or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Blu-ray vs. DVD/VOD (2009)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Blu-ray vs. DVD/VOD (2009) - Page 3

post #81 of 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

The reality is that you can download HD content today. The amount of content and number of distributors is growing everyday.

While I agree the quality of Blu-ray is better in every way. Most people are not knowledgeable enough to tell the difference. Convenience is always going to loose out to better quality.


You really need to go back over some of the previous posts on this subject in the other HDDVD vs BluRay thread. There are so many issues that will put a road block in the way of downloading as a purchase item of HD ( as opposed to rental or only being able to watch it on your computer ) that it can't compete. Downloading is great for rental or a service like Apple TV. If you really want to own the movie and have the flexability you have today with physical media ( portability etc. ) it comes up short. Then there's the Studios and how they feel about you downloading HD content and transfering it to another media like a burnable DVD or flash drive so you can have said portability. Then there's bandwidth issue as in limited.

But I've been over this many times and don't feel like doing it again for you.

Try here for the last go around.

http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...=80874&page=66

Try some of the previous pages also and you'll see I have been over this quite a bit already. I think downloading content would be great but because of these issues we're just not there yet. If it was the main way people purchased HD content can you imagine the way the internet would be clogged by everyone wanting the newest big release on the day of release? Trust me these services you speak of don't do the volume that stores do selling just a DVD.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #82 of 669
I see their has already been discussion about it. But you talk about it as though HD downloads is a future concept. Its available right now.

Their are some challenges that limit media downloads from over taking physical media. But those challenges will easily be over come. Bandwidth speeds will improve, codecs will deliver better quality at lower bitrates. These improvements have already made a difference as 720P downloading wasn't possible a few years ago.

Video downloading hasn't over come physical DVD's yet. Looking at how audio downloading has over come physical CD's. Video is more than likely to follow.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

You really need to go back over some of the previous posts on this subject in the other HDDVD vs BluRay thread. There are so many issues that will put a road block in the way of downloading as a purchase item of HD ( as opposed to rental or only being able to watch it on your computer ) that it can't compete. Downloading is great for rental or a service like Apple TV. If you really want to own the movie and have the flexability you have today with physical media ( portability etc. ) it comes up short. Then there's the Studios and how they feel about you downloading HD content and transfering it to another media like a burnable DVD or flash drive so you can have said portability. Then there's bandwidth issue as in limited.

But I've been over this many times and don't feel like doing it again for you.


Try some of the previous pages also and you'll see I have been over this quite a bit already. I think downloading content would be great but because of these issues we're just not there yet. If it was the main way people purchased HD content can you imagine the way the internet would be clogged by everyone wanting the newest big release on the day of release? Trust me these services you speak of don't do the volume that stores do selling just a DVD.
post #83 of 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Ya know, I remember folks saying the same about DVD in comparison to LD.

They still do. Just need to lurk in the right forum.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Somehow I don't think that Jackson is going to allow a shoddy transfer on LOTR blu-ray do you? Over time the average DVD release became better. Same will happen to Blu-ray.

I have seen 1080i version of LOTR series. It's better than DVD, but I wouldn't consider the PQ being near HD demo material. I hope the BD release would come from a much better/improved master and transfer. There are much room for improvements.
always a newbie
Reply
always a newbie
Reply
post #84 of 669
Today, everyone who walks out of a store with a flatscreen television has invariably boughten themselves an HDTV, whether they intend to use it to it's fullest potential or just go home to hook it up to their SD satellite box with the composite cable they have left over from their dead VCR. This is because HDTV's reached a price point where manufacturers simply stopped producing SD-only televisions.

Likewise, eventually Blu-Ray players will be the only DVD player you can buy in a store (they are backwards compatible after all), and people will end up with the players in their home whether they intend to use them or not. Then, Blu-Ray discs can overtake regular DVDs on store shelves, and people will be able to buy and play them whether their television shows the improved picture or not.

For those who believe Blu-Ray need not exist because the era of HD streaming is upon us, let me remind you that the internet has been fast enough for digital-only distribution of music — a market that's thrived — for almost a decade, and yet I can still buy music on a real CD if I so choose. That means even after the internet and the studios are ready for honest-to-goodness digital HD sales, physical media will still have at least ten years of life in it. Since we're still 5-10 years away from honest-to-goodness digital HD media, Blu-Ray's going to be around for a long damn time.
post #85 of 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

I see their has already been discussion about it. But you talk about it as though HD downloads is a future concept. Its available right now.

Their are some challenges that limit media downloads from over taking physical media. But those challenges will easily be over come. Bandwidth speeds will improve, codecs will deliver better quality at lower bitrates. These improvements have already made a difference as 720P downloading wasn't possible a few years ago.

Video downloading hasn't over come physical DVD's yet. Looking at how audio downloading has over come physical CD's. Video is more than likely to follow.

Ok this is just one item about the current short comings of downloading.

Can you " right now " legally download an HD movie, transfer it to another media ( portable ) so you can watch it over at your friend's house on his brand new 80" flatscreen ( or even loan it to him/her ) like you could with a DVD or BluRay? Your friend would also need the same service ( assuming you've already figured out the unviability of the transfer issue but let's just say you get it over there somehow ) to watch it on said TV ( like Apple TV ). You talked about flexability. How do you think the movie studios would view said transfer so you could get the video over to your friend's house? Are they likely to change that position in the future? If so what concrete evidnce do you have?

It's good for a renting concept but what about owning the video? Sales of DVD/BluRay already dwarf renting in case you were wondering.

This is just one item. We haven't even talked about how ComCast is currently putting a cap on monthly downloads and it's way below what it would take for everyone doing HD commerce on the web like you're suggesting. The reason? The web is already getting full with the traffic it has now. More means alot more fiber optic laid. You do realize Broadband is still not availiable in all areas?

Also everytime they figure out a new codec they can pump more through the same pipe but then it get's compressed and yes I can tell the difference. If you undestand how that works there's only so much you can currently do before the quality suffers. I can really tell the difference between an HD movie delivered by ComCast and a BluRay disc. The same goes for something downloaded off of the web. Bigtime.

As I've tried to tell others music and video are completely different worlds when talking about downloading. Because of the size and because of the studios ( think alot more powerful and controlling than the RIAA ) that govern their nature.

I've gone over this with others before many times now.

Like I've said before think like maybe 10 years before it has a chance to take over in the way your suggesting.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #86 of 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Can you " right now " legally download an HD movie, transfer it to another media ( portable ) so you can watch it over at your friend's house on his brand new 80" flatscreen ( or even loan it to him/her ) like you could with a DVD or BluRay?

