Your generous: I'd say within 5 years optical's dead. Why carry a disc when a thumb drive will do? 64GB are going to get cheaper over the next few years. I just can't get excited over Blu-Ray and have no intention of purchasing the beast. It's yesterday's technology on steriods is all.
well then Matsushita, Sandisk and Toshiba better get a move on SD memory and start making deals with the movie labels. Frankly, if they don't do this in the next 5 years, then the idea will die quicker than all you nay-sayers interject about BD. At least BD players will play DVDs and Audo CDs. You're talking a whole new player and people will have to replace all their movies again.
There must be a better way. I think Home Servers are the best way to solve the problem, but you'll never keep people from wanting physical copies.
The only way the electronics industry would switch to SDD media storage is if the consumer market forces them to. If consumers bought fewer optical discs and carrying media files on SDD became more common. This could happen at some point, but its not likely anytime soon.
I do agree the electronics industry should be pro-active and jump on these things before the consumer market discovers the convenience and they are unable to gain control of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasein
Your generous: I'd say within 5 years optical's dead. Why carry a disc when a thumb drive will do? 64GB are going to get cheaper over the next few years. I just can't get excited over Blu-Ray and have no intention of purchasing the beast. It's yesterday's technology on steriods is all.
You're talking a whole new player and people will have to replace all their movies again.
Transferring digital formats shouldn't be an issue (another piece of hardware to sell 'em). Many people copy their CDs to iPods. I don't like messing with CDs anymore...not when I have it all easily accessible on my iPod. If the older DVDs aren't HiDef, then they're going to have to repurchase anyway, irregardless of the medium....or, just keep the old players. There's a density race going on that the larger equipment loses in.
Yes, cos adding nearly $1000 dollars to the pre-markup price of any MacBook is going to be a really compelling idea.
/sarcasm
Apple would get these drives at a third the price. Possibly lower.
When they put the Pioneer DVD recorder into the Digital Audio Powermac, they didn't raise the price from the previous model by more than a couple of hundred bucks. At the time that drive was selling for $1,000 by itself.
I'd guess again before predicting the demise of BD. it took VHS almost 30 years before it' finally died in 2006 to the commercial market. If you want to predict the end of Phyical Media, a safe bet would be 20 years more.
True... My 5-7 years was for downloading to become mainstream (not dominate, just a common practice for the average consumer), not for the demise of blu-ray. And even then, I think rentals will be the most common form of download. There are just too many issues around ownership of downloaded content, transferability being the main problem.
In Apple's defence, the success of CDs and DVDs was inevitable whereas Blu-Ray faces a much more fractured, certainly more complicated marketplace.
It seems to me that Apple has by no means indicated it will not support Blu-Ray ever. The timing wasn't right until maybe now and so Apple waited. Nothing wrong with that.
I think there's market pressure to add it. Apple is holding off as long as they can. It's also taking off pretty well, considering the recession we're in.
I agree few people would buy a $30-$40 movie. What differentiates this idea is that you don't need a stand alone player. You can simply stick the card into a TV or computer and have glorious 1080P and surround sound.
Early adopters would be into this at that price point. As the price comes down, it would filter to the masses. But electronics manufacturers won't do this because it risks destroying their current business model.
I'd actually like to believe it, but I'm finding it difficult.
A couple of years after the personal computer first came out I was telling people that in the future we would be buying music on memory cards instead of LPs.
But that was also before the CD came out. That changed everything.
Just like bubble memory was supposed to kill the HDD, it never happened.
I think the timing is impossible.
I don't see the industry moving to a format that will have just a handful of years of life.
Quote:
I think people would have no problem moving on from optical players if given a choice.
I barely use the optical player in my Mac anymore. Most of the software on my computer has been downloaded from the developers website. The last third party application I recall installing from a disc was MS Office and that was about four years ago.
Most of the media I watch is from cable, video on demand, Hulu, iTunes, or Netflix streaming. A growing number of my friends are watching movies through torrents. But I don't participate in that myself.
Several of my gaming friends are more into playing Xbox or Playstation online. You really don't even need the optical disc for that, even though you still have to buy it to play the game online.
