Just downloaded my first HD Rental via iTunes. I must say, very impressed. I was able to start watching it 2 minutes after clicking download, and never caught up. I have DSL (6 mbps), so no FIOS or anything fancy. The quality was very good (way better than DVD, better than HD on cable, and pretty close to some of the HD DVDs i've seen). I know I have been saying that downloads are here, and everyone wants to fight it, but they are here. Easy as pie to get going, fast, and very good quality.
I snagged a few screengrabs, if anyone is interested (I know, not the best scenes to grab, but i'm still getting used to the timing from the command to the grab):
Huh? Why is that? Don't publishers and electronics manufacturers still make a margin on their SD hardware and media? Yes of course they do, though probably not as large as with blu-ray. And just because you are ready for a 1080p world doesn't mean everyone else needs to be.
And I dont see why there is a discussion about Blu having to defeat DVD. Its ridiculous. As long as studios make money by offering both formats, why would they drop one? And as a blu-ray user, why do you care how long it takes for Blu to overcome DVD? You already took the plunge on a player, right? You're obviously not price sensitive, so paying $25 per movie on Amazon is not so bad, right? Aren't you getting the movies you want slowly but surely? Why do you give a crap if Joe Blow down the street is happy with his 1994 Aiwa dvd player that doesn't even have progressive scanning? Most consumers won't even know the difference between S-Video and HDMI 5 years from now.
If Sony / Panasonic want Blu adoption rates to take off, they need to lower the prices. But if they did that, wouldnt blu-ray be just like DVD? Why replace one low-margin business with another? It seems alot smarter to have 2 formats coexisting and allowing consumers to self select which market they want to be in... the standard DVD low price market, or the high end, high cost BD market. Sounds like price discrimination at its best.
The market wont be won from people buying BR DVD's. It's won in rentals. The rental shift just started this year with netflix, and Blockbuster saying they are going to carry them in store, but once the video stores all start getting behind the format and pushing it, (which hollywood will help by giving incentives) people will start buying more players. By that time they should be about $299, or less.
Within a year and a half from now you'll see flat screen 1080p HDTV's in every video store, and they will be playing Blu Ray disks 24/7. That's when the first real push will start taking place. about a year from then Blu Ray should have about 30% of the rental market.
Caution is what my stance is. It's just that I've seen a lot of sure things in my day that logic would dictate a winner.
Maybe its time to check your logic? it seems it might be what is at fault?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac
However it was the other things that I wasn't paying attention to that tipped the scales.
Good use of logic would imply that you should have considered all factors, the admission that you weren't paying attention shows that your logical assessment was not complete.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac
I'm just not so sure it's in the bag for BR. The predictions about BR that I've been reading here seem more based on wishful thinking than facts about what the market is doing.
No, its not "in the bag" nothing is impossible. I warned of caution re Downloads above, yet there is ample wishful thinking about that to, just as there was/is ample wishful thinking about HD-DVD. a while back I took most of the factors into account and arrived at the prediction that HD-DVD would fail, it has.
I don't see BD and Downloads as direct a competitor to each other as some people here seem to, touching on a fairly large portion of common ground YES. but for instance Downloads cant really be used for backup storage, can they? in fact they need to be backed up themselves, BD as a recordable medium will fill this role.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac
It's way to early to assume it's a sure thing. And as they said on AICN there's a lot of work for Sony to do to promote this thing into the limelight.
why is it up to SONY - ONLY? do the studios not have a stake in this? Is it up to them to supply the software? and see that the price is reduced to competitive levels with SD-DVD as you might wish?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac
And as an advocate of HD in home media ( and not downloading ) I hope it does succeed. But I have to be realistic.
Realism alert, if you DON'T want Downloads it is looking like the ONLY option, so try supporting it with your dollars .. mmm?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac
And about your question about the timeline. There were alot of obvious differences in that situation. For one there was a much larger noticable difference between VHS and DVD. Tape at that point had been around 21 years. DVD has only been around barely 11 years. It was time for a change as people had just gotten used to abandoning their Cassette tapes for CD so why not do the same for video. There were alot of other factors.
Cassettes were "useful" at best, great for sampling new music, but I personally preferred Vinyl, Still have my collection in hiding.
but disc recordings were around 50 odd years when tape got going, cassette managed a respectable 30 years-ish, CD passed 25 last year (I bought in year one) mp3s might be the most common new format, but its Apples DRMed ACC that is the next new format commonly on sale, arround for?? 4/5 years.
celluloid had been around for? 50/60 years before TV studios at least, started using it for editing on, VHS as you say 21 years, DVD 11, BD? who knows.