Unless you have a portable BR player we don't know about or an implementation of managed copy that no one else has you can't with BR either.

Quote:
Your friend would also need the same service ( assuming you've already figured out the unviability of the transfer issue but let's just say you get it over there somehow ) to watch it on said TV ( like Apple TV ). You talked about flexability. How do you think the movie studios would view said transfer so you could get the video over to your friend's house? Are they likely to change that position in the future? If so what concrete evidnce do you have?

It's a question of price isn't it? If a HD rental is $4.99 then even for a bargin bin $15 BRD you need to watch the title 3 times to break even. So if say you watched Iron Man at home and wanted to watch it again at your buddy's house, then you're out $10...not $25.99 for the blu-ray disc.

Quote:
It's good for a renting concept but what about owning the video? Sales of DVD/BluRay already dwarf renting in case you were wondering.

When does ownership make sense? Mostly kid titles. If I had to pay for each time my kids watched various Disney flicks I'd be flat broke.

Quote:
This is just one item. We haven't even talked about how ComCast is currently putting a cap on monthly downloads and it's way below what it would take for everyone doing HD commerce on the web like you're suggesting. The reason? The web is already getting full with the traffic it has now. More means alot more fiber optic laid. You do realize Broadband is still not availiable in all areas?

250GB. That's 10 movies at Blu-Ray bit rates. Not very much. On the other hand far more movies at cable bit rates. Here's the deal though...Fios and cable going to the local Verizon or Comcast server farms aren't as big a problem as aggregating all that traffic out. VOD to Comcast VOD services doesn't count against your caps. So you're back to the $5-$6 rental costs vs $20+ purchase costs.

Quote:
Also everytime they figure out a new codec they can pump more through the same pipe but then it get's compressed and yes I can tell the difference. If you undestand how that works there's only so much you can currently do before the quality suffers. I can really tell the difference between an HD movie delivered by ComCast and a BluRay disc. The same goes for something downloaded off of the web. Bigtime.

Yes. On the other hand some folks say upconverted DVD is good enough. So I would guess that low bitrate HD is good enough as well.

Quote:
As I've tried to tell others music and video are completely different worlds when talking about downloading. Because of the size and because of the studios ( think alot more powerful and controlling than the RIAA ) that govern their nature.

I've gone over this with others before many times now.

Like I've said before think like maybe 10 years before it has a chance to take over in the way your suggesting.

Meh. I don't see HD-VOD/IPTV killing BR. I do see it taking more share than SD-VOD/PPV did from DVD and it wont take 10 years. FiOS/UVerse (FTTP/FTTN), DOCSIS 3.0 and Xhom/Clear are being deployed so the last mile is started to get covered. From there the backhauls are probably in okay shape unless AT&T, Verizon, Sprint/Clearwire, cablecos really screw the pooch.

I'm guessing, without knowing, that the place that most providers fall down at is the pipe to the internet itself. This will impact iTunes, Hulu and other 3rd party IPTV distributors more than VOD services from last mile owners.
post #87 of 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Ok this is just one item about the current short comings of downloading.

Can you " right now " legally download an HD movie, transfer it to another media ( portable ) so you can watch it over at your friend's house on his brand new 80" flatscreen ( or even loan it to him/her ) like you could with a DVD or BluRay? Your friend would also need the same service ( assuming you've already figured out the unviability of the transfer issue but let's just say you get it over there somehow ) to watch it on said TV ( like Apple TV ). You talked about flexability. How do you think the movie studios would view said transfer so you could get the video over to your friend's house? Are they likely to change that position in the future? If so what concrete evidnce do you have?

No, that isn't as easy, but it isn't impossible either. You can take a lap top containing the HD file and connect it to the friends TV.

Quote:
It's good for a renting concept but what about owning the video? Sales of DVD/BluRay already dwarf renting in case you were wondering.

I don't have any hard numbers but that is difficult to believe. Video rental companies are doing pretty well, while several major media retailers have recently gone out of business.

Quote:
This is just one item. We haven't even talked about how ComCast is currently putting a cap on monthly downloads and it's way below what it would take for everyone doing HD commerce on the web like you're suggesting. The reason? The web is already getting full with the traffic it has now. More means alot more fiber optic laid. You do realize Broadband is still not availiable in all areas?

The point of the Comcast cap isn't to stop people from watching video, its to stop people from abusing the system. Competition will force them to improve their bandwidth.

AT&T, Verizon, and Sprint are moving into becoming ISP's across the country. As well as having their own wireless data services, which will eventually compete directly against traditional ISP's. Competition will take care of bandwidth and speed issues.

Quote:
Also everytime they figure out a new codec they can pump more through the same pipe but then it get's compressed and yes I can tell the difference. If you undestand how that works there's only so much you can currently do before the quality suffers. I can really tell the difference between an HD movie delivered by ComCast and a BluRay disc. The same goes for something downloaded off of the web. Bigtime.

I acknowledged earlier that the quality is not as good as BR, but that does not matter for the average consumer. It only has to be good enough.

Quote:
As I've tried to tell others music and video are completely different worlds when talking about downloading. Because of the size and because of the studios ( think alot more powerful and controlling than the RIAA ) that govern their nature.

I've gone over this with others before many times now.

Like I've said before think like maybe 10 years before it has a chance to take over in the way your suggesting.

The movie/television studios are not that different from music labels. They are trying to hold on to their old business model the same way the music labels did. If they don't change and adapt to new technology they will go over the same exact cliff as the music labels. The movie/television studios have more time because video files are bigger than music files.

You say you've gone over this many times as though you are absolutely right and that's the end of it. You choose to ignore that video over IP is happening now.
post #88 of 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Ok this is just one item about the current short comings of downloading.

Can you " right now " legally download an HD movie, transfer it to another media ( portable ) so you can watch it over at your friend's house on his brand new 80" flatscreen ( or even loan it to him/her ) like you could with a DVD or BluRay? Your friend would also need the same service ( assuming you've already figured out the unviability of the transfer issue but let's just say you get it over there somehow ) to watch it on said TV ( like Apple TV ). You talked about flexability. How do you think the movie studios would view said transfer so you could get the video over to your friend's house? Are they likely to change that position in the future? If so what concrete evidnce do you have?

It's good for a renting concept but what about owning the video? Sales of DVD/BluRay already dwarf renting in case you were wondering.

