If you'd paid a few thousand for a film project and were then sent a You Tube URL you'd be pretty p'd off. You Tube's fine for getting stuff viewed by a large amount of people, but for decent revenue and the best viewing experience you still currently need hard copies. The BBC and Channel 4 in the UK have their own excellent streaming services which are free to view, you can access these through any set-top box linked to the internet. The quality is pretty good, but they still make most of their revenue on the sale of discs with actual paid-for downloads being a tiny proportion of revenue. The BBC in particular have been very quick to exploit blu-ray with their Planet Earth blu-ray being one of the best selling discs of 2008.
Apple currently have computers with brilliant screens and no way of playing back optical HD media, let alone burning it. it's just silly.
Quote:
It was you that insisted that digital distribution was unacceptable for "serious" works as opposed to laughs.
Well if I was watching Lawrence of Arabia or Avatar I don't think You Tube or Vimeo would currently be my first port of call.
If you'd paid a few thousand for a film project and were then sent a You Tube URL you'd be pretty p'd off.
Sure. So what? What does that have to do with budding film makers? If the customer is paying they get it on whatever media they want to pay for.
Quote:
You Tube's fine for getting stuff viewed by a large amount of people, but for decent revenue and the best viewing experience you still currently need hard copies. The BBC and Channel 4 in the UK have their own excellent streaming services which are free to view, you can access these through any set-top box linked to the internet. The quality is pretty good, but they still make most of their revenue on the sale of discs with actual paid-for downloads being a tiny proportion of revenue. The BBC in particular have been very quick to exploit blu-ray with their Planet Earth blu-ray being one of the best selling discs of 2008.
Free downloads and streams generate little to no income. Who knew?
DEG says digital downloads generated $968M in revenue in 1H 2009...double that of BR.
But lets not let facts interfere shall we? Digital downloads don't generate decent revenues.
Quote:
Apple currently have computers with brilliant screens and no way of playing back optical HD media, let alone burning it. it's just silly.
Perhaps because they've chosen to promote digital downloads since they dominate it? Nah, that would be silly.
Quote:
Well if I was watching Lawrence of Arabia or Avatar I don't think You Tube or Vimeo would currently be my first port of call.
If you want to watch Avatar at home (illegal) digital download is your only option unless your last name is Cameron. And funny enough I recall watching Lawrence Of Arabia in HD via HDNet (okay, broadcast and not download except it WAS digital cable)...has your BR version arrived yet?
Amusingly, while the Avatar in theater you saw may have arrived on discs it also may have arrived via download. DCP allows for either distribution via physical media or download from Technicolor, Kodak or Deluxe (sat or broadband).
Gosh, another snide comment shown to be wrong again. Whoda guessed?
Saw this for sale in this week's Best Buy flyer. Thought I was dreaming.
Looks like an AppleTV without the iTunes Store, but with USB stick support. It's MUCH cheaper than an AppleTV though (no hard drive.)
When did Sony join the downloading bandwagon? Does anyone here have one?
But the thing about Sony is that they have an example of every possible configuration of every possible consumer technology on earth, somewhere in their catalog. Most of the time it doesn't represent any kind of strategy or plan or even particular interest-- you get the impression that their hardware design labs are like the Sorcerer's Apprentice, just kind of mindlessly churning out boxes and widgets and devices and systems, unbidden and undirected.
I mean really, it's like they can't stop. I've seen Sony video/ebook/mp3 player things with more buttons and industrial design than an Apache helicopter, and just stood their marveling that it even exists. I don't think even Sony knows what all they're making.
That will be another 26 million households with netflix streaming hardware in the US alone!
In the same press release there was also some news about Warner Brothers and Netflix cutting a deal that made new movies available for rental 28 days after going on sale. This would be for streaming and physical media as far as I can tell. But that part of the news is a bit light on details. Anyone know more about that?
As an avid movie enthusiast and collector I demand high quality 1080p on monitors 50" or larger or via projectors.
[Slightly off topic]
Actually, what I'd like to see is an All-in-One projector (such as the Epson MovieMate) with BluRay and the capacity to throw a 300" projection. (The NCIS MTAC room is my inspiration.)