The electronics industry would charge a premium for this to make up for the loss in media player sales.
$30-$40 would not be that way forever, the price would come down as the price for BR has come down.
If the price was $20 to $25 it might work. But except for a very small number, I just don't see those prices as being desirable. as I said, players will be $50 in a couple of years.
We'll be getting B_R recorders in out computers for $30, just like we have DVD recorders now. Recordable disks will be cheap, and no one will go back.
We'll see 9.5mm recorders for laptops, and they will be everywhere.
I can't see anything else happening.
Optical has too much life left.
I read an article where they were saying that the format can even hold a 4k movie on a double layer disk with no changes.
IBM has already produced experimental recorders and disks that have 200GB. This is also the same format.
It's just beginning.
Quote:
Its like my Grandmother. She lives in a retirement home and the building is wired for broadband. She has computer hooked up to broadband, but she rarely ever uses it.
But she doesn't fall under that term "active users" you said the survey found. She doesn't count basically.
On the other hand, I have several friends who are still on dial-up. One even has sold over 750 items on e-bay, and has bought about the same number.
But again, most "broadband" in use is 1 Mb/s or less, totally unusable for this purpose.
When 50% of the public has 20Mb/s then we can talk about this.
Sorry you get the full resolution regardless of the distance, although the typical person wont perceive the full benefit of a 40" 1080P until 5 feet. However blu ray discs contain much more detail (compared to heavily compressed iTunes media). Disks are typically 50GB and main features are typically about 28GB.
Frankly I sit around 6 feet away from my 42" plasma and Blu Ray 1080P content is noticably better than all other sources I use. The best example of this can be found in comparing DVDs to Blu Ray versions of the same film.
On my 24" PC screen the difference may not be obvious however I want to buy a film once and play it back at home and when travelling so blu ray on a Macbook Pro would rock.
In short for home cinema lovers Blu Ray is a must.
By the way, Carlton is a friend of mine, and he would argue with you about your interpretation if you think that you're getting the full resolution in the sense of seeing it...
The chart, which I use for my quick numbers is easy to understand.
Sitting 6 feet from a 42" screen WILL give some of the benefit of 1080p, but you need to get to 5 feet before you can get all the benefit. Is that what you're saying? If it is, then fine, but be careful how you describe what you see.
I'm not sure if I fully agree with this chart. I have a 37" 720p Plasma (i was an early adopter) and run blu-ray on it, and we sit about 12' away from it. I do notice the difference between 480p and 720p very clearly on this set. Now that might have something to do with the Blu-ray player.
The chart is correct. You simply can't see the detail of 720p from 12 feet with that size set unless you have eagle eyes.
What you are seeing is the beginnings of the higher rez. but just barely. If you move up to 6 feet, you will see a much sharper picture.
True... My 5-7 years was for downloading to become mainstream (not dominate, just a common practice for the average consumer), not for the demise of blu-ray. And even then, I think rentals will be the most common form of download. There are just too many issues around ownership of downloaded content, transferability being the main problem.
Agreed. I NEVER buy on iTunes, but I VERY frequently download. I love the service and as a student with no tv and no desire to go to the movie store let alone deal with returns and such it is fantastic.
I don't see the industry moving to a format that will have just a handful of years of life.
It can be argued this is the situation BR is in. I believe Blu-ray sales will stall long before it becomes a primary medium for video.
Quote:
If the price was $20 to $25 it might work. But except for a very small number, I just don't see those prices as being desirable. as I said, players will be $50 in a couple of years.
That's the progression for every new media format.
Quote:
We'll be getting B_R recorders in out computers for $30, just like we have DVD recorders now. Recordable disks will be cheap, and no one will go back.
Go back to what? Hard Drives are the primary storage medium now, not DVD's. I don't know of anyone who plans to replace a hard drive with any optical format.
Quote:
Optical has too much life left.
Largely because of legacy and because the major content industries don't offer other viable options for physical media. Optical media will have a long slow death, but it won't have anymore significant growth.