This is just one item. We haven't even talked about how ComCast is currently putting a cap on monthly downloads and it's way below what it would take for everyone doing HD commerce on the web like you're suggesting. The reason? The web is already getting full with the traffic it has now. More means alot more fiber optic laid. You do realize Broadband is still not availiable in all areas?

Also everytime they figure out a new codec they can pump more through the same pipe but then it get's compressed and yes I can tell the difference. If you undestand how that works there's only so much you can currently do before the quality suffers. I can really tell the difference between an HD movie delivered by ComCast and a BluRay disc. The same goes for something downloaded off of the web. Bigtime.

As I've tried to tell others music and video are completely different worlds when talking about downloading. Because of the size and because of the studios ( think alot more powerful and controlling than the RIAA ) that govern their nature.

I've gone over this with others before many times now.

Like I've said before think like maybe 10 years before it has a chance to take over in the way your suggesting.

Some of what you're harping on is also currently a shortcoming of blu-ray. I can't take blu-ray netflix discs over to a friend's house to watch because none of my friends own a blu-ray player. When a new movie is released, sold out physical media can be as problematic as VOD bandwidth.

There are certainly shortcoming with VOD, but it can't be written off entirely. There is anything but a consensus on the issue. Having made your case previously doesn't make it more valid or beyond reproach. This is still a very debatable subject.
post #89 of 669
Well, after holding out for today's MacWorld keynote I finally ordered a Blu-ray player for my home. I ordered the Sony BDP-S550. It just might be here by the end of the week.
post #90 of 669
VOD is going to be a big bag of hurt for many years to come. We are not ready for VOD to become the mainstream way of getting HD movies to your house and we are unlikely to be ready within the next 5 years and even then it will take another 5 years for it to become widespread in use.

Physical Media will continue to be the majority choice for the next 10 years. Not necessarily Blu-Ray but a combination of Blu-Ray and Flash. During that time VOD sales will steadily increase starting with the early adopters currently dabbling and eventually will catch up in sales.

There are too many problems with HD VOD. Firstly the delivery system is expensive and is only going to get worse. ISP's run the show here and like we already see in many countries around the world they are keen not to let you use up all your bandwidth on paying 3rd parties for content. My ISP, like many others, caps my bandwidth usage to 60GB despite me paying $150 a month for it. I may have a 20MB connection but 60GB is my limit, fine for SD movies but real HD? I would not rent more than 3 movie a month. What my ISP does do however is any movies I buy from them do not count towards my download limit, unfortunately they do not support MAC's so that is not a way forward and they are years away from offering full HD downloads (like Apple).

This is the future of all big ISP's, they want you to buy their content, with their DRM and if you really want to use iTunes you are gonna be paying for it. What is likely to happen is that we will move back to a pay as you play model. You download a 15GB movie from iTunes (of course when iTunes actually do start a real HD service) you are gonna pay $15 to the ISP, plus the $5 you pay Apple for the rental and hey presto next thing you know you have spent $20 to rent a movie.

And don't think i am anti-VOD or anything, I am one of the early adopters. I have had some kind of computer connected to my TV for over 6 years now. The majority of movies I watch are purchased downloads or VOD and since iTunes started rentals I have been a big user.

But for HD? Blu-Ray will play a huge role in the future.

Example: Since my last Mac Mini died I have been using a hacked Apple TV as my media server, it does mean however I have lost my DVD player. Do I miss it? Not one bit, I no longer watch DVD's - they are all backed-up to my server anyway. But, I am buying a Blu-Ray player this weekend. I was waiting to see if there was any chance Apple will release a Mac Mini with Blu-Ray, not a chance so my money is going on a player instead.

All this talk of choice is probably redundant. While I agree that not everyone wants HD content or even feels any need for it they will be left with little choice. Blu-Ray players will replace DVD players before the end of the year. I guarantee that in 12 months there will not be any DVD players in the stores. Same as on the shelves Blu-Ray will replace DVD's, the price will be the same, they are backward compatible, even people who have no real need for it will end up buying it because it is there.

Does nobody here remember when DVD replaced Video? It will go exactly the same way.

Apple dragging their heels will not change anything, they will come round eventually, they have to.
post #91 of 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Unless you have a portable BR player we don't know about or an implementation of managed copy that no one else has you can't with BR either.



It's a question of price isn't it? If a HD rental is $4.99 then even for a bargin bin $15 BRD you need to watch the title 3 times to break even. So if say you watched Iron Man at home and wanted to watch it again at your buddy's house, then you're out $10...not $25.99 for the blu-ray disc.



When does ownership make sense? Mostly kid titles. If I had to pay for each time my kids watched various Disney flicks I'd be flat broke.



250GB. That's 10 movies at Blu-Ray bit rates. Not very much. On the other hand far more movies at cable bit rates. Here's the deal though...Fios and cable going to the local Verizon or Comcast server farms aren't as big a problem as aggregating all that traffic out. VOD to Comcast VOD services doesn't count against your caps. So you're back to the $5-$6 rental costs vs $20+ purchase costs.



Yes. On the other hand some folks say upconverted DVD is good enough. So I would guess that low bitrate HD is good enough as well.



Meh. I don't see HD-VOD/IPTV killing BR. I do see it taking more share than SD-VOD/PPV did from DVD and it wont take 10 years. FiOS/UVerse (FTTP/FTTN), DOCSIS 3.0 and Xhom/Clear are being deployed so the last mile is started to get covered. From there the backhauls are probably in okay shape unless AT&T, Verizon, Sprint/Clearwire, cablecos really screw the pooch.

I'm guessing, without knowing, that the place that most providers fall down at is the pipe to the internet itself. This will impact iTunes, Hulu and other 3rd party IPTV distributors more than VOD services from last mile owners.

Quote:
When does ownership make sense? Mostly kid titles. If I had to pay for each time my kids watched various Disney flicks I'd be flat broke.

And yet sales dwarf the numbers coming from rentals. More people purchase than rent. Really look it up. I did in the last thread.

Bottom line sales do more volume than rentals. I've already proven that.

Standard definition will play a smaller role as time goes on as HD will become mainstream ( as it's well on it's way to doing now that's pretty clear with the sales numbers of HDTVs ).

Quote:
Unless you have a portable BR player we don't know about or an implementation of managed copy that no one else has you can't with BR either.

What? You simply carry the BluRay disc over to your friend's house! You can't do that legally with a download is the point.


Quote:
Yes. On the other hand some folks say upconverted DVD is good enough. So I would guess that low bitrate HD is good enough as well.

The same mistake was made with VHS. Everyone was slowing down their machines to get more on a tape. Then TVs got even better and they could see how crappy it looked.