I'm helping to set up a media room at a local church for movie watching and small group studies.
Haven't seen an AIO system out there that's affordable and easy for non techies to use.
I received a BR player for xmas but I can't tell you the last time I actually visited a movie rental place, including those rental stands at the g store.
That's why Jesus invented Netflix and Blockbuster in-the-mail delivery, and that's how I get my blu-ray movies.
I don't see myself going to digital download. I like having my wall (nearly literally) of DVDs and Blu-Rays. I think, once the qaulity of the media gets better, that I could do more iTunes rentals, but I don't see it as my primary source for my home entertainment center.
Don't get me wrong though, I would love to have digital copies for my laptop/iPod/tablet one day, but not at the expense of my hard copy (so to speak).
I think it would be neat if future Apple TVs had Blu-Ray players built in, and they will either download a digital copy for your iTunes account or copy it straight from the disk (obviously, you could not watch the disk while it did this, but you could watch other iTunes stuff). I honestly see them doing that before being cable boxes.
What is it about the wall of physical media that you like?
I too used to collect DVDs and and really enjoyed the act of browsing the shelves full of cases. At first the digital experience couldn't hold a candle to this. The gap has closed in the past few years though. In some ways, each is attractive and each has shortcomings. I'll attempt to address just the browsing experience but do fully acknowledge that there are other reasons for preferring physical or electronically delivered media.
Home physical media libraries provide a tactile experience, high-resolution cover art, and sometimes detailed info booklets.
Browsing of streaming/download/VOD libraries is certainly different. Each person must have a separate electronic device in order to browse independently while with physical media each person can simply stand in front of a different part of the shelf. In real world usage, just one person is control of the browsing while everyone else provides commentary.
Another difference is the organizational scheme. Physical media collections have static organization, typically everything is arranged alphabetically. Electronically delivered libraries can be reorganized on the fly and even offer suggestions. It is possible to select a movie, and have others suggested from the same genre, same staring actors, same director, same topic, or even just preferred by people who happen to have the same taste as you. In this regard, the difference is exactly analogous to that of physical books vs the www. The www allows interlinking and multiple simultaneous classification/browsing architectures.
Ironically, i gave up collecting physical media prior to a equivalent experience being available via a streamed/downloaded library. Other trade-offs such as cost, selection, and immediacy, were what justified the poorer browsing experience. Thankfully though, the situation has changed. I now prefer to browse electronic rather than physical libraries.
What is it about the wall of physical media that you like?
I too used to collect DVDs and and really enjoyed the act of browsing the shelves full of cases. At first the digital experience couldn't hold a candle to this. The gap has closed in the past few years though. In some ways, each is attractive and each has shortcomings. I'll attempt to address just the browsing experience but do fully acknowledge that there are other reasons for preferring physical or electronically delivered media.
Home physical media libraries provide a tactile experience, high-resolution cover art, and sometimes detailed info booklets.
Browsing of streaming/download/VOD libraries is certainly different. Each person must have a separate electronic device in order to browse independently while with physical media each person can simply stand in front of a different part of the shelf. In real world usage, just one person is control of the browsing while everyone else provides commentary.
Another difference is the organizational scheme. Physical media collections have static organization, typically everything is arranged alphabetically. Electronically delivered libraries can be reorganized on the fly and even offer suggestions. It is possible to select a movie, and have others suggested from the same genre, same staring actors, same director, same topic, or even just preferred by people who happen to have the same taste as you. In this regard, the difference is exactly analogous to that of physical books vs the www. The www allows interlinking and multiple simultaneous classification/browsing architectures.
Ironically, i gave up collecting physical media prior to a equivalent experience being available via a streamed/downloaded library. Other trade-offs such as cost, selection, and immediacy, were what justified the poorer browsing experience. Thankfully though, the situation has changed. I now prefer to browse electronic rather than physical libraries.