Quote:
I read an article where they were saying that the format can even hold a 4k movie on a double layer disk with no changes.
There is no reason to use extremely compressed 4K at home. We should get to less compressed 1080 first.
Quote:
But she doesn't fall under that term "active users" you said the survey found. She doesn't count basically.
You said you didn't understand what they meant by active users. She was an example people who are not active users.
I think there's market pressure to add it. Apple is holding off as long as they can. It's also taking off pretty well, considering the recession we're in.
Apple has a relatively small piece of the action and as such being able to standardize components across assorted product offerings allows economies of scale to keep costs down. It's no coincidence that today superdrives are standard fare in Minis, Pros, the Macbook, the iMac and the Macbook Pro.
Not only does using laptop components allow clever form factors for the Mini and the iMac, it also means there is an entire range of desktop CPUs, etc. that Apple simply doesn't have to concern itself with.
I believe that Apple wants the transition from a Superdrive that embraces DVD to one that extends to Blu-Ray to be as short as possible. So, yes, Apple has not rushed to embrace Blu-Ray. But the poor economy is a factor. At a time when Apple has been focused on lowering the price of its computers because of a soft economy, along comes Blu-Ray, which if adopted in the early going would bave involved Apple offering a Blu-Ray option so costly that the complaints would have been overwhelming.
Now that licensing is more favourable and the cost of hardware is starting to enter a workable range, Apple has a better channce of being able to offer Blu-Ray at a price point that will facilitate a significant adoption. Also the installed base of Blu-Ray players is growing, further improving the chances of enough customers opting for Blu-Ray to make it all work.
Seems to me that Apple's approach to Blu-Ray is consistent with how it does business. While other companies were tackling the flash music player market as an opportunity to out-feature the competition from a hardware perspective, Apple was thinking in terms of how to have their solution make sense in the daily lives of customers. Also Apple approached the handheld computer space by methodically evolving what started off as a simple music player into what we have today with the Touch, the iPhone, etc. Others might offer Blu-Ray simply because they can but Apple wouldn't offer it unless it could provide a satisfying implementation.
In last year’s fourth quarter, usually a big one for DVD sales, Mr. Smith explained, the studios’ revenue from sell-through of conventional DVDs and Blu-Ray discs fell 23.4 percent, to $2.6 billion from $3.4 billion.
It can be argued this is the situation BR is in. I believe Blu-ray sales will stall long before it becomes a primary medium for video.
We'll have a couple of years before we'll see this through.
Quote:
That's the progression for every new media format.
But if the price is too high to begin with, it may never get started.
Quote:
Go back to what? Hard Drives are the primary storage medium now, not DVD's. I don't know of anyone who plans to replace a hard drive with any optical format.
Once people get used to watching B-R and using it for a recording format they will never go back to DVD.
Quote:
Largely because of legacy and because the major content industries don't offer other viable options for physical media. Optical media will have a long slow death, but it won't have anymore significant growth.
B-R will have significant growth.
we'll just have to disagree on this one. It's too early to see how it'll shake out.
Quote:
There is no reason to use extremely compressed 4K at home. We should get to less compressed 1080 first.
I'm talking about the future. It will come
Quote:
You said you didn't understand what they meant by active users. She was an example people who are not active users.
I understand that, which is why I said she doesn't count.
It isn't the inactive users that matter. It's the active ones. but there is just a fuzzy idea of what that means.
It is someone who is on 30 minutes several days a week, or is it someone who is on 10 hours every day. Or where in between? Does it have to do with what they do while online, or is being online enough?
Do they have to be online buyers, or can they just be passive browsers?
It all means different things. People who are "active" may not be people who buy online, while those who spend little time there may do so for the purposes of buying.
Comments
Your generous: I'd say within 5 years optical's dead. Why carry a disc when a thumb drive will do? 64GB are going to get cheaper over the next few years. I just can't get excited over Blu-Ray and have no intention of purchasing the beast. It's yesterday's technology on steriods is all.
well then Matsushita, Sandisk and Toshiba better get a move on SD memory and start making deals with the movie labels. Frankly, if they don't do this in the next 5 years, then the idea will die quicker than all you nay-sayers interject about BD. At least BD players will play DVDs and Audo CDs. You're talking a whole new player and people will have to replace all their movies again.