Once again we're talking about HD sales as they represent the mainstream of video consumption. Not rental. And even rental if it really catches on will run into bandwidth problems.

If I'm not right about this why are the experts ( you know people who know more about this than you or I ) are saying the internet can't take widespread HD commerce in it's current state?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #92 of 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfiler View Post

Some of what you're harping on is also currently a shortcoming of blu-ray. I can't take blu-ray netflix discs over to a friend's house to watch because none of my friends own a blu-ray player. When a new movie is released, sold out physical media can be as problematic as VOD bandwidth.

There are certainly shortcoming with VOD, but it can't be written off entirely. There is anything but a consensus on the issue. Having made your case previously doesn't make it more valid or beyond reproach. This is still a very debatable subject.

But the point is you could if they did have a BluRay player. Also you can currently do this easily with a DVD! More flexability!

As I've said before we're talking about the big money maker for this to really change things. That being sales not rental.


Quote:
Having made your case previously doesn't make it more valid or beyond reproach

No but it does become quite tiresome having to reexplain it over and over again until the other side must back down and see they don't really have a solid case.

There are some real solid facts in the way of downloading HD content for purchase becoming the mainstream. The movie studios who won't budge on this issue except in a limited way like renting or only wtaching it on your computer. Bandwidth. Do I really have to explain this again? Portability or ease of use. Trying to say we're going to replace what we've got already with something less flexible doesn't make sense.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #93 of 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

No but it does become quite tiresome having to reexplain it over and over again until the other side must back down and see they don't really have a solid case.

From the number of rebutals your post generated, you'll need to continue making your case.

It isn't that your assertions are that outlandish, but rather that they're stated with certainty and with what appears to be contempt for those who disagree. There's only one thing that is certain here, that video distribution is a turbulent market and that its future isn't entirely clear... hence the attraction of debating the subject here.
post #94 of 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

And yet sales dwarf the numbers coming from rentals. More people purchase than rent. Really look it up. I did in the last thread.

Bottom line sales do more volume than rentals. I've already proven that.

Standard definition will play a smaller role as time goes on as HD will become mainstream ( as it's well on it's way to doing now that's pretty clear with the sales numbers of HDTVs ).

I couldn't find that post. Can you post that information again? Several retail stores that sell DVD's have gone out of business. The major and mom and pop rental stores are still doing pretty well.



Quote:
What? You simply carry the BluRay disc over to your friend's house! You can't do that legally with a download is the point.

Their are ways you can.


Quote:
The same mistake was made with VHS. Everyone was slowing down their machines to get more on a tape. Then TVs got even better and they could see how crappy it looked.

This isn't true. No one thought VHS looked great. Most everyone was excited about DVD and it was quickly adopted. BR has not had the same reception and excitement that DVD had in its first years of sales.

Quote:
Once again we're talking about HD sales as they represent the mainstream of video consumption. Not rental. And even rental if it really catches on will run into bandwidth problems.

Just anecdotally I only know of a couple of people who buy and collect movies. I know many more people who watch movies when they are broadcast on television or cable, watch video on demand, rent from Netflix, and to a growing degree watching online downloads.

Quote:
If I'm not right about this why are the experts ( you know people who know more about this than you or I ) are saying the internet can't take widespread HD commerce in it's current state?

Widespread HD commerce is already happening.
post #95 of 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Bt the point is you could if they did have a BluRay player. Also you can currently do this easily with a DVD! More flexability!

Its not more flexible if your friend doesn't have a BR player. Which most people don't.


Quote:
No but it does become quite tiresome having to reexplain it over and over again until the other side must back down and see they don't really have a solid case.

The solid case are all of the companies who are getting into video downloads. They are not doing this because they want to loose money.

The solid case is the fact that people 25 and under are more used to downloading media than they are to buying physical media. When those people become 30 and over they will want downloads they won't want to go to a video store.

Quote:
There are some real solid facts in the way of downloading HD content for purchase becoming the mainstream. The movie studios who won't budge on this issue except in a limited way like renting or only wtaching it on your computer. Bandwidth. Do I really have to explain this again? Portability or ease of use. Trying to say we're going to replace what we've got already with something less flexible doesn't make sense.

About 5 years ago I remember reading an article about a disc technology that will allow the storage of many more GB's of information on a disc. They accomplish this by squeezing the data into smaller packets and using a blue laser to read it. The problem at the time was getting it to work. Their was the risk of the blue laser getting to hot and starting a fire. eventually they figure it out and got it to work reliably.

You are explaining either old or current problems. The problems you explain will be over come in the near future.
post #96 of 669
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murphster View Post

VOD is going to be a big bag of hurt for many years to come. We are not ready for VOD to become the mainstream way of getting HD movies to your house and we are unlikely to be ready within the next 5 years and even then it will take another 5 years for it to become widespread in use.

Physical Media will continue to be the majority choice for the next 10 years. Not necessarily Blu-Ray but a combination of Blu-Ray and Flash. During that time VOD sales will steadily increase starting with the early adopters currently dabbling and eventually will catch up in sales.

There are too many problems with HD VOD. Firstly the delivery system is expensive and is only going to get worse. ISP's run the show here and like we already see in many countries around the world they are keen not to let you use up all your bandwidth on paying 3rd parties for content. My ISP, like many others, caps my bandwidth usage to 60GB despite me paying $150 a month for it. I may have a 20MB connection but 60GB is my limit, fine for SD movies but real HD? I would not rent more than 3 movie a month. What my ISP does do however is any movies I buy from them do not count towards my download limit, unfortunately they do not support MAC's so that is not a way forward and they are years away from offering full HD downloads (like Apple).

This is the future of all big ISP's, they want you to buy their content, with their DRM and if you really want to use iTunes you are gonna be paying for it. What is likely to happen is that we will move back to a pay as you play model. You download a 15GB movie from iTunes (of course when iTunes actually do start a real HD service) you are gonna pay $15 to the ISP, plus the $5 you pay Apple for the rental and hey presto next thing you know you have spent $20 to rent a movie.

And don't think i am anti-VOD or anything, I am one of the early adopters. I have had some kind of computer connected to my TV for over 6 years now. The majority of movies I watch are purchased downloads or VOD and since iTunes started rentals I have been a big user.

But for HD? Blu-Ray will play a huge role in the future.

Example: Since my last Mac Mini died I have been using a hacked Apple TV as my media server, it does mean however I have lost my DVD player. Do I miss it? Not one bit, I no longer watch DVD's - they are all backed-up to my server anyway. But, I am buying a Blu-Ray player this weekend. I was waiting to see if there was any chance Apple will release a Mac Mini with Blu-Ray, not a chance so my money is going on a player instead.