Is it too soon for a new consumer video format? yes most likely just a bit too soon. HDTV adoption is on the one hand slow, but on the other.. is it faster than colour adoption? most likely yes, I think it might be the best option to offer the next gen hi-def optical format at the SAME time as offering HDTV sets.. just as colour TV programming was offered at the same time as colour TV sets.
is it too soon for "the world" going digital download? yes, most likely too soon. is it "just around the corner"? possibly.
Is the mass consumer adoption of HDM optical "just around the corner"? again, possibly/probably. I say probably because it has already been proven that the average consumer will buy the little 5" discs for music AND for movies.
It has been proven that a lot of people will but PMPs for music playback, but not yet for movie playback.
this is what makes things interesting.. no crystal balls. only total error, or the best possibly application of logic
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac
The DVD was a true success story that happened rapidly.
Not by your measure, you want BD to take over in 5 years, yet it took DVD 8 years.. so by your own "wishful thinking" DVD was a failure?
Or are you so filled with personal bias due to investment in HD-DVD that you cant admit when your own personal "wishful thinking" is affecting your logical thinking?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac
What Sony has to do now ( and I'm really getting tired of repeating this ) is convince the consumer it's worth it to switch to something that costs more and doesn't have the same number of titles that they can get in an acceptable format for less money. That's the way they look at it. Now just to clarify myself I'm for HD and think it just looks better. Enough to justify the cost. But I'm a videophile not the average Joe.
what sony has to to now, see my above reply Re the studios selling the content, and i KNOW sony is one of them. but seriously, if you are tired of repeating it, maybe you should just give the heartburn a chance and stop?
Did the studios have to convince the public to pay more for DVD versus VHS? YES do you seem to want to forget that happening? YES.
Don't you guys remember the time when new release movies on VHS were $99? Only after as much as 6 months to a year after the release date were $24.99 "budget" editions released?
I think $12.99 for a new release DVD or $25 for a new releas on HD is actually pretty good.
Ahh yes, I remember browsing a video catalogue and looking at £60 for some films ($120) SOOO glad I held off
Just downloaded my first HD Rental via iTunes. I must say, very impressed. I was able to start watching it 2 minutes after clicking download, and never caught up. I have DSL (6 mbps), so no FIOS or anything fancy. The quality was very good (way better than DVD, better than HD on cable, and pretty close to some of the HD DVDs i've seen). I know I have been saying that downloads are here, and everyone wants to fight it, but they are here. Easy as pie to get going, fast, and very good quality.
I snagged a few screengrabs, if anyone is interested (I know, not the best scenes to grab, but i'm still getting used to the timing from the command to the grab):
nice quality on those, looks like a "good" movie.. mm 6mbps.. I get 1 due to being in the dead center of sticksville, but I think I could manage a 10/15/20 min wait WHEN movies get the go ahead here, very interested to try the service. Just hope the catalogue has increased by the time it gets to the UK
nice quality on those, looks like a "good" movie.. mm 6mbps.. I get 1 due to being in the dead center of sticksville, but I think I could manage a 10/15/20 min wait WHEN movies get the go ahead here, very interested to try the service. Just hope the catalogue has increased by the time it gets to the UK
I too would like to know what movie.
PS: I'd also like to know its duration and size as listed in iTunes under the AppleTV section. If you click on the bar near the bottom it will cycle through duration, size and number of files for each type of file. I'll gladly do the math.
Don't you guys remember the time when new release movies on VHS were $99? Only after as much as 6 months to a year after the release date were $24.99 "budget" editions released?
I think $12.99 for a new release DVD or $25 for a new releas on HD is actually pretty good.
That's not entirely correctly. Yes it is true that studios charged $99-$129 for new release titles. But that was the pricing set for video store owners. The studios extrapolated how much a given cassette would generate in revenue. So, rather than audit each and every video rental store to see how many times a cassette was rented, open their books, and demand a royalty payment, they ultimately decided on a simpler way (which is to set a standard agreed royalty per title, ergo, $99). So, that price was never intended for the customer. It was always intended for the store owner.
But sometimes the studios would consider a title a "sell-through" and would price them for $24-$30 (usually Disney titles and huge blockbusters like Terminator 2).
Heh...I never noticed that you couldn't rent HD except on aTV? iTunes didn't give me the option for HD rental...maybe I did something wrong...
You can only rent HD on the AppleTV and anything you rent via the AppleTV can only reside on the AppleTV. If you rent an SD movie through iTunes you can move it to and from the AppleTV.
Oh, that's lame and a half. I was going to rent some HD next month when I get my TV back from myself*, but I planned on watching it via my MacBook. An aTV is aways off.