There must be a better way. I think Home Servers are the best way to solve the problem, but you'll never keep people from wanting physical copies.
I do agree the electronics industry should be pro-active and jump on these things before the consumer market discovers the convenience and they are unable to gain control of it.
Your generous: I'd say within 5 years optical's dead. Why carry a disc when a thumb drive will do? 64GB are going to get cheaper over the next few years. I just can't get excited over Blu-Ray and have no intention of purchasing the beast. It's yesterday's technology on steriods is all.
You're talking a whole new player and people will have to replace all their movies again.
You don't need a player at all. They just need to built a media slot into televisions or use the media card reader in a computer.
There must be a better way. I think Home Servers are the best way to solve the problem, but you'll never keep people from wanting physical copies.
You can already create a home server now. The way that DVD sales are slumping there are signs that many people don't need to own movies.
You're talking a whole new player and people will have to replace all their movies again.
Transferring digital formats shouldn't be an issue (another piece of hardware to sell 'em). Many people copy their CDs to iPods. I don't like messing with CDs anymore...not when I have it all easily accessible on my iPod. If the older DVDs aren't HiDef, then they're going to have to repurchase anyway, irregardless of the medium....or, just keep the old players. There's a density race going on that the larger equipment loses in.
Yes, cos adding nearly $1000 dollars to the pre-markup price of any MacBook is going to be a really compelling idea.
/sarcasm
Apple would get these drives at a third the price. Possibly lower.
When they put the Pioneer DVD recorder into the Digital Audio Powermac, they didn't raise the price from the previous model by more than a couple of hundred bucks. At the time that drive was selling for $1,000 by itself.
If they want to do it, they can.
I'd guess again before predicting the demise of BD. it took VHS almost 30 years before it' finally died in 2006 to the commercial market. If you want to predict the end of Phyical Media, a safe bet would be 20 years more.
True... My 5-7 years was for downloading to become mainstream (not dominate, just a common practice for the average consumer), not for the demise of blu-ray. And even then, I think rentals will be the most common form of download. There are just too many issues around ownership of downloaded content, transferability being the main problem.
In Apple's defence, the success of CDs and DVDs was inevitable whereas Blu-Ray faces a much more fractured, certainly more complicated marketplace.
It seems to me that Apple has by no means indicated it will not support Blu-Ray ever. The timing wasn't right until maybe now and so Apple waited. Nothing wrong with that.
I think there's market pressure to add it. Apple is holding off as long as they can. It's also taking off pretty well, considering the recession we're in.
Its true but you know Apple.
Unfortunately, I do.
I agree few people would buy a $30-$40 movie. What differentiates this idea is that you don't need a stand alone player. You can simply stick the card into a TV or computer and have glorious 1080P and surround sound.
Early adopters would be into this at that price point. As the price comes down, it would filter to the masses. But electronics manufacturers won't do this because it risks destroying their current business model.
I'd actually like to believe it, but I'm finding it difficult.
A couple of years after the personal computer first came out I was telling people that in the future we would be buying music on memory cards instead of LPs.
But that was also before the CD came out. That changed everything.
Just like bubble memory was supposed to kill the HDD, it never happened.
I think the timing is impossible.
I don't see the industry moving to a format that will have just a handful of years of life.
I think people would have no problem moving on from optical players if given a choice.
I barely use the optical player in my Mac anymore. Most of the software on my computer has been downloaded from the developers website. The last third party application I recall installing from a disc was MS Office and that was about four years ago.
Most of the media I watch is from cable, video on demand, Hulu, iTunes, or Netflix streaming. A growing number of my friends are watching movies through torrents. But I don't participate in that myself.
Several of my gaming friends are more into playing Xbox or Playstation online. You really don't even need the optical disc for that, even though you still have to buy it to play the game online.
The electronics industry would charge a premium for this to make up for the loss in media player sales.
$30-$40 would not be that way forever, the price would come down as the price for BR has come down.