It is more or less simple. With digital media, I worry too much that may harddrive may fail, or I will accidentally delete something that cannot be recovered without a payment. Also, if all my DVDs and Blu-Rays were to become digital, I would need a large harddrive just for them. And there are, of course, the extra features (I enjoy commentaries).
Perhaps, one day, when solutions to these things present themselves and in a simple way, I may be more willing to make a transition and free up the wall for something else. As you said, the fluid way to rapidly rearrange the sorting appeals to me. But we shall see what we shall see. At the moment, the phyiscal media appeals.
Care to comment on what you find appealing about browsing physical media? Or is it just that you prefer the physical media without browsing being the motivating factor?
And to address the non-browsing side of the equation...
The fear of damage to the storage medium is certainly a logical concern. It should be noted that this is a only concern for downloads, but not streaming or VOD. Ironically, this is an inherent weakness of physical media, not electronic media distribution. Download services, as a distinct concept from VOD or streaming, can be structured either way. Either they are available for subsequent re-downloads, or not. But it isn't inherent to the medium.
For me, the anecdotal evidence is in favor of electronic delivery. Netflix streaming has never ever failed me. Yet I've received at least a dozen unplayable disks from netflix. Granted, my own personal library has only seen two DVDs fail out of a couple hundred.
Another aspect to note is that the motivation for video collecting has disappeared for a large percentage of those who used to be avid collectors. Prior to streaming/downloads/VOD, you either watched one of the 35 available cable channels, you watched a purchased DVD/VHS, or you had to take a trip to a rental store. Also, if you really wanted to have something in particular to watch at any time, it had to be owned.
What's key here is that this is no longer the case. People are no longer limited to 30-40 cable channels or their own collection. Instead they can choose from vastly more cable channels, stream, download, PPV, or even watch something on a computer.
I'll be the first to admit that this isn't sufficient for all video collectors. But looking at the changing motivations for collecting, it almost seems inevitable for the vast majority in the long run.
People have forgotten that DVD didn't take off until players became affordable. In case you forgot, right after Bluray became the "standard," we experienced a global economic meltdown. Also, people aren't going to be replacing their DVD libraries - ever.
So, now that BR is cheaper (and approaching $100 which is what people are willing to pay for a player), they'll look to replace their aging DVD player. Then they'll start renting and buying DVDs. The idea that the vast majority of nontechnophiles is going to stream/download near HD is ridiculous... they can't even tell the difference between HD and plain DVD.
So, I am a techie but I've been waiting for BR to come down in cost and I'm looking at getting the Sony BR player from Costco this week at $107. I still won't buy but I'll start renting BR discs. I also have two kids so I'll get a BR burner and take their movies to BR discs.
I don't see myself going to digital download. I like having my wall (nearly literally) of DVDs and Blu-Rays. I think, once the qaulity of the media gets better, that I could do more iTunes rentals, but I don't see it as my primary source for my home entertainment center.
Don't get me wrong though, I would love to have digital copies for my laptop/iPod/tablet one day, but not at the expense of my hard copy (so to speak).
I think it would be neat if future Apple TVs had Blu-Ray players built in, and they will either download a digital copy for your iTunes account or copy it straight from the disk (obviously, you could not watch the disk while it did this, but you could watch other iTunes stuff). I honestly see them doing that before being cable boxes.
You and I are equally aligned on this issue. I can't describe why I love my physical DVD/Blu collection. I just do. It's like a library. I like walking up to my "wall" of media and browsing through them and deciding what I'm in the mood for. I also like that whenever someone walks into my house and sees that wall of media they know "whoever lives here definitely love movies."
I don't dislike iTunes versions, or Netflix streams, per se. I just don't like the quality of them and I don't like how long it takes to download or to start streaming. I don't like being at the mercy of my IP or the service provider serving me the file. Physical media makes me feel more secure and I at least know what the quality of the presentation is going to be.
Downloads and streaming are definitely the future. But I just don't see it eclipsing physical media for a very long time. And even then physical media will always have a market no matter how much it might shrink.
Or maybe it's because I'm becoming more and more old-fashioned about some things.