*It's on loan to my company to showcase our HD demo reel in the local Chamber of Commerce window."
Glad you think I'm a mighty forum god.. but I thought the "morans" bit was well known, and as it seems it was not, I had covered that eventuality by placing the word in quotes, your reading skills did manage to pick up on that, so well done you! forum godhood might not be so far away for you after all.
Thanks for not responding in kind to my not-quite-flame. I was in an unpleasant mood all around when I posted that. I stand by my points, but not my tone. Thanks again and I apologize.
Oh, that's lame and a half. I was going to rent some HD next month when I get my TV back from myself*, but I planned on watching it via my MacBook. An aTV is aways off.
I don't think you'd get much benefit from th e HD stream on the 13" MB screen.
I believe the reason they prevent renting HD movies from the iTunes application is to prevent an even worse "that's lames" scenario?and possibly class action lawsuit?when customers are denied the option to copy that 720p @ 4.5Mb/s video to their iDevices which can only handle 640x40 @ 1.5Mb/s according to Apple's Tech Specs.
I'm sure you wouldn't expect such a large movie to play well on an ARM processor, but we at AI tend to be more tech savvy than Apple's average customer.
Maybe its time to check your logic? it seems it might be what is at fault?
Good use of logic would imply that you should have considered all factors, the admission that you weren't paying attention shows that your logical assessment was not complete.
No, its not "in the bag" nothing is impossible. I warned of caution re Downloads above, yet there is ample wishful thinking about that to, just as there was/is ample wishful thinking about HD-DVD. a while back I took most of the factors into account and arrived at the prediction that HD-DVD would fail, it has.
I don't see BD and Downloads as direct a competitor to each other as some people here seem to, touching on a fairly large portion of common ground YES. but for instance Downloads cant really be used for backup storage, can they? in fact they need to be backed up themselves, BD as a recordable medium will fill this role.
why is it up to SONY - ONLY? do the studios not have a stake in this? Is it up to them to supply the software? and see that the price is reduced to competitive levels with SD-DVD as you might wish?
Realism alert, if you DON'T want Downloads it is looking like the ONLY option, so try supporting it with your dollars .. mmm?
Cassettes were "useful" at best, great for sampling new music, but I personally preferred Vinyl, Still have my collection in hiding.
but disc recordings were around 50 odd years when tape got going, cassette managed a respectable 30 years-ish, CD passed 25 last year (I bought in year one) mp3s might be the most common new format, but its Apples DRMed ACC that is the next new format commonly on sale, arround for?? 4/5 years.
celluloid had been around for? 50/60 years before TV studios at least, started using it for editing on, VHS as you say 21 years, DVD 11, BD? who knows.
Is it too soon for a new consumer video format? yes most likely just a bit too soon. HDTV adoption is on the one hand slow, but on the other.. is it faster than colour adoption? most likely yes, I think it might be the best option to offer the next gen hi-def optical format at the SAME time as offering HDTV sets.. just as colour TV programming was offered at the same time as colour TV sets.
is it too soon for "the world" going digital download? yes, most likely too soon. is it "just around the corner"? possibly.
Is the mass consumer adoption of HDM optical "just around the corner"? again, possibly/probably. I say probably because it has already been proven that the average consumer will buy the little 5" discs for music AND for movies.
It has been proven that a lot of people will but PMPs for music playback, but not yet for movie playback.
this is what makes things interesting.. no crystal balls. only total error, or the best possibly application of logic
Not by your measure, you want BD to take over in 5 years, yet it took DVD 8 years.. so by your own "wishful thinking" DVD was a failure?
Or are you so filled with personal bias due to investment in HD-DVD that you cant admit when your own personal "wishful thinking" is affecting your logical thinking?
what sony has to to now, see my above reply Re the studios selling the content, and i KNOW sony is one of them. but seriously, if you are tired of repeating it, maybe you should just give the heartburn a chance and stop?
Did the studios have to convince the public to pay more for DVD versus VHS? YES do you seem to want to forget that happening? YES.
Walter seriously bottom line show me the numbers that exist right now to justify your position. And I'll want links to your sources. Then I'll be optimistic like you.
I'm used to playing this game in " Political Outsider ".
By the way the growth rate for DVD made it clear it had it " in the bag " by the end of the 4th year. True it didn't surpass VHS until later but it was clear long before then what was going to happen.
Also Walter technology is moving so much faster now days. That's why I said 10 years is too long. Something not even discussed here will come along by then. Purhaps something like movies on a swipe card with no moving parts. Now that would be a serious contender if they could get the data to fit on such a thing.
Just speculation of course but you know something like this will happen.
