JD on EP

Call me back when Adobe will also satify full screen video decompression and HD and not just stamp size resolutions; perfect for YouTube kind of things, crap for all the rest. While you are at it, please also ask to them to provide some sync with the audio, would be cool to watch lips of actors standing still when they are not speaking.

Hi, I haven't heard any word on high-definition decoding yet... it might be possible on some systems, but mostly we're looking at in-browser use, even though fullscreen mode does kick out the browser chrome as it increases pixels size.

The drift of synch between audio and video varies with the length of the content, the codec used, and the playback configuration. If you're constantly seeing bad synch then that might be addressable today.

Some want DRM, some despise it. Some people spam and need spam tools, some don't. People want everything, some good some bad. You don't need to satisfy every 'need' out there, you need to do the 'right thing'.

What does Steve Jobs say:
"The third alternative is to abolish DRMs entirely. ... This is clearly the best alternative for consumers, and Apple would embrace it in a heartbeat."

"DRMs haven’t worked, and may never work, to halt music piracy. Though the big four music companies require that all their music sold online be protected with DRMs, these same music companies continue to sell billions of CDs a year which contain completely unprotected music."

"Convincing them [Universal, Sony BMG, Warner and EMI] to license their music to Apple and others DRM-free will create a truly interoperable music marketplace. Apple will embrace this wholeheartedly."

In summary:
- He states that DRM is not good for consumers.
- He states that DRM does not work.
- He says Apple will get rid of DRM if content owners can be convinced (to do the right thing).
- He says how DRM is not Apple's decision and defends Apple's position from that angle.

[jd sez: If Steve Jobs says individuals should not use encryption on their email, files or hard drives, then I'm not sure I'd buy that.]

> closes out by showing that, ultimately, encryption and other protection mechanisms are a result of interplay between content creator and content consumer.

As I read it, he closes by blaming the DRM virus on european music cartel and the last sentence is "Apple will embrace this [DRM-free music] wholeheartedly."

> the ecology is getting more complex

Don't agree. There were always good guys and bad guys...

Show me a DRM that works, and I promise I'll love it. Until then, DRM is evil.

Best regards,
Burak

I wonder if it will change when internet broadband is accessible from nearly all devices.
I dont mind buying music if it has reasonable prices, but i refuse to buy downloads which might not work in the future because i have copied the file too many times or i cant access internet to validate my user and password.

However, if i had permanent access to internet from all my devices (mobilephone, caraudio, homecomputer, laptop, workcomputer, friends computers etc.) then i imagine a service which allowed me to log on and play (stream) my music anytime from anywhere. Also my playlists would be saved.

This would work from both a consumers viewpoint and creator, as your music is always accessible, and your music is tied up to your account. Noone can play the music from your account at the same time, but you still get to play your playlists at a party, in your car or wherever. I would love if something like this had existed already, as i hate managing mp3 between the diffrent devices already after ripping a CD.

Problems here is ofcourse you would prefer to only log on to one source automaticly from all your devices, and this means your provider needs to have all the music you want. Also, what happends if providers goes bankrupt? You might end up loose your entire recordcollection?

[jd sez: That's true... a subscription model always has to deal with the chance for changing circumstances on either party's side.]

Its easier with movies actually, as movies are usually a kind of thing people watch once. So once HDmovies and series can stream flawlessly on your TV without too much UIhassle i think this will bring the cashflow in the right direction. But with music you need to control the enviroment on a longterm-basis, the customer want to play the same song many times over several years as he swaps devices to play it on.

A related post on how much of a complete failure walmart's service appears to be, at least on the cross-platform front.

http://www.boingboing.net/2007/02/06/walmarts_new_downloa.html

@Endry Deloir, Flash video supports HD and then some. It's simply a matter of the content author outputting a video - FLV - of the appropriate dimensions.

While Flash can display videos at HD dimensions there is certainly an issue of smooth playback. Because the Flash player does not rely on hardware acceleration playing video at large sizes can make a big hit on computer performance. (I've read conflicting reports that Flash 9 does use hardware acceleration so I'm not certain on this score.)

High Definition really shouldn't be used to describe content on a computer. It's similar to the confusion caused by talking about the print resolution of an image in Photoshop.

Check out the wikipedia for more info.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-definition_television
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1080p

Hope this helps.

I'd rather see H.264 used, primarily because I feel FLV is closed and proprietary (not an ISO spec). There are far more encoding, playback options with MPEG-4. Additionally, my testing has shown H.264 encoded files are smaller and show fewer artifacts than FLV.

Want to make me really really happy? Support native H.264 playback inside Flash player.

[jd sez: That's what I said, but maybe not clearly enough... some people want encryption of their videos, others don't care, and others want to implement things themselves by being able to write their own software. People are pushing for "open codec" as well as encryption and rights-management. I don't know yet if all these needs can be reconciled while still enjoying rapid consumer adoption.]

well, as somebody else here has said, give me DRM that works and I wont have any problem with it. The concept that you're trying to pass here is that DRM is bad because Adobe and Flash can't support it, so tell how much worse it is to embrace a video format that is completely closed and undocumented like FLV? You talk about platform neutrality, what about my portable device? Beside the more powerful PDAs is there any mobile that can actually play FLV video? And no, it will never support HD until the Flash player keep insisting to use its own software only rendering engine, as http://www.kaourantin.net/ is also documenting, there is imply not enough memory bandwidth to do it. About Audio sync, that's a much bigger problem than what you're trying to point out: it's ok when used on hand made 3 minutes long home videos, certainly it is a huge problem with a DVD quality movie. While I also don't think that WMV was the best solution, certainly FLV wasn't a better one either.

Interestingly if Jobs is now so anti DRM he does not follow through the logic for Disney movies ? Or is it more the threat of anti-trust action from the EU ?

[jd sez: You're right... people have pointed out that Jobs is talking about music here, but he doesn't address his businesses in movies and books. It almost feels like a tactical op/ed rather than a strategic one.]

In response to Endry Deloir's comments:

Flash isn't a media player. Nor do I think it should become one. If someone wants to build an Apollo-based video player/library app and sell content encoded in a high resolution flv/On2, hey go at it, have fun.

YouTube was nothing special, someone just did the obvious thing and made a player that reads a query string then threw a database behind it. They made millions.

Flash is a lot of things, but most of all it's what developers choose to make of it on their own.

If you want to sell hi-def protected video for consumer use, you've got to choose the right solution. Maybe you can build one in Flash, maybe one is out there.

But I doubt Adobe is going to nudge into the 'Media Player' market against Apple and MS, that's not what their business is about.

The claim that .flv is completely closed is not accurate... nor is the statement that synch is impossible in .flv.

Back to DRM... the intent of encrypting email is totally different than DRMing music. In the case of music, you have the content owner who is trying to lock out non-paying consumers. Naturally, because it's inherently flawed in many ways, it does little but cause headaches for the PAYING customers. Encrypting email intends to take a two ended connection and, though a key, encrypted the data while it travels over the wire. The key there is that there's only two ends and they can share the key. In the case of distributing music, there's one producer and many many receivers... all using some funky scheme to enter their key.

I understand the desire for content owners to protect themselves from getting ripped off. They should just either spend their resources on other things or wait for a DRM that works.

Yay for Steve Jobs (never thought I'd say that!).