All this talk of choice is probably redundant. While I agree that not everyone wants HD content or even feels any need for it they will be left with little choice. Blu-Ray players will replace DVD players before the end of the year. I guarantee that in 12 months there will not be any DVD players in the stores. Same as on the shelves Blu-Ray will replace DVD's, the price will be the same, they are backward compatible, even people who have no real need for it will end up buying it because it is there.

Does nobody here remember when DVD replaced Video? It will go exactly the same way.

Apple dragging their heels will not change anything, they will come round eventually, they have to.

The Murphster gets it!

I agree too that HD downloads have a way to go before being a viable replacement or overcoming Blu-ray--given the infrastructure, ease of use, and quality issues aforementioned in everyone's posts.

Anyhow, I came across this article in regards to Blu-ray and DVD and wanted to share...

Blu-Ray's First Two Years Outstrip DVD

http://www.psxextreme.com/ps3-news/4403.html

Quote:
Whenever the market is in the midst of a format transition, everyone has a lot of questions and the doom and gloom typically runs rampant. But what if we simply compare the last transition to the current one?

DVD owns the market and completely erased VHS from the face of the earth (well, for the most part), as the digital era arrived and gained complete control. Now, the high-definition Blu-Ray format has eliminated its only competition in HD-DVD and seeks to supplant DVD, although some reports would have you believe it's not doing the job. Well, not so. According to statistics compiled by EngadgetHD and Pali Capital's Richard Greenfield, Blu-Ray is coming along at a much faster rate than DVD. After two years, about 1.2 million DVD players had been sold, and in that same time frame, an estimated 2.5 million Blu-Ray players have been sold...and that number certainly doesn't include PlayStation 3 sales. Furthermore, Blu-Ray sales appear to have been unaffected by the economic downturn over the holidays, as it has "doubled its market share of the top 20 titles in the past six months." Remember, it takes some time for an entire market - like home movie viewing - to completely switch formats, but Blu-Ray is actually ahead of schedule.

There's no doubt that Sony used the PS3 as a Trojan Horse for Blu-Ray, and quite clearly, that move seems to have worked. Of course, it would help if more movies like "The Dark Knight" hit store shelves; that thing pretty much exploded and became gigantic for Blu-Ray.

Engadget article: http://www.engadgethd.com/2009/01/06...outpaces-dvds/

Also, I'd have to go back to see who had mentioned this before, but it appears Disney is releasing Blu-ray + DVD Combo packs for their movies which should also help in the adoption of the format...

http://www.businesswire.com/portal/s...78&newsLang=en
post #97 of 669
Thread Starter 
Profile 3.0 is GO! Maybe

http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=2245

Quote:
Technical Audio Devices (TAD), a subsidiary of Pioneer Electronics, will be demonstrating a new audio-only Blu-ray format at their booth at CES this year. This format, which will provide uncompressed 24bit 192kHz stereo audio, has not been named, though it sounds like this may be the first Blu-ray Profile 3.0 (Audio Only) demonstration.

While most Blu-ray users are familiar with Profiles 1.0, 1.1 (BonusView), and 2.0 (BD-Live), very few are aware that Blu-ray has yet another profile which allows for an audio only experience. Basically, the same audio codecs can be used (PCM, Dolby TrueHD, and DTS-HD Master Audio) to provide users with a lossless/uncompressed audio experience at the highest fidelity, but without any requirements for video interaction. Much like CDs or SACDs, the disc would only have to be inserted into the player before it would automatically begin playing. All current players would be capable of playing the disc, but the spec allows for other, audio only players to be released as well.

Once we receive more information about this format, we will let you know.

I've been interested for quite some time in replacing my CD collection with high quality audio and I have to say I'm excited to hear what this format will sound like, along with the proper audio equipment as well, of course. Can't wait to hear some 311, Linkin Park, The Exit, Jack Johnson, and Red on Blu-ray audio. Anyhow, thought this was some exciting news.
post #98 of 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by marzetta7 View Post

I've been interested for quite some time in replacing my CD collection with high quality audio...

Marz, before I get into why music on discs is so last millennium, have you actually bought a BR player yet?
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #99 of 669
When DVD was introduced it was a clearly better format than its alternatives. It had far better picture and sound than VHS. It was a better storage solution than floppy disc.

Today their are many other alternatives to BR and DVD for content distribution and storage. BR is not in the same position as DVD nine years ago and does not offer as compelling an option as it would have been a few years ago.

Quote:
Originally Posted by marzetta7 View Post

The Murphster gets it!

I agree too that HD downloads have a way to go before being a viable replacement or overcoming Blu-ray--given the infrastructure, ease of use, and quality issues aforementioned in everyone's posts.

Anyhow, I came across this article in regards to Blu-ray and DVD and wanted to share...

Blu-Ray's First Two Years Outstrip DVD

http://www.psxextreme.com/ps3-news/4403.html
post #100 of 669
Physical music sales are headed down the tubes. I'm not sure why they would even bother with this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by marzetta7 View Post

I've been interested for quite some time in replacing my CD collection with high quality audio and I have to say I'm excited to hear what this format will sound like, along with the proper audio equipment as well, of course. Can't wait to hear some 311, Linkin Park, The Exit, Jack Johnson, and Red on Blu-ray audio. Anyhow, thought this was some exciting news.
post #101 of 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Today their are many other alternatives to BR and DVD for content distribution and storage. BR is not in the same position as DVD nine years ago and does not offer as compelling an option as it would have been a few years ago.

Which would seem to make it even more impressive that Blu-ray is outdoing DVD at the same point in their respective lives.
post #102 of 669
Well there will be BR sales, BR will be one option amongst many others. I don't know if that's really all that much of a victory, but I guess you gotta' take what you can.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guartho View Post

Which would seem to make it even more impressive that Blu-ray is outdoing DVD at the same point in their respective lives.
post #103 of 669
Speaking just for me I'll be happy as long as Blu-ray remains viable enough that it's available for all the "must-own" titles that I come across.

Since it's doing better than DVD did at this point with more competition than DVD had I think I'll be happy.
post #104 of 669
Ultimately we'll have to see how the long term trends play out. Their is a market for those who want the highest quality. But their seems to be little excitement for BR amongst the majority of the consumer market for which up-converted DVD is perfectly fine.

Standard DVD still far outsells BR that trend has not seemed to have changed much at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guartho View Post

Speaking just for me I'll be happy as long as Blu-ray remains viable enough that it's available for all the "must-own" titles that I come across.