Comments
Just downloaded my first HD Rental via iTunes. I must say, very impressed. I was able to start watching it 2 minutes after clicking download, and never caught up. I have DSL (6 mbps), so no FIOS or anything fancy. The quality was very good (way better than DVD, better than HD on cable, and pretty close to some of the HD DVDs i've seen). I know I have been saying that downloads are here, and everyone wants to fight it, but they are here. Easy as pie to get going, fast, and very good quality.
I snagged a few screengrabs, if anyone is interested (I know, not the best scenes to grab, but i'm still getting used to the timing from the command to the grab):
http://www.benmackin.com/stuff
What movie was this?
Huh? Why is that? Don't publishers and electronics manufacturers still make a margin on their SD hardware and media? Yes of course they do, though probably not as large as with blu-ray. And just because you are ready for a 1080p world doesn't mean everyone else needs to be.
And I dont see why there is a discussion about Blu having to defeat DVD. Its ridiculous. As long as studios make money by offering both formats, why would they drop one? And as a blu-ray user, why do you care how long it takes for Blu to overcome DVD? You already took the plunge on a player, right? You're obviously not price sensitive, so paying $25 per movie on Amazon is not so bad, right? Aren't you getting the movies you want slowly but surely? Why do you give a crap if Joe Blow down the street is happy with his 1994 Aiwa dvd player that doesn't even have progressive scanning? Most consumers won't even know the difference between S-Video and HDMI 5 years from now.
If Sony / Panasonic want Blu adoption rates to take off, they need to lower the prices. But if they did that, wouldnt blu-ray be just like DVD? Why replace one low-margin business with another? It seems alot smarter to have 2 formats coexisting and allowing consumers to self select which market they want to be in... the standard DVD low price market, or the high end, high cost BD market. Sounds like price discrimination at its best.
The market wont be won from people buying BR DVD's. It's won in rentals. The rental shift just started this year with netflix, and Blockbuster saying they are going to carry them in store, but once the video stores all start getting behind the format and pushing it, (which hollywood will help by giving incentives) people will start buying more players. By that time they should be about $299, or less.
Within a year and a half from now you'll see flat screen 1080p HDTV's in every video store, and they will be playing Blu Ray disks 24/7. That's when the first real push will start taking place. about a year from then Blu Ray should have about 30% of the rental market.
Caution is what my stance is. It's just that I've seen a lot of sure things in my day that logic would dictate a winner.
Maybe its time to check your logic? it seems it might be what is at fault?
However it was the other things that I wasn't paying attention to that tipped the scales.
Good use of logic would imply that you should have considered all factors, the admission that you weren't paying attention shows that your logical assessment was not complete.
I'm just not so sure it's in the bag for BR. The predictions about BR that I've been reading here seem more based on wishful thinking than facts about what the market is doing.
No, its not "in the bag" nothing is impossible. I warned of caution re Downloads above, yet there is ample wishful thinking about that to, just as there was/is ample wishful thinking about HD-DVD. a while back I took most of the factors into account and arrived at the prediction that HD-DVD would fail, it has.
I don't see BD and Downloads as direct a competitor to each other as some people here seem to, touching on a fairly large portion of common ground YES. but for instance Downloads cant really be used for backup storage, can they? in fact they need to be backed up themselves, BD as a recordable medium will fill this role.
It's way to early to assume it's a sure thing. And as they said on AICN there's a lot of work for Sony to do to promote this thing into the limelight.
why is it up to SONY - ONLY? do the studios not have a stake in this? Is it up to them to supply the software? and see that the price is reduced to competitive levels with SD-DVD as you might wish?
And as an advocate of HD in home media ( and not downloading ) I hope it does succeed. But I have to be realistic.
Realism alert, if you DON'T want Downloads it is looking like the ONLY option, so try supporting it with your dollars .. mmm?
And about your question about the timeline. There were alot of obvious differences in that situation. For one there was a much larger noticable difference between VHS and DVD. Tape at that point had been around 21 years. DVD has only been around barely 11 years. It was time for a change as people had just gotten used to abandoning their Cassette tapes for CD so why not do the same for video. There were alot of other factors.
Cassettes were "useful" at best, great for sampling new music, but I personally preferred Vinyl, Still have my collection in hiding.
but disc recordings were around 50 odd years when tape got going, cassette managed a respectable 30 years-ish, CD passed 25 last year (I bought in year one) mp3s might be the most common new format, but its Apples DRMed ACC that is the next new format commonly on sale, arround for?? 4/5 years.
celluloid had been around for? 50/60 years before TV studios at least, started using it for editing on, VHS as you say 21 years, DVD 11, BD? who knows.