It was pointed out to me that one reason for Apple not adopting blu-ray anytime soon is probably a total lack of Apple blu-ray authoring software. Not much point to stick it in there just for playback/archiving when you'll still have to author stuff on a PC. And no I don't expect the mass iPod market to be clamouring for this, just as I doubt many people actually use Garageband, iMovie or iDVD, but the iApps are still the most user-friendly suite of programs around.
This guys got some good points:
Quote:
To say Apple is forgoing on optical media altogether would be to say it?s slowly, but surely, bowing out of the video market altogether ? and nobody in their right mind would believe that is the case...
...If we?ve learned anything, it?s to not listen to Apple when it ?writes off? technologies in its shareholder meetings. Though the company has referred to Blu-ray as a ?bag of hurt? in the past, it sits on the Board of Directors of the Blu-ray Disc Association. Apple is a huge proponent of high definition (who wouldn?t be at this point?) and, as such, it realizes that more and more people are shooting in HD and need a way to present that. We?ve discussed before the limitations of the iPod and iPhone platforms as they do not support HD content, and even the Apple TV is limited in this regard. What other solution is there? YouTube? While that?s a great start, Apple is totally aware that people still prefer to have something a bit more portable and higher quality than YouTube.
My personal opinion is that Apple is working on developing Blu-ray authoring solutions (as well as inclusion of Blu-ray drives as the price continues to come down). We?ve seen a small taste of this support in the latest version of Compressor; hints of Blu-ray support in the latest version of iTunes; and I think as time goes on, we will see more support in other apps as well. In the meantime, DVD Studio Pro and iDVD will likely stay right where they are at. It?s easy to develop new themes for these apps, but why split your resources if you?re focusing on some whizz-bang, new app for Blu-ray authoring? In their current states, these applications are quite maxed out for now.
If I could just pop in here for a moment, I'd just like to thank everyone for looking past my slightly tongue-in-cheek thread title and pitching in to take the simply-cannot-die-ever Blu-ray thread forward into the future. (wipes away tear) It's beautiful.
Comments
Apple currently have computers with brilliant screens and no way of playing back optical HD media, let alone burning it. it's just silly.
It was you that insisted that digital distribution was unacceptable for "serious" works as opposed to laughs.
Well if I was watching Lawrence of Arabia or Avatar I don't think You Tube or Vimeo would currently be my first port of call.
If you'd paid a few thousand for a film project and were then sent a You Tube URL you'd be pretty p'd off.
Sure. So what? What does that have to do with budding film makers? If the customer is paying they get it on whatever media they want to pay for.
You Tube's fine for getting stuff viewed by a large amount of people, but for decent revenue and the best viewing experience you still currently need hard copies. The BBC and Channel 4 in the UK have their own excellent streaming services which are free to view, you can access these through any set-top box linked to the internet. The quality is pretty good, but they still make most of their revenue on the sale of discs with actual paid-for downloads being a tiny proportion of revenue. The BBC in particular have been very quick to exploit blu-ray with their Planet Earth blu-ray being one of the best selling discs of 2008.
Free downloads and streams generate little to no income. Who knew?
DEG says digital downloads generated $968M in revenue in 1H 2009...double that of BR.
But lets not let facts interfere shall we? Digital downloads don't generate decent revenues.
Apple currently have computers with brilliant screens and no way of playing back optical HD media, let alone burning it. it's just silly.
Perhaps because they've chosen to promote digital downloads since they dominate it? Nah, that would be silly.
Well if I was watching Lawrence of Arabia or Avatar I don't think You Tube or Vimeo would currently be my first port of call.
If you want to watch Avatar at home (illegal) digital download is your only option unless your last name is Cameron. And funny enough I recall watching Lawrence Of Arabia in HD via HDNet (okay, broadcast and not download except it WAS digital cable)...has your BR version arrived yet?
Amusingly, while the Avatar in theater you saw may have arrived on discs it also may have arrived via download. DCP allows for either distribution via physical media or download from Technicolor, Kodak or Deluxe (sat or broadband).
Gosh, another snide comment shown to be wrong again. Whoda guessed?
