The fact is that Netflix members are already watching more TV episodes and movies streamed instantly over the Internet than on DVDs, and we expect that trend to continue.
The only reason Netflix has unbalanced streaming options is only because of the content owners. They know people are quickly adopting streaming and are attempting to hold it back as long as possible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory Bauer
Blu-Ray is available in RedBox kiosks in the smallest of rural American towns; so much for it going the way of those elusive CD-replacement formats. Blu-ray players are showing up in houses where I least expect them; Apple TVs? Not so much. And the content available on Netflix streaming, especially HD content, is still a joke.
Of course the content owners want to keep physical media going as long as they possibly can. Its far more profitable for them. The music industry tried to do the exact same thing. Attempting to ignore the will of the market did not work out so well for them.
The music industry tried to do the exact same thing. Attempting to ignore the will of the market did not work out so well for them.
this doesn't change the fact that drumming about the demise of physical media has been grossly premature for more than a decade. music content, streaming or direct downloads, has been widely available since 1998 (courtesy of Justin Frankel and Dmitry Boldyrev with Winamp 2, and Shawn Fanning with Napster) where many people in a first or second world country can still purchase music or films of physical media. one can also claim that music, without the need to purchase a physical copy, was widely available sooner via Usenet, IRC and FTP servers ever since MP3 encoding was standardised in 1991.
yes, i do forsee a time when entertainment will be predominantly available without the option of physical media. this scenario, however, won't be available anytime soon. CDs, DVDs and Blu-rays will be around for years to come. this will be especially true in places where access to reliable and relatively fast broadband connectivity is cost prohibitive.
this will be especially true in places where access to reliable and relatively fast broadband connectivity is cost prohibitive.
Regarding CDs everyone just keeps citing that very same argument.
But this really is not the main problem. These are the real problems:
In a day and age of 3TB hard drives I really do not see why I should buy music with lossy compression.
No matter how good the encoding is today, lossy compression means I'm locked into that very codec.
What am I going to do 5 or 10 years down the line (and I still listen to music I bought 10 years ago) if that codec is no longer supported on the hardware I will own then? I cannot re-encode that music with the then modern codec without a massive loss in audio quality. I will have to purchase that music all over again (take a guess who wants me to do that!)
Yet I'll be OK if I have access to the original lossless version, allowing me a simple re-encode.
I wish iTunes would sell music in AppleLossless, FLAC or WAV formats. But AAC, no thank you.
Also with iTunes the music market effectively got a lot more segmented.
What if I want to buy music from England, France or Japan? No luck. I can't. Not unless I have a UK, French or Japanese credit card and address or somehow organize an iTunes gift voucher from that very country. What a hassle.
If I order a CD via mail order it just works. No segmentation, no hassles.
Long live the CD!
iTunes (or any other digital music store) is just riddled with barriers, limits and long-term pitfalls.
Regarding CDs everyone just keeps citing that very same argument.
But this really is not the main problem. These are the real problems:
In a day and age of 3TB hard drives I really do not see why I should buy music with lossy compression.
No matter how good the encoding is today, lossy compression means I'm locked into that very codec.
What am I going to do 5 or 10 years down the line (and I still listen to music I bought 10 years ago) if that codec is no longer supported on the hardware I will own then? I cannot re-encode that music with the then modern codec without a massive loss in audio quality. I will have to purchase that music all over again (take a guess who wants me to do that!)
Yet I'll be OK if I have access to the original lossless version, allowing me a simple re-encode.
I wish iTunes would sell music in AppleLossless, FLAC or WAV formats. But AAC, no thank you.
Also with iTunes the music market effectively got a lot more segmented.
What if I want to buy music from England, France or Japan? No luck. I can't. Not unless I have a UK, French or Japanese credit card and address or somehow organize an iTunes gift voucher from that very country. What a hassle.
If I order a CD via mail order it just works. No segmentation, no hassles.