If the price was $20 to $25 it might work. But except for a very small number, I just don't see those prices as being desirable. as I said, players will be $50 in a couple of years.
We'll be getting B_R recorders in out computers for $30, just like we have DVD recorders now. Recordable disks will be cheap, and no one will go back.
We'll see 9.5mm recorders for laptops, and they will be everywhere.
I can't see anything else happening.
Optical has too much life left.
I read an article where they were saying that the format can even hold a 4k movie on a double layer disk with no changes.
IBM has already produced experimental recorders and disks that have 200GB. This is also the same format.
It's just beginning.
Its like my Grandmother. She lives in a retirement home and the building is wired for broadband. She has computer hooked up to broadband, but she rarely ever uses it.
But she doesn't fall under that term "active users" you said the survey found. She doesn't count basically.
On the other hand, I have several friends who are still on dial-up. One even has sold over 750 items on e-bay, and has bought about the same number.
But again, most "broadband" in use is 1 Mb/s or less, totally unusable for this purpose.
When 50% of the public has 20Mb/s then we can talk about this.
Sorry you get the full resolution regardless of the distance, although the typical person wont perceive the full benefit of a 40" 1080P until 5 feet. However blu ray discs contain much more detail (compared to heavily compressed iTunes media). Disks are typically 50GB and main features are typically about 28GB.
Frankly I sit around 6 feet away from my 42" plasma and Blu Ray 1080P content is noticably better than all other sources I use. The best example of this can be found in comparing DVDs to Blu Ray versions of the same film.
On my 24" PC screen the difference may not be obvious however I want to buy a film once and play it back at home and when travelling so blu ray on a Macbook Pro would rock.
In short for home cinema lovers Blu Ray is a must.
By the way, Carlton is a friend of mine, and he would argue with you about your interpretation if you think that you're getting the full resolution in the sense of seeing it...
The chart, which I use for my quick numbers is easy to understand.
Sitting 6 feet from a 42" screen WILL give some of the benefit of 1080p, but you need to get to 5 feet before you can get all the benefit. Is that what you're saying? If it is, then fine, but be careful how you describe what you see.
I agree. In this context BR is clearly is the winner. But quality is not the only variable. For many consumers not particularly important one.
For consumers with big HD Tvs, t is, and more people are moving to them every day.
About 62% of US BD releases have been been on BD50
That's more than I expected. It just makes the argument stronger.
Are you saying that badly written UI(/any) code runs better on faster hardware? That is OUTRAGEOUS!
Ain't it the truth?
I'm not sure if I fully agree with this chart. I have a 37" 720p Plasma (i was an early adopter) and run blu-ray on it, and we sit about 12' away from it. I do notice the difference between 480p and 720p very clearly on this set. Now that might have something to do with the Blu-ray player.
The chart is correct. You simply can't see the detail of 720p from 12 feet with that size set unless you have eagle eyes.
What you are seeing is the beginnings of the higher rez. but just barely. If you move up to 6 feet, you will see a much sharper picture.
True... My 5-7 years was for downloading to become mainstream (not dominate, just a common practice for the average consumer), not for the demise of blu-ray. And even then, I think rentals will be the most common form of download. There are just too many issues around ownership of downloaded content, transferability being the main problem.
Agreed. I NEVER buy on iTunes, but I VERY frequently download. I love the service and as a student with no tv and no desire to go to the movie store let alone deal with returns and such it is fantastic.
I don't see the industry moving to a format that will have just a handful of years of life.
It can be argued this is the situation BR is in. I believe Blu-ray sales will stall long before it becomes a primary medium for video.
If the price was $20 to $25 it might work. But except for a very small number, I just don't see those prices as being desirable. as I said, players will be $50 in a couple of years.
That's the progression for every new media format.
We'll be getting B_R recorders in out computers for $30, just like we have DVD recorders now. Recordable disks will be cheap, and no one will go back.
Go back to what? Hard Drives are the primary storage medium now, not DVD's. I don't know of anyone who plans to replace a hard drive with any optical format.
Optical has too much life left.