Since it's doing better than DVD did at this point with more competition than DVD had I think I'll be happy.
post #105 of 669
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

Marz, before I get into why music on discs is so last millennium, have you actually bought a BR player yet?

Frank, for you, and others, let's put your highly offensive and elitist persona in the spotlight for the time being and hopefully have it go away not only for you but for others as well.

First, yes I do own a Blu-ray player, a PS3. I've had it for quite some time now. Before I even posted my 2009 thread I had one already for a couple of months. In addition, I also own a Sony Bravia Z-Series KDL46Z4100 46-inch LCD TV, with a Sony 5.1 surround sound system.

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/...52921665411950

Would you like to know my height, weight, and schwartz size too? My tax filing status? Where I live? Some more about my spending habits?

My point here is not so much the question of my own personal financial spending habits, but the elitist sense of some like yourself in this thread that seem to vilify those if they don't own a piece of hardware. I find it it nauseating in the sense that I, for one, welcome any person's opinion on the subject--whether they own or don't own Blu-ray--as long as they are willing to back up their assertions with well versed debate. Sure it helps ones assertion if they've witnessed Blu-ray for themselves, as I've done for years now, but ownership is surely not a prerequisite for witnessing Blu-ray or knowing the tech behind the format. Moreover, ownership certainly does not give one certain unaleinable rights as being an expert on the subject either. So, in essence, I find your inquiry simply contentious and lacking in any real substance in trying to discredit my Blu-ray arguments.

Notice I haven't asked you if you own Blu-ray yet? Because, frankly Frank, I don't give a crap. I'll simply keep refuting the bogus pro HD DVD (and now VOD since you lost the aforementioned battle) garbage you've been spewing for a long time now--with ownership or without ownership.

Happy debating everyone. And Frank, I'd love to hear your take on how music on a disc is so last millenium.
post #106 of 669
Thread Starter 
By the way, CES starts today and there will be some interesting developments.

Here is some news on a Cell-based TV that Toshiba is prototyping...

http://www.businesswire.com/portal/s...87&newsLang=en

Very interesting. I'll try and post any more developments.
post #107 of 669
Thread Starter 
post #108 of 669
ugh. I hope it works better than the Sharp stand-alone player I had for about 3 days last year. It's funny, I don't have an issue with all-in-one computers, but I shudder at all-in-one TVs.
post #109 of 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfiler View Post

From the number of rebutals your post generated, you'll need to continue making your case.

It isn't that your assertions are that outlandish, but rather that they're stated with certainty and with what appears to be contempt for those who disagree. There's only one thing that is certain here, that video distribution is a turbulent market and that its future isn't entirely clear... hence the attraction of debating the subject here.

Quote:
From the number of rebutals your post generated, you'll need to continue making your case.


I'll let Bill Hunt of " The Digital Bits " do that for me.

Quote:
Also today, do you recall that rant I posted a couple weeks back about how the talk of Blu-ray's demise was absurd? Our friend Ben Drawbaugh weighed in on the subject over at Engadget as well, and he's clearly of the same mind. Ben and I were e-mailing back and forth recently, and he made a few additional points about Blu-ray and the notion of downloading that I thought were interesting. First, he noted that while Apple was recently thrilled to announce program-to-date high-def TV series sales of $5 million via iTunes download, Blu-ray sold $17 million worth of titles that same week alone. Ben also sent the following, which made me smile...

"Top ten reasons that prove Hollywood is only playing in the downloads world while focusing its real efforts on Blu-ray.

10 - Movie commercials say "now available on Blu-ray and DVD" never mentions downloads.
9 - You can't rent TV shows from any download service, but you can buy them on disc.
8 - 24 hour rental window.
7 - 30 day rental limit.
6 - Extras only available on discs
5 - Can't rent HD movies on the PC (only on boxes like the 360, Vudu etc).
4 - Pulls previously available movies from the selection.
3 - About a 30 day window between when a title is released on disc and on download services.
2 - Digital copies are now included with many discs.
1 - Can't buy HD movies from any service."

Those are good points all. To them, I'll add the fact that according to VideoScan, Blu-ray now regularly hits as much as 10% of total sales of new release titles. In addition, there are now over 1,000 Blu-ray Disc titles released or scheduled for release according to the DVD Release Report (1,057 to be exact). That's a significant milestone after just two full years of format availability. Let's go further... as Blu-ray player pricing drops below $200 and even $150 this holiday season and into 2009, buying a Blu-ray player will become a no-brainer. Just a couple days ago, I was at the dentist and the hygienist was talking about how her DVD player had just died and she needed to get a new one. She asked about "this Blu-ray thing," and when I told her that she could get a BD player for under $200 and that it would play all her DVDs too, she was sold on the spot. That story is going to be repeated millions of times next year. ANYONE who walks into a Best Buy or a Wal-Mart looking to replace a broken cheap DVD player is going to learn about cheap Blu-ray/DVD players and think, "Why the hell not?" Have I mentioned the fact that Hollywood is being relentless in getting the word about Blu-ray Disc out? You're not going to see that with downloading. Why, you ask? You want the real clincher? The REAL reason why Blu-ray is going to be around a long time, and downloading isn't going to take over for a very long time? It's not just bandwidth, folks, though that's a problem too and will be for a while. No, the real roadblock is profit. Hollywood studios will NEVER be able to sell you a downloaded movie for $29.99 or $39.99. It'll NEVER happen. That would be like telling hardcore gamers that they can't buy games on physical discs anymore, but they still have to pay $60 for the latest, greatest titles. What this means is that downloading - best case - is going to take over the movie rental market, not sales. Any movie fans who want extras beyond just the movie itself, and want to actually own the content rather than continually rent it again and again, are going to stick with physical media. And that means Blu-ray. Anyone who tells you otherwise A) doesn't understand the home video industry or the movie enthusiast market, B) is a downloading advocate, or C) preferred HD-DVD and still feels sour grapes. That's not to say everyone who watches DVDs will make the switch to Blu, but this whole idea that Blu-ray isn't here to stay or is going to remain a super-über-high-end niche product is a load of malarkey. I'm just saying. Ben too. (Thanks again, Ben - great talking with you!)

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/mytwoc...62.html#bourne

Here's something else you can read.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10042979-93.html

Quote:
The research group reported Tuesday that, on average, consumers spent 41 percent of the money budgeted for movies and other video content by purchasing DVDs of films. Movie rentals on DVD were the next biggest category with 29 percent. Consumers spent 11 percent purchasing TV shows on DVD. About 18 percent went to theater tickets, according to the report.