Looks like an AppleTV without the iTunes Store, but with USB stick support. It's MUCH cheaper than an AppleTV though (no hard drive.)
When did Sony join the downloading bandwagon? Does anyone here have one?
Saw this for sale in this week's Best Buy flyer. Thought I was dreaming.
Looks like an AppleTV without the iTunes Store, but with USB stick support. It's MUCH cheaper than an AppleTV though (no hard drive.)
When did Sony join the downloading bandwagon? Does anyone here have one?
But the thing about Sony is that they have an example of every possible configuration of every possible consumer technology on earth, somewhere in their catalog. Most of the time it doesn't represent any kind of strategy or plan or even particular interest-- you get the impression that their hardware design labs are like the Sorcerer's Apprentice, just kind of mindlessly churning out boxes and widgets and devices and systems, unbidden and undirected.
I mean really, it's like they can't stop. I've seen Sony video/ebook/mp3 player things with more buttons and industrial design than an Apache helicopter, and just stood their marveling that it even exists. I don't think even Sony knows what all they're making.
Saw this for sale in this week's Best Buy flyer. Thought I was dreaming.
Looks like an AppleTV without the iTunes Store, but with USB stick support. It's MUCH cheaper than an AppleTV though (no hard drive.)
When did Sony join the downloading bandwagon? Does anyone here have one?
A device with no form of networking whatsoever wouldn't be what I call evidence of Sony getting on the "download bandwagon".
On the other hand, selling movie downloads to their millions of console customers... that could be considered evidence.
Wii to get Netflix streaming this spring:
http://vator.tv/news/show/2010-01-13...-coming-to-wii
That will be another 26 million households with netflix streaming hardware in the US alone!
In the same press release there was also some news about Warner Brothers and Netflix cutting a deal that made new movies available for rental 28 days after going on sale. This would be for streaming and physical media as far as I can tell. But that part of the news is a bit light on details. Anyone know more about that?
A device with no form of networking whatsoever wouldn't be what I call evidence of Sony getting on the "download bandwagon".
On the other hand, selling movie downloads to their millions of console customers... that could be considered evidence.
Quite true. Makes one wonder why they bothered with another consumer box. Adda is probably right.
Therefore, to me...
1. Downloads utterly suck in picture quality.
2. Internet speeds (at least in LA) are still crushingly slow and HD downloads are painful.
2. Optical media is still the only way to go and will not be replaced anytime soon.
3. Nothing replaces physical media for film collectors.
4. Film collector are also avid fans of behind-the-scenes and bonus materials.
Yes, yes, I know, some downloads look "decent". But I don't want decent. I want spectacular.
As an avid movie enthusiast and collector I demand high quality 1080p on monitors 50" or larger or via projectors.
[Slightly off topic]
Actually, what I'd like to see is an All-in-One projector (such as the Epson MovieMate) with BluRay and the capacity to throw a 300" projection. (The NCIS MTAC room is my inspiration.)
I'm helping to set up a media room at a local church for movie watching and small group studies.
Haven't seen an AIO system out there that's affordable and easy for non techies to use.
I received a BR player for xmas but I can't tell you the last time I actually visited a movie rental place, including those rental stands at the g store.
That's why Jesus invented Netflix and Blockbuster in-the-mail delivery, and that's how I get my blu-ray movies.
Don't get me wrong though, I would love to have digital copies for my laptop/iPod/tablet one day, but not at the expense of my hard copy (so to speak).
I think it would be neat if future Apple TVs had Blu-Ray players built in, and they will either download a digital copy for your iTunes account or copy it straight from the disk (obviously, you could not watch the disk while it did this, but you could watch other iTunes stuff). I honestly see them doing that before being cable boxes.
What is it about the wall of physical media that you like?
I too used to collect DVDs and and really enjoyed the act of browsing the shelves full of cases. At first the digital experience couldn't hold a candle to this. The gap has closed in the past few years though. In some ways, each is attractive and each has shortcomings. I'll attempt to address just the browsing experience but do fully acknowledge that there are other reasons for preferring physical or electronically delivered media.