Long live the CD!
iTunes (or any other digital music store) is just riddled with barriers, limits and long-term pitfalls.
What you're saying is certainly true for yourself and other sound quality conscious people. But shouldn't we also acknowledge that for the vast majority of people, "the real problem" isn't the sound quality of music on the iTunes store? I'm in total agreement that higher quality would be better. I too won't buy iTS music because of the low fidelity. But we are but a tiny minority!
Another minor quibble is about "lossy" compression. Note that both aac/mp3 and CDs are lossy. CDs don't have all the audio fidelity of the master; some is lost when converted for red book audio (CD). Granted, more data is lost when converting to aac or mp3. Note that an mp3 or aac file ripped from a master will be better than one ripped from a CD.
Both of these topics are useful when constructing analogies for video distribution. BD AV quality is better than streaming right now and for the immediate future. However, it also seems true that netflix, vudu, and others have reached a level of quality that is good enough for most people.
Your point about segmentation is much more widely applicable. It seems like "the real problem". It is annoying that digital distribution is still being hampered by copyright holders dragging their feet. This is what is really holding back streaming. If netflix had every movie and tv show ever aired, we'd be home free, done, media nirvana would be achieved. There would be nothing else left to accomplish. Well, perhaps bumping up the bitrate every year so that absolutely everyone is satisfied. That nirvana might still be few years out, but we're sooo close now. At times, it already seems as if that nirvana has arrived. On many occasions, what I want to watch or listen to is immediately available.
Of course the content owners want to keep physical media going as long as they possibly can. Its far more profitable for them. The music industry tried to do the exact same thing. Attempting to ignore the will of the market did not work out so well for them.
You answered your own question. Physical media is still the will of the market, and it makes them more money, hence why they support it more. Steaming isn't going to be the will of the market for many a year to come.
I'm not talking about a total sum game. Where physical media is completely gone. That isn't the point. The point is the clear shift in media distribution.
You don't understand what happened over the past ten years if you don't believe that Napster was the beginning of the end. Everything changed after that.
Do you still go to a major media retailer to purchase CDs and DVDs the way you would have ten years ago?
Quote:
Originally Posted by emacs72
this doesn't change the fact that drumming about the demise of physical media has been grossly premature for more than a decade. music content, streaming or direct downloads, has been widely available since 1998 (courtesy of Justin Frankel and Dmitry Boldyrev with Winamp 2, and Shawn Fanning with Napster) where many people in a first or second world country can still purchase music or films of physical media. one can also claim that music, without the need to purchase a physical copy, was widely available sooner via Usenet, IRC and FTP servers ever since MP3 encoding was standardised in 1991.
yes, i do forsee a time when entertainment will be predominantly available without the option of physical media. this scenario, however, won't be available anytime soon. CDs, DVDs and Blu-rays will be around for years to come. this will be especially true in places where access to reliable and relatively fast broadband connectivity is cost prohibitive.
If physical media was still the will of the market there would continue to be Tower Records, HMV Records, Virgin Mega Store, Blockbuster, Hollywood Video. Why are all the major brick and mortar media stores dust in the wind, or very well soon to be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning
You answered your own question. Physical media is still the will of the market, and it makes them more money, hence why they support it more. Steaming isn't going to be the will of the market for many a year to come.
If physical media was still the will of the market there would continue to be Tower Records, HMV Records, Virgin Mega Store, Blockbuster, Hollywood Video. Why are all the major brick and mortar media stores dust in the wind, or very well soon to be.
Because of the likes of Amazon.com. As you are an American I thought you would have know about this.
And try to remember, as you are an American you can't speak for all the countries in the world. Digital Downloads have a long way to catch up...
Delivery Infrastructure
Cost
Quality
Interoperability
These are just a couple of the issues that Digital Downloads need to overcome before going mainstream.
Do you still go to a major media retailer to purchase CDs and DVDs the way you would have ten years ago?