Bandwidth

portability

Flexibility




When you have a good counter argument let me know guys but I'm tired of looking this stuff up everytime someone new comes along when you could be doing this yourselves!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #110 of 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Ultimately we'll have to see how the long term trends play out. Their is a market for those who want the highest quality. But their seems to be little excitement for BR amongst the majority of the consumer market for which up-converted DVD is perfectly fine.

Standard DVD still far outsells BR that trend has not seemed to have changed much at all.

18% of all Dark Knight sales so far have been on Blu-Ray.

You completely fail to take into consideration what will undoubtedly happen sometime this year when the cost of buying Blu-Ray players and disks are no more than DVD players... DVD players will disappear from the stores in a flash. People will buy a Blu-Ray player even if they are not that bothered about Blu-Ray because that is all there will be and they still play DVD'S so what's the harm?

Week by Week you will see your local Blockbuster extend the amount of Blu-Ray titles they have at the expense of DVD's. This is already happening in my local store.

Then all of a sudden we will hit a point where Blu-ray sales actually overtake DVD sales, who is betting on next Christmas? Maybe the year after, but it is not that far away.

Blu-Ray will remain ahead of VOD for many years to come. Anyone who does not believe that or understand that does not have a very good grasp on the market.

People do not buy what they want, they buy what the manufacturers want them to buy. At the moment the big studios and electronics companies want you to buy Blu-Ray so that is exactly what they will make cheaper and easier for you to buy.
post #111 of 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

I couldn't find that post. Can you post that information again? Several retail stores that sell DVD's have gone out of business. The major and mom and pop rental stores are still doing pretty well.





Their are ways you can.




This isn't true. No one thought VHS looked great. Most everyone was excited about DVD and it was quickly adopted. BR has not had the same reception and excitement that DVD had in its first years of sales.



Just anecdotally I only know of a couple of people who buy and collect movies. I know many more people who watch movies when they are broadcast on television or cable, watch video on demand, rent from Netflix, and to a growing degree watching online downloads.



Widespread HD commerce is already happening.

Quote:
This isn't true. No one thought VHS looked great. Most everyone was excited about DVD and it was quickly adopted. BR has not had the same reception and excitement that DVD had in its first years of sales.

Sigh!

This is true. When I was in my late 20 and early 30's I sold video equipment for a living.
This was during the 80's when VHS was the thing. People were happy just to have video and thought it looked great on their TVs that were 330 lines of resolution at best!

Please I was there and worked with this stuff every day for about 10 years.

When the first higher resolution monitors came in ( 480i ) they began to see how their slowed down tape looked like crap. In the end the ability to slow down recording ( which helped JVC win the VHS vs Beta war ) became unimportant as it looked bad.

Video has been my hobby for about 25 years now. I'm pretty well versed.


Quote:
Just anecdotally I only know of a couple of people who buy and collect movies. I know many more people who watch movies when they are broadcast on television or cable, watch video on demand, rent from Netflix, and to a growing degree watching online downloads.

Oh by the way almost everyone I know buys movies on DVD. Some renting but mostly they like to watch them when, where, and how they like. And the special features. That means buying.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #112 of 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

When you have a good counter argument let me know guys but I'm tired of looking this stuff up everytime someone new comes along when you could be doing this yourselves!

Condescend much?

Counter argument to which one of your assertions? It seems that you're lumping all people who disagree with you into one category. Having rebutted one person's position doesn't mean you've rebutted everyone's. Everyone here has a slightly different take on the video distribution market. Agreement and disagreement isn't an all or nothing kind of thing.

You seem to be proposing that network delivered video stands no chance against blu-ray. My take is that strategic decisions by key market players could easily kill or launch either as the predominant video delivery technology. The future is wide open.

How do I support such an assertion?

Hard numbers aren't available but my guess is that, as of today, people spend more time watching network delivered video than they do blu-ray. This includes everything from youtube to PPV VOD.

Huge corporations are betting on network delivered video. Apple, hulu, the networks, the telecommunications companies, Netflix, etc.

I'm not saying that blu-ray is losing the battle. But rather that the situation isn't as cut and dry as you're making out. Valid rebutals have been offered despite your claims to the contrary. You simply disagree with those rebutals.
post #113 of 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

I'll let Bill Hunt of " The Digital Bits " do that for me.

"Top ten reasons that prove Hollywood is only playing in the downloads world while focusing its real efforts on Blu-ray.

That was a top ten list from a BR fans perspective. The main reason Hollywood is pushing BR is simply because of money. They want to protect their aging business model. The same as the music industry wanted to protect its CD sales.



Quote:
Bandwidth

Portability

Flexibility

As I've said before you are looking at the situation as it is today, todays problems are not tomorrows problems, in technology imagination and innovation always gets around limitation.



Quote:
When you have a good counter argument let me know guys but I'm tired of looking this stuff up everytime someone new comes along when you could be doing this yourselves!

Video sales aren't very much more than renting. You tried to make it sound as though people spent a significant more on sales than renting.
post #114 of 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murphster View Post

You completely fail to take into consideration what will undoubtedly happen sometime this year when the cost of buying Blu-Ray players and disks are no more than DVD players... DVD players will disappear from the stores in a flash. People will buy a Blu-Ray player even if they are not that bothered about Blu-Ray because that is all there will be and they still play DVD'S so what's the harm?

How do I fail to take into consideration a prediction in the future that may or may not happen?



Quote:
Blu-Ray will remain ahead of VOD for many years to come. Anyone who does not believe that or understand that does not have a very good grasp on the market.

People who play down VOD, underestimates convenience over quality.
post #115 of 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Sigh!

This is true. When I was in my late 20 and early 30's I sold video equipment for a living.
This was during the 80's when VHS was the thing. People were happy just to have video and thought it looked great on their TVs that were 330 lines of resolution at best!

Please I was there and worked with this stuff every day for about 10 years.

When the first higher resolution monitors came in ( 480i ) they began to see how their slowed down tape looked like crap. In the end the ability to slow down recording ( which helped JVC win the VHS vs Beta war ) became unimportant as it looked bad.

Video has been my hobby for about 25 years now. I'm pretty well versed.

That was the 80's. I'm not sure why you are bringing up a time when VHS was the only viable format. DVD did not yet exist.

I'm talking about the transition from VHS to DVD. Most people clearly see that DVD was superior to VHS.


Quote:
Oh by the way almost everyone I know buys movies on DVD. Some renting but mostly they like to watch them when, where, and how they like. And the special features. That means buying.