Home physical media libraries provide a tactile experience, high-resolution cover art, and sometimes detailed info booklets.
Browsing of streaming/download/VOD libraries is certainly different. Each person must have a separate electronic device in order to browse independently while with physical media each person can simply stand in front of a different part of the shelf. In real world usage, just one person is control of the browsing while everyone else provides commentary.
Another difference is the organizational scheme. Physical media collections have static organization, typically everything is arranged alphabetically. Electronically delivered libraries can be reorganized on the fly and even offer suggestions. It is possible to select a movie, and have others suggested from the same genre, same staring actors, same director, same topic, or even just preferred by people who happen to have the same taste as you. In this regard, the difference is exactly analogous to that of physical books vs the www. The www allows interlinking and multiple simultaneous classification/browsing architectures.
Ironically, i gave up collecting physical media prior to a equivalent experience being available via a streamed/downloaded library. Other trade-offs such as cost, selection, and immediacy, were what justified the poorer browsing experience. Thankfully though, the situation has changed. I now prefer to browse electronic rather than physical libraries.
Curious... (and to play devil's advocate)
What is it about the wall of physical media that you like?
I too used to collect DVDs and and really enjoyed the act of browsing the shelves full of cases. At first the digital experience couldn't hold a candle to this. The gap has closed in the past few years though. In some ways, each is attractive and each has shortcomings. I'll attempt to address just the browsing experience but do fully acknowledge that there are other reasons for preferring physical or electronically delivered media.
Home physical media libraries provide a tactile experience, high-resolution cover art, and sometimes detailed info booklets.
Browsing of streaming/download/VOD libraries is certainly different. Each person must have a separate electronic device in order to browse independently while with physical media each person can simply stand in front of a different part of the shelf. In real world usage, just one person is control of the browsing while everyone else provides commentary.
Another difference is the organizational scheme. Physical media collections have static organization, typically everything is arranged alphabetically. Electronically delivered libraries can be reorganized on the fly and even offer suggestions. It is possible to select a movie, and have others suggested from the same genre, same staring actors, same director, same topic, or even just preferred by people who happen to have the same taste as you. In this regard, the difference is exactly analogous to that of physical books vs the www. The www allows interlinking and multiple simultaneous classification/browsing architectures.
Ironically, i gave up collecting physical media prior to a equivalent experience being available via a streamed/downloaded library. Other trade-offs such as cost, selection, and immediacy, were what justified the poorer browsing experience. Thankfully though, the situation has changed. I now prefer to browse electronic rather than physical libraries.
It is more or less simple. With digital media, I worry too much that may harddrive may fail, or I will accidentally delete something that cannot be recovered without a payment. Also, if all my DVDs and Blu-Rays were to become digital, I would need a large harddrive just for them. And there are, of course, the extra features (I enjoy commentaries).
Perhaps, one day, when solutions to these things present themselves and in a simple way, I may be more willing to make a transition and free up the wall for something else. As you said, the fluid way to rapidly rearrange the sorting appeals to me. But we shall see what we shall see. At the moment, the phyiscal media appeals.
And to address the non-browsing side of the equation...
The fear of damage to the storage medium is certainly a logical concern. It should be noted that this is a only concern for downloads, but not streaming or VOD. Ironically, this is an inherent weakness of physical media, not electronic media distribution. Download services, as a distinct concept from VOD or streaming, can be structured either way. Either they are available for subsequent re-downloads, or not. But it isn't inherent to the medium.
For me, the anecdotal evidence is in favor of electronic delivery. Netflix streaming has never ever failed me. Yet I've received at least a dozen unplayable disks from netflix. Granted, my own personal library has only seen two DVDs fail out of a couple hundred.
Another aspect to note is that the motivation for video collecting has disappeared for a large percentage of those who used to be avid collectors. Prior to streaming/downloads/VOD, you either watched one of the 35 available cable channels, you watched a purchased DVD/VHS, or you had to take a trip to a rental store. Also, if you really wanted to have something in particular to watch at any time, it had to be owned.