10 years ago I purchased CDs and DVDs at Amazon.com, now I purchase my DVDs and Blu-rays from Amazon.co.uk. Personally the majority of my movie collection have come from online retailers. Now see my experience is different, don't expect your current experience to mirror the entire worlds.
10 years ago Amazon was primarily a book seller. I don't recall them having a large selection of physical media. DVD was still very new in 2001, I don't believe Amazon had any significant presence in DVD sales at that point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning
10 years ago I purchased CDs and DVDs at Amazon.com, now I purchase my DVDs and Blu-rays from Amazon.co.uk. Personally the majority of my movie collection have come from online retailers. Now see my experience is different, don't expect your current experience to mirror the entire worlds.
You don't understand what happened over the past ten years if you don't believe that Napster was the beginning of the end. Everything changed after that.
Quote:
Do you still go to a major media retailer to purchase CDs and DVDs the way you would have ten years ago?
What you're saying is certainly true for yourself and other sound quality conscious people. But shouldn't we also acknowledge that for the vast majority of people, "the real problem" isn't.
What you're saying is all very true.
Sound quality could always be better. And certainly the few 24bit Audio DVDs I have sound much better than any 'lossless' CD I have.
Though I don't want to get hung up on initial audio quality. The point I tried to make was that re-encoding already lossy quality (e.g. AAC) into yet another lossy format (whatever lossy codec is popular in 10 years) will dramatically reduce overall audio quality.
And I might have to do that if the audio player of my choice in 10 years does not support AAC but only some other, newer format.
It is the 'being locked into having to buy an audio player that supports AAC in 10 years' - or facing a huge loss of audio quality if I have to transcode my AACs - that has me worried.
With CDs I don't have that transcoding fear.
And I really hate the iTunes market segmentation.
I don't just listen to mainstream US pop because there's lots of other fantastic stuff out there from so many different countries. That new British band, or the soundtrack to that French movie or Japanese anime, that Flamenco singer from Spain or the Italian pop star that reminded me of last summer's vacation there. None of these I can purchase in iTunes with my US credit card and address. THAT is what sucks.
And I don't think we can blame copyrights for it, as I can very easily buy all this music - on good ol' CDs.
I think it has more to do with studio bosses abusing this digital distribution as a chance to introduce tiered pricing by country - to milk consumers better.
Something they lost with CDs as these have a more uniform pricing nowadays.
Amazon did not absorb the lost brick and mortar sales. Amazon isn't even the largest online retailer of media.
What part of "likes of" did you have the issue with?
[QUOTE=TenoBell;1777109]
There is no need to account for every country in the world. Physical media sales are in decline. That's just a fact.
Yes they are, no one is denying that (actually DVD are decreasing, Blu-ray is continuing to increase in sales and rentals). The issue is Digital Downloads are not increasing at the same rate that physical media is decreasing. That's just a fact.
May I ask what US city you live in? Would it be New York?
What store do you buy media from? If you are in the US brick and mortar media stores are absolutely nothing like what they were 10 years ago.
Mostly whats left is Wal-Mart and Target. Both of which mostly carry the most popular music/movies of the moment. Not nearly the depth of selection that Virgin Megastore or Tower used to have.
10 years ago Amazon was primarily a book seller. I don't recall them having a large selection of physical media. DVD was still very new in 2001, I don't believe Amazon had any significant presence in DVD sales at that point.
Since DVD distribution didn't take off in the US until 2003 why did you ask a question where there was no correct answer? Personally I had a DVD player in 2001, looking at my Amazon history I started purchasing DVDs from Amazon in 2002.
And currently I purchase the majority (over 90%) of my movies (99% are Blu-rays) from Amazon.com or Amazon.co.uk. This has nothing to do with the lack of a store selling Blu-ray movies, those are around, generally one of the Amazons are much cheaper.