Largely because of legacy and because the major content industries don't offer other viable options for physical media. Optical media will have a long slow death, but it won't have anymore significant growth.
I read an article where they were saying that the format can even hold a 4k movie on a double layer disk with no changes.
There is no reason to use extremely compressed 4K at home. We should get to less compressed 1080 first.
But she doesn't fall under that term "active users" you said the survey found. She doesn't count basically.
You said you didn't understand what they meant by active users. She was an example people who are not active users.
For consumers with big HD Tvs, t is, and more people are moving to them every day.
I think there's market pressure to add it. Apple is holding off as long as they can. It's also taking off pretty well, considering the recession we're in.
Apple has a relatively small piece of the action and as such being able to standardize components across assorted product offerings allows economies of scale to keep costs down. It's no coincidence that today superdrives are standard fare in Minis, Pros, the Macbook, the iMac and the Macbook Pro.
Not only does using laptop components allow clever form factors for the Mini and the iMac, it also means there is an entire range of desktop CPUs, etc. that Apple simply doesn't have to concern itself with.
I believe that Apple wants the transition from a Superdrive that embraces DVD to one that extends to Blu-Ray to be as short as possible. So, yes, Apple has not rushed to embrace Blu-Ray. But the poor economy is a factor. At a time when Apple has been focused on lowering the price of its computers because of a soft economy, along comes Blu-Ray, which if adopted in the early going would bave involved Apple offering a Blu-Ray option so costly that the complaints would have been overwhelming.
Now that licensing is more favourable and the cost of hardware is starting to enter a workable range, Apple has a better channce of being able to offer Blu-Ray at a price point that will facilitate a significant adoption. Also the installed base of Blu-Ray players is growing, further improving the chances of enough customers opting for Blu-Ray to make it all work.
Seems to me that Apple's approach to Blu-Ray is consistent with how it does business. While other companies were tackling the flash music player market as an opportunity to out-feature the competition from a hardware perspective, Apple was thinking in terms of how to have their solution make sense in the daily lives of customers. Also Apple approached the handheld computer space by methodically evolving what started off as a simple music player into what we have today with the Touch, the iPhone, etc. Others might offer Blu-Ray simply because they can but Apple wouldn't offer it unless it could provide a satisfying implementation.
In last year’s fourth quarter, usually a big one for DVD sales, Mr. Smith explained, the studios’ revenue from sell-through of conventional DVDs and Blu-Ray discs fell 23.4 percent, to $2.6 billion from $3.4 billion.
Bad News for Hollywood’s Bottom Line: DVD Rentals Doing Better Than DVD Sales
It can be argued this is the situation BR is in. I believe Blu-ray sales will stall long before it becomes a primary medium for video.
We'll have a couple of years before we'll see this through.
That's the progression for every new media format.
But if the price is too high to begin with, it may never get started.
Go back to what? Hard Drives are the primary storage medium now, not DVD's. I don't know of anyone who plans to replace a hard drive with any optical format.
Once people get used to watching B-R and using it for a recording format they will never go back to DVD.
Largely because of legacy and because the major content industries don't offer other viable options for physical media. Optical media will have a long slow death, but it won't have anymore significant growth.
B-R will have significant growth.
we'll just have to disagree on this one. It's too early to see how it'll shake out.
There is no reason to use extremely compressed 4K at home. We should get to less compressed 1080 first.
I'm talking about the future. It will come
You said you didn't understand what they meant by active users. She was an example people who are not active users.
I understand that, which is why I said she doesn't count.
It isn't the inactive users that matter. It's the active ones. but there is just a fuzzy idea of what that means.
It is someone who is on 30 minutes several days a week, or is it someone who is on 10 hours every day. Or where in between? Does it have to do with what they do while online, or is being online enough?
Do they have to be online buyers, or can they just be passive browsers?
It all means different things. People who are "active" may not be people who buy online, while those who spend little time there may do so for the purposes of buying.
Its not too difficult to go from 1% to 2% or even 5% to 10%. If BR went from 25% to 50% then we could be talking.
That's why we have to wait a couple of years to see where things stand.