What's key here is that this is no longer the case. People are no longer limited to 30-40 cable channels or their own collection. Instead they can choose from vastly more cable channels, stream, download, PPV, or even watch something on a computer.
I'll be the first to admit that this isn't sufficient for all video collectors. But looking at the changing motivations for collecting, it almost seems inevitable for the vast majority in the long run.
So, now that BR is cheaper (and approaching $100 which is what people are willing to pay for a player), they'll look to replace their aging DVD player. Then they'll start renting and buying DVDs. The idea that the vast majority of nontechnophiles is going to stream/download near HD is ridiculous... they can't even tell the difference between HD and plain DVD.
So, I am a techie but I've been waiting for BR to come down in cost and I'm looking at getting the Sony BR player from Costco this week at $107. I still won't buy but I'll start renting BR discs. I also have two kids so I'll get a BR burner and take their movies to BR discs.
I don't see myself going to digital download. I like having my wall (nearly literally) of DVDs and Blu-Rays. I think, once the qaulity of the media gets better, that I could do more iTunes rentals, but I don't see it as my primary source for my home entertainment center.
Don't get me wrong though, I would love to have digital copies for my laptop/iPod/tablet one day, but not at the expense of my hard copy (so to speak).
I think it would be neat if future Apple TVs had Blu-Ray players built in, and they will either download a digital copy for your iTunes account or copy it straight from the disk (obviously, you could not watch the disk while it did this, but you could watch other iTunes stuff). I honestly see them doing that before being cable boxes.
You and I are equally aligned on this issue. I can't describe why I love my physical DVD/Blu collection. I just do. It's like a library. I like walking up to my "wall" of media and browsing through them and deciding what I'm in the mood for. I also like that whenever someone walks into my house and sees that wall of media they know "whoever lives here definitely love movies."
I don't dislike iTunes versions, or Netflix streams, per se. I just don't like the quality of them and I don't like how long it takes to download or to start streaming. I don't like being at the mercy of my IP or the service provider serving me the file. Physical media makes me feel more secure and I at least know what the quality of the presentation is going to be.
Downloads and streaming are definitely the future. But I just don't see it eclipsing physical media for a very long time. And even then physical media will always have a market no matter how much it might shrink.
Or maybe it's because I'm becoming more and more old-fashioned about some things.
Free downloads and streams generate little to no income. Who knew?
DEG says digital downloads generated $968M in revenue in 1H 2009...double that of BR.
But lets not let facts interfere shall we? Digital downloads don't generate decent revenues.
The majority of that figure was for VOD
The majority of that figure was for VOD
This guys got some good points:
To say Apple is forgoing on optical media altogether would be to say it?s slowly, but surely, bowing out of the video market altogether ? and nobody in their right mind would believe that is the case...
...If we?ve learned anything, it?s to not listen to Apple when it ?writes off? technologies in its shareholder meetings. Though the company has referred to Blu-ray as a ?bag of hurt? in the past, it sits on the Board of Directors of the Blu-ray Disc Association. Apple is a huge proponent of high definition (who wouldn?t be at this point?) and, as such, it realizes that more and more people are shooting in HD and need a way to present that. We?ve discussed before the limitations of the iPod and iPhone platforms as they do not support HD content, and even the Apple TV is limited in this regard. What other solution is there? YouTube? While that?s a great start, Apple is totally aware that people still prefer to have something a bit more portable and higher quality than YouTube.
My personal opinion is that Apple is working on developing Blu-ray authoring solutions (as well as inclusion of Blu-ray drives as the price continues to come down). We?ve seen a small taste of this support in the latest version of Compressor; hints of Blu-ray support in the latest version of iTunes; and I think as time goes on, we will see more support in other apps as well. In the meantime, DVD Studio Pro and iDVD will likely stay right where they are at. It?s easy to develop new themes for these apps, but why split your resources if you?re focusing on some whizz-bang, new app for Blu-ray authoring? In their current states, these applications are quite maxed out for now.
http://theappleblog.com/2009/08/04/w...pport-blu-ray/