Comments
My suggestion for this year's name is Blu-Ray vs The Internet [2011].
Just my 2¢.
People, it's January 2nd. If you want to continue this decade-long tradition, someone needs to start a 2011 thread.
My suggestion for this year's name is Blu-Ray vs The Internet [2011].
Just my 2¢.
I would think that the new title should be "The Internet Streaming VOD vs. BD & DVD"
All the original BD supporters on this thread probably have moved onto different hobbies, like PS3 gaming.
The fact is that Netflix members are already watching more TV episodes and movies streamed instantly over the Internet than on DVDs, and we expect that trend to continue.
content owners are looking to change that trend http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN0117661420101201 as such, physical media will be around for many years to come.
Blu-Ray is available in RedBox kiosks in the smallest of rural American towns; so much for it going the way of those elusive CD-replacement formats. Blu-ray players are showing up in houses where I least expect them; Apple TVs? Not so much. And the content available on Netflix streaming, especially HD content, is still a joke.
content owners are looking to change that trend http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN0117661420101201 as such, physical media will be around for many years to come.
The music industry tried to do the exact same thing. Attempting to ignore the will of the market did not work out so well for them.
this doesn't change the fact that drumming about the demise of physical media has been grossly premature for more than a decade. music content, streaming or direct downloads, has been widely available since 1998 (courtesy of Justin Frankel and Dmitry Boldyrev with Winamp 2, and Shawn Fanning with Napster) where many people in a first or second world country can still purchase music or films of physical media. one can also claim that music, without the need to purchase a physical copy, was widely available sooner via Usenet, IRC and FTP servers ever since MP3 encoding was standardised in 1991.
yes, i do forsee a time when entertainment will be predominantly available without the option of physical media. this scenario, however, won't be available anytime soon. CDs, DVDs and Blu-rays will be around for years to come. this will be especially true in places where access to reliable and relatively fast broadband connectivity is cost prohibitive.
this will be especially true in places where access to reliable and relatively fast broadband connectivity is cost prohibitive.
Regarding CDs everyone just keeps citing that very same argument.
But this really is not the main problem. These are the real problems:
In a day and age of 3TB hard drives I really do not see why I should buy music with lossy compression.
No matter how good the encoding is today, lossy compression means I'm locked into that very codec.
What am I going to do 5 or 10 years down the line (and I still listen to music I bought 10 years ago) if that codec is no longer supported on the hardware I will own then? I cannot re-encode that music with the then modern codec without a massive loss in audio quality. I will have to purchase that music all over again (take a guess who wants me to do that!)
Yet I'll be OK if I have access to the original lossless version, allowing me a simple re-encode.
I wish iTunes would sell music in AppleLossless, FLAC or WAV formats. But AAC, no thank you.
Also with iTunes the music market effectively got a lot more segmented.
What if I want to buy music from England, France or Japan? No luck. I can't. Not unless I have a UK, French or Japanese credit card and address or somehow organize an iTunes gift voucher from that very country. What a hassle.
If I order a CD via mail order it just works. No segmentation, no hassles.
Long live the CD!
iTunes (or any other digital music store) is just riddled with barriers, limits and long-term pitfalls.
Regarding CDs everyone just keeps citing that very same argument.
But this really is not the main problem. These are the real problems:
In a day and age of 3TB hard drives I really do not see why I should buy music with lossy compression.
No matter how good the encoding is today, lossy compression means I'm locked into that very codec.
What am I going to do 5 or 10 years down the line (and I still listen to music I bought 10 years ago) if that codec is no longer supported on the hardware I will own then? I cannot re-encode that music with the then modern codec without a massive loss in audio quality. I will have to purchase that music all over again (take a guess who wants me to do that!)
Yet I'll be OK if I have access to the original lossless version, allowing me a simple re-encode.
I wish iTunes would sell music in AppleLossless, FLAC or WAV formats. But AAC, no thank you.
Also with iTunes the music market effectively got a lot more segmented.
What if I want to buy music from England, France or Japan? No luck. I can't. Not unless I have a UK, French or Japanese credit card and address or somehow organize an iTunes gift voucher from that very country. What a hassle.
If I order a CD via mail order it just works. No segmentation, no hassles.
Long live the CD!
iTunes (or any other digital music store) is just riddled with barriers, limits and long-term pitfalls.
What you're saying is certainly true for yourself and other sound quality conscious people. But shouldn't we also acknowledge that for the vast majority of people, "the real problem" isn't the sound quality of music on the iTunes store? I'm in total agreement that higher quality would be better. I too won't buy iTS music because of the low fidelity. But we are but a tiny minority!
Another minor quibble is about "lossy" compression. Note that both aac/mp3 and CDs are lossy. CDs don't have all the audio fidelity of the master; some is lost when converted for red book audio (CD). Granted, more data is lost when converting to aac or mp3. Note that an mp3 or aac file ripped from a master will be better than one ripped from a CD.
Both of these topics are useful when constructing analogies for video distribution. BD AV quality is better than streaming right now and for the immediate future. However, it also seems true that netflix, vudu, and others have reached a level of quality that is good enough for most people.
Your point about segmentation is much more widely applicable. It seems like "the real problem". It is annoying that digital distribution is still being hampered by copyright holders dragging their feet. This is what is really holding back streaming. If netflix had every movie and tv show ever aired, we'd be home free, done, media nirvana would be achieved. There would be nothing else left to accomplish. Well, perhaps bumping up the bitrate every year so that absolutely everyone is satisfied. That nirvana might still be few years out, but we're sooo close now. At times, it already seems as if that nirvana has arrived. On many occasions, what I want to watch or listen to is immediately available.
Of course the content owners want to keep physical media going as long as they possibly can. Its far more profitable for them. The music industry tried to do the exact same thing. Attempting to ignore the will of the market did not work out so well for them.
You answered your own question. Physical media is still the will of the market, and it makes them more money, hence why they support it more. Steaming isn't going to be the will of the market for many a year to come.
You don't understand what happened over the past ten years if you don't believe that Napster was the beginning of the end. Everything changed after that.
Do you still go to a major media retailer to purchase CDs and DVDs the way you would have ten years ago?
this doesn't change the fact that drumming about the demise of physical media has been grossly premature for more than a decade. music content, streaming or direct downloads, has been widely available since 1998 (courtesy of Justin Frankel and Dmitry Boldyrev with Winamp 2, and Shawn Fanning with Napster) where many people in a first or second world country can still purchase music or films of physical media. one can also claim that music, without the need to purchase a physical copy, was widely available sooner via Usenet, IRC and FTP servers ever since MP3 encoding was standardised in 1991.
yes, i do forsee a time when entertainment will be predominantly available without the option of physical media. this scenario, however, won't be available anytime soon. CDs, DVDs and Blu-rays will be around for years to come. this will be especially true in places where access to reliable and relatively fast broadband connectivity is cost prohibitive.
You answered your own question. Physical media is still the will of the market, and it makes them more money, hence why they support it more. Steaming isn't going to be the will of the market for many a year to come.
If physical media was still the will of the market there would continue to be Tower Records, HMV Records, Virgin Mega Store, Blockbuster, Hollywood Video. Why are all the major brick and mortar media stores dust in the wind, or very well soon to be.
Because of the likes of Amazon.com. As you are an American I thought you would have know about this.
And try to remember, as you are an American you can't speak for all the countries in the world. Digital Downloads have a long way to catch up...
- Delivery Infrastructure
- Cost
- Quality
- Interoperability
These are just a couple of the issues that Digital Downloads need to overcome before going mainstream.Do you still go to a major media retailer to purchase CDs and DVDs the way you would have ten years ago?