Is it too soon for a new consumer video format? yes most likely just a bit too soon. HDTV adoption is on the one hand slow, but on the other.. is it faster than colour adoption? most likely yes, I think it might be the best option to offer the next gen hi-def optical format at the SAME time as offering HDTV sets.. just as colour TV programming was offered at the same time as colour TV sets.
is it too soon for "the world" going digital download? yes, most likely too soon. is it "just around the corner"? possibly.
Is the mass consumer adoption of HDM optical "just around the corner"? again, possibly/probably. I say probably because it has already been proven that the average consumer will buy the little 5" discs for music AND for movies.
It has been proven that a lot of people will but PMPs for music playback, but not yet for movie playback.
this is what makes things interesting.. no crystal balls. only total error, or the best possibly application of logic
The DVD was a true success story that happened rapidly.
Not by your measure, you want BD to take over in 5 years, yet it took DVD 8 years.. so by your own "wishful thinking" DVD was a failure?
Or are you so filled with personal bias due to investment in HD-DVD that you cant admit when your own personal "wishful thinking" is affecting your logical thinking?
What Sony has to do now ( and I'm really getting tired of repeating this ) is convince the consumer it's worth it to switch to something that costs more and doesn't have the same number of titles that they can get in an acceptable format for less money. That's the way they look at it. Now just to clarify myself I'm for HD and think it just looks better. Enough to justify the cost. But I'm a videophile not the average Joe.
what sony has to to now, see my above reply Re the studios selling the content, and i KNOW sony is one of them. but seriously, if you are tired of repeating it, maybe you should just give the heartburn a chance and stop?
Did the studios have to convince the public to pay more for DVD versus VHS? YES do you seem to want to forget that happening? YES.
Don't you guys remember the time when new release movies on VHS were $99? Only after as much as 6 months to a year after the release date were $24.99 "budget" editions released?
I think $12.99 for a new release DVD or $25 for a new releas on HD is actually pretty good.
Ahh yes, I remember browsing a video catalogue and looking at £60 for some films ($120) SOOO glad I held off
Just downloaded my first HD Rental via iTunes. I must say, very impressed. I was able to start watching it 2 minutes after clicking download, and never caught up. I have DSL (6 mbps), so no FIOS or anything fancy. The quality was very good (way better than DVD, better than HD on cable, and pretty close to some of the HD DVDs i've seen). I know I have been saying that downloads are here, and everyone wants to fight it, but they are here. Easy as pie to get going, fast, and very good quality.
I snagged a few screengrabs, if anyone is interested (I know, not the best scenes to grab, but i'm still getting used to the timing from the command to the grab):
http://www.benmackin.com/stuff
I second the "what movie" ?
nice quality on those, looks like a "good" movie.. mm 6mbps.. I get 1 due to being in the dead center of sticksville, but I think I could manage a 10/15/20 min wait WHEN movies get the go ahead here, very interested to try the service. Just hope the catalogue has increased by the time it gets to the UK
I second the "what movie" ?
nice quality on those, looks like a "good" movie.. mm 6mbps.. I get 1 due to being in the dead center of sticksville, but I think I could manage a 10/15/20 min wait WHEN movies get the go ahead here, very interested to try the service. Just hope the catalogue has increased by the time it gets to the UK
I too would like to know what movie.
PS: I'd also like to know its duration and size as listed in iTunes under the AppleTV section. If you click on the bar near the bottom it will cycle through duration, size and number of files for each type of file. I'll gladly do the math.
Now its over and all you guys are going to have to find something else to argue about.
wah wah.
To all the HD-DVD fans out there: PWNED.
Don't you guys remember the time when new release movies on VHS were $99? Only after as much as 6 months to a year after the release date were $24.99 "budget" editions released?
I think $12.99 for a new release DVD or $25 for a new releas on HD is actually pretty good.
That's not entirely correctly. Yes it is true that studios charged $99-$129 for new release titles. But that was the pricing set for video store owners. The studios extrapolated how much a given cassette would generate in revenue. So, rather than audit each and every video rental store to see how many times a cassette was rented, open their books, and demand a royalty payment, they ultimately decided on a simpler way (which is to set a standard agreed royalty per title, ergo, $99). So, that price was never intended for the customer. It was always intended for the store owner.
But sometimes the studios would consider a title a "sell-through" and would price them for $24-$30 (usually Disney titles and huge blockbusters like Terminator 2).
If Tosh pull the media BY march as engaget are reporting, then whats that gonna do to Marz when he posts the Nielsen ratings for march ?
come to think about it, whats it gonna do to 180 and lens boy? and .. hasn't lens boy been VWERY VWERY quiet all of a sudden?
