders forums and will report shortly when the availability is announced.

Pro-B

I think this issue is relevant to the 1.1/2.0 rumor. Given that the very title of this thread is largely speculation, I think "speculating" a bit on this situation is warranted.

Titles authored for 1.1 or 2.0 would no doubt use different code. If there is a problem this early with titles using a little bit of different code, it's reasonable to think that a MAJOR upgrade like that would cause similar issues. It was my understanding that EVERY BD player was supposed to have the full java programming environment "on board" so that it can run the software? It seems that FOX has used a slightly different (upgraded?) version of this software to author these titles - hence, the problem.

Now, I would also speculate that the 1.1 requirement for the 256MB of persistent storage is directly related to this programming environment. In order to support the advanced BDJ environment, more storage is needed to house the base environment.

As for the firmware, time will tell how long (and if?) they'll be able to issue firmware to fix it. Maybe this time, but I sincerely doubt that 1.1/2.0 will be able to be "firmwared".

We will see.

Can anyone elaborate as to the "etc." players? Because if I could definitively identify which players can be upgraded in the future, I would be willing to make a purchase sooner rather than later.

There is no etc. at this point. In fact, not even the PS3 is actually confirmed to be able to support 1.1 or 2.0 through upgrades. We just assume it will because a) the PS3 is Sony's Trojan Horse to win the war, so they better make damn sure it works with later profiles, b) it has all the necessary components to work with the later profiles (internet connection, more than a gig of space, etc.), and c) the cell processor can handle two separate video streams, which I believe is another requirement of 2.0. I certainly hope Sony DOES upgrade the PS3, because I own one and would be very, very angry if they didn't.

as far as i know, there are no players currently on the market that have been absolutely confirmed for profile 2.0 compatibility. even with the PS3, there has been no official statement on whether it will be upgraded, but it does have all of the hardware to meet the spec (unlike many standalones), so its probably safe to assume that it will be 2.0 compliant someday.

personally, i'm holding off on getting a blu-ray player at least until all of this profile stuff is sorted out.

Remember when Panasonic used to make DIVX players?

Yeah, they know how to pick winners.

The difference here is that we are feeding our speculations based off of a published article. To the best of my knowledge there isn’t an official article claiming that the current crop of BD players will not be upgradeable. If such article/text exists I would love to read it, comment on its context, and discuss the credibility of the source that produced it.

You are assuming that there is a problem (and I understand your argumentation). My perception is that until the firmware is released and proven ineffective such does not exist. I would wait for the upgrade and comment later.

I’ve read on different forums some quite strange accusations which flat out announced that Fox had a great percentage of their newly-announced titles fabricated. The reality is that Fox were expecting ALL firmware upgrades to become active (obviously different manufacturers however work on different time tables). I don’t know what is the source of your “understanding” but I clearly believe that the new Java “issue”, not BD+ issue, is only an “issue” because two of the upgrades were not released on time (reading through the insiders thread points precisely to such scenario).

I am sorry I can not comment on this bit. I have not read any recent info that I could share with you.
You could save this post and quote me later: 1.0 players will NOT be obsolete as some like to suggest. Portions of the interactive features that will be using the new profiles will not be accessible but the main feature will be perfectly, without a doubt, playable on these machines.


Wrong, Paidgeek has stated that the PS3 will be compatible with the new formats. As far as I am concerned this is as official of a statement that you would get before the actual firmware upgrades become a reality. I take this gentleman’s words on the issue to be, simply put, an “indisputable fact”.

Pro-B

Pro-B, you should have read the rest of my post, where I laid out a case for why the PS3 would be the most likely player to be compatible. I was not denigrating the system, but there has been no official word. Paidgeek is an insider who works for Sony, I completely agree. His saying that the PS3 will be compatible puts my mind at ease, but I don't take his word as "undisputable fact." He's a very good source, though.

Yet in the Dracula thread, you bashed me for treating Paidgeek's words as an official Sony statement.

In the end all of this technical mumbo jumbo means absolutely nothing as HD is pretty well established... at least established enough not to fall by right after the holidays. What the heck kind of a statement is that... that the format war would be over in three months.

It should also be noted that Paidgeek works for Sony Picture Home Entertainment. He does not work for Sony Computer, which is the division that makes the PS3.

He's a software guy, not a hardware guy. Regarding PS3 upgrades, all he has done is relay information that has been passed down to him. He has not made any promises that these upgrades will happen.

[QUOTE=Josh Z]It should also be noted that Paidgeek works for Sony Picture Home Entertainment. He does not work for Sony Computer, which is the division that makes the PS3.

He's a software guy, not a hardware guy. Regarding PS3 upgrades, all he has done is relay information that has been passed down to him. He has not made any promises that these upgrades will happen.QUOTE]

Well, wouldn't it be the software and not the hardware that would fix these problems if they were to pop up on the PS3?

I did not bash you! I attempted to point out to you the fact that you don't seem to differentiate his words from an official company statement. You regard them as equal. The only reason we were even arguing the issue in the afore-mentioned thread is because he was willing to comment on it (elsewhere).

This being said, I am certain you do not grasp the difference between the two. An official statement disproving some of the reviewers' claims would de facto confirm that Zoetrope was at fault to begin with (far and away from Sony who you insist must feel responsible). All recent developments point precisely to the opposite fact: they appear happy with the new presentation.

Pro-B

That's not the kind of software Josh means.

I'm referring to the software of movies on disc. Paidgeek works for the movie division of Sony, not the video game division. He can relay information that the PS3 team will release to him, but he doesn't work on the product himself.

Sony is a big company with many independent divisions.

That's a funny article.

I guess if a company is 100% committed to one system, it would be 'stupid' for that company to support both systems. As for everyone else though, having a player that can support either system is the only sure bet.