10 years ago I purchased CDs and DVDs at Amazon.com, now I purchase my DVDs and Blu-rays from Amazon.co.uk. Personally the majority of my movie collection have come from online retailers. Now see my experience is different, don't expect your current experience to mirror the entire worlds.
Because of the likes of Amazon.com. As you are an American I thought you would have know about this.
Amazon did not absorb the lost brick and mortar sales. Amazon isn't even the largest online retailer of media.
And try to remember, as you are an American you can't speak for all the countries in the world. Digital Downloads have a long way to catch up...
There is no need to account for every country in the world. Physical media sales are in decline. That's just a fact.
10 years ago I purchased CDs and DVDs at Amazon.com, now I purchase my DVDs and Blu-rays from Amazon.co.uk. Personally the majority of my movie collection have come from online retailers. Now see my experience is different, don't expect your current experience to mirror the entire worlds.
You don't understand what happened over the past ten years if you don't believe that Napster was the beginning of the end. Everything changed after that.
Do you still go to a major media retailer to purchase CDs and DVDs the way you would have ten years ago?
absolutely, yes.
What you're saying is certainly true for yourself and other sound quality conscious people. But shouldn't we also acknowledge that for the vast majority of people, "the real problem" isn't.
What you're saying is all very true.
Sound quality could always be better. And certainly the few 24bit Audio DVDs I have sound much better than any 'lossless' CD I have.
Though I don't want to get hung up on initial audio quality. The point I tried to make was that re-encoding already lossy quality (e.g. AAC) into yet another lossy format (whatever lossy codec is popular in 10 years) will dramatically reduce overall audio quality.
And I might have to do that if the audio player of my choice in 10 years does not support AAC but only some other, newer format.
It is the 'being locked into having to buy an audio player that supports AAC in 10 years' - or facing a huge loss of audio quality if I have to transcode my AACs - that has me worried.
With CDs I don't have that transcoding fear.
And I really hate the iTunes market segmentation.
I don't just listen to mainstream US pop because there's lots of other fantastic stuff out there from so many different countries. That new British band, or the soundtrack to that French movie or Japanese anime, that Flamenco singer from Spain or the Italian pop star that reminded me of last summer's vacation there. None of these I can purchase in iTunes with my US credit card and address. THAT is what sucks.
And I don't think we can blame copyrights for it, as I can very easily buy all this music - on good ol' CDs.
I think it has more to do with studio bosses abusing this digital distribution as a chance to introduce tiered pricing by country - to milk consumers better.
Something they lost with CDs as these have a more uniform pricing nowadays.
Amazon did not absorb the lost brick and mortar sales. Amazon isn't even the largest online retailer of media.
What part of "likes of" did you have the issue with?
[QUOTE=TenoBell;1777109]
There is no need to account for every country in the world. Physical media sales are in decline. That's just a fact.
Yes they are, no one is denying that (actually DVD are decreasing, Blu-ray is continuing to increase in sales and rentals). The issue is Digital Downloads are not increasing at the same rate that physical media is decreasing. That's just a fact.
May I ask what US city you live in? Would it be New York?
Mostly whats left is Wal-Mart and Target. Both of which mostly carry the most popular music/movies of the moment. Not nearly the depth of selection that Virgin Megastore or Tower used to have.
absolutely, yes.
10 years ago Amazon was primarily a book seller. I don't recall them having a large selection of physical media. DVD was still very new in 2001, I don't believe Amazon had any significant presence in DVD sales at that point.
Since DVD distribution didn't take off in the US until 2003 why did you ask a question where there was no correct answer? Personally I had a DVD player in 2001, looking at my Amazon history I started purchasing DVDs from Amazon in 2002.
And currently I purchase the majority (over 90%) of my movies (99% are Blu-rays) from Amazon.com or Amazon.co.uk. This has nothing to do with the lack of a store selling Blu-ray movies, those are around, generally one of the Amazons are much cheaper.