Here in NYC a lot of people buy $5 DVD from the street corner of a movie that is currently still in the theater. Because its cheap and convenient, its the worst quality you can get.
post #116 of 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

People who play down VOD, underestimates convenience over quality.

You should have read my post. I do not play down VOD, for 6 years I have had a computer connected to my TV and was a very early adopter of VOD and downloads. I have been beta testing VOD sites since they first began. I am actually a big fan of VOD.

But I am a realist and I know how the industry works. The infrastructure is not in place that will allow Hi-Def downloads to replace physical media and will not be in place for at least the next 5 years. And even then it will take many more years for sales to overtake that of physical media. For those of use lucky enough to be in areas where high speed net access is possible we will still be charged through the nose that renting a BR is cheaper anyway.

You are right in the respect that it will happen, of course it will. I doubt anybody doubts that fact. But for the next 10 years physical media will outsell downloads by 10-1. In 2 years time more movies will be bought and rented on Blu-Ray than any other format. We might well see SSD come to the fore in a couple of years with SSD player hitting the market in 2011/12 but even then they will not replace Blu-Ray only compliment it.

You have to think outside the box on this and look at the biggger picture. Just because something is possible it does not make it viable. There are too many companies with a vested interest in making Blu_Ray work.

And it's all about the money? Of course it is, you don't think this a business?
post #117 of 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

That was the 80's. I'm not sure why you are bringing up a time when VHS was the only viable format. DVD did not yet exist.

I'm talking about the transition from VHS to DVD. Most people clearly see that DVD was superior to VHS.




Here in NYC a lot of people buy $5 DVD from the street corner of a movie that is currently still in the theater. Because its cheap and convenient, its the worst quality you can get.


TenoBell get a grip. We're talking about how the Video market works regardless of the format. My reference was just an example. The same rules still apply.

Did you read my post from Bill Hunt? He knows alot more about this than either of us. Look I didn't say downloading wasn't in the future it's just going to take a bit longer than you think with all the issues.

Still haven't heard a good counter argument.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #118 of 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfiler View Post

Condescend much?

Counter argument to which one of your assertions? It seems that you're lumping all people who disagree with you into one category. Having rebutted one person's position doesn't mean you've rebutted everyone's. Everyone here has a slightly different take on the video distribution market. Agreement and disagreement isn't an all or nothing kind of thing.

You seem to be proposing that network delivered video stands no chance against blu-ray. My take is that strategic decisions by key market players could easily kill or launch either as the predominant video delivery technology. The future is wide open.

How do I support such an assertion?

Hard numbers aren't available but my guess is that, as of today, people spend more time watching network delivered video than they do blu-ray. This includes everything from youtube to PPV VOD.

Huge corporations are betting on network delivered video. Apple, hulu, the networks, the telecommunications companies, Netflix, etc.

I'm not saying that blu-ray is losing the battle. But rather that the situation isn't as cut and dry as you're making out. Valid rebutals have been offered despite your claims to the contrary. You simply disagree with those rebutals.

So you're more of an expert than Bill Hunt?

Did you not read the article??????

Downloading will probably take over TenoBell's mom and pop video store ( which is a shame end of an era and all that ) but as far as sales go physical media is here to stay for about another decade at least. Downloading will be for renting.

Quote:
You seem to be proposing that network delivered video stands no chance against blu-ray. My take is that strategic decisions by key market players could easily kill or launch either as the predominant video delivery technology. The future is wide open.

Quote:
people spend more time watching network delivered video than they do blu-ray.

From my link that I posted for you which you obviously didn't read the article :

Quote:
Here's the kicker for Internet video: only 0.5 percent was spent on renting or purchasing TV shows or movies off the Web.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10042979-93.html

That's 41 % for sales of physical media, 29% for rentals, and .05 % for downloaded material.

Big among the issues is bandwidth among other things. Sorry it just ain't there yet. That's why Comcast is putting a cap on their downloads. No one will offer a better solution as Vinea says because without more pipeline there isn't one. I know some people don't want to believe this but that's the way it is. Look it up.

You would think that if there's more bandwidth why would they do this. Hmmm?

It's just that downloading will be good for renting. Period. For many reasons that you still haven't produced a good counter argument addressing these issues.

Posts some links that offer solutions to these issues and I'll believe you. Show me where " huge corporations " plan to sell HD video that you can transfer to another medium for portability. Until then just repeating your wishful thinking isn't going to make it real.

Read the links from people in the know! Sticking your head in the sand won't make it happen either.

Here's some more food for thought.

http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives...ar_much_lo.php

http://gizmodo.com/5048025/giz-expla...-very-high-def

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...th-crunch.html
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #119 of 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murphster View Post

You should have read my post. I do not play down VOD, for 6 years I have had a computer connected to my TV and was a very early adopter of VOD and downloads. I have been beta testing VOD sites since they first began. I am actually a big fan of VOD.

But I am a realist and I know how the industry works. The infrastructure is not in place that will allow Hi-Def downloads to replace physical media and will not be in place for at least the next 5 years. And even then it will take many more years for sales to overtake that of physical media. For those of use lucky enough to be in areas where high speed net access is possible we will still be charged through the nose that renting a BR is cheaper anyway.

You are right in the respect that it will happen, of course it will. I doubt anybody doubts that fact. But for the next 10 years physical media will outsell downloads by 10-1. In 2 years time more movies will be bought and rented on Blu-Ray than any other format. We might well see SSD come to the fore in a couple of years with SSD player hitting the market in 2011/12 but even then they will not replace Blu-Ray only compliment it.

You have to think outside the box on this and look at the biggger picture. Just because something is possible it does not make it viable. There are too many companies with a vested interest in making Blu_Ray work.

And it's all about the money? Of course it is, you don't think this a business?

This post is spot on correct. VOD/downloads are the future. Emphasis on the word future.

I get impatient waiting for a 150mb 1080p trailer to download. I don't see my internet speeds getting any faster anytime soon and I live in Los Angeles. I can't imagine how long it would take to download a 1080p feature film.

Also, I'm a full-on "extras" lover. I gobble up discs for their behind-the-scenes and extras just as much as the feature itself.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #120 of 669
Quote:
Originally Posted by marzetta7 View Post

Sony Bravia Z-Series KDL46Z4100 46-inch LCD TV

Smart buy for a Sony at that timeframe. Essentially an XBR4. Today I guess the XBR6 is pretty well discounted that it's probably the better buy...$2499 vs $2199. I just can't see coughing up $4,699 for an XBR8.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Blu-ray vs. DVD/VOD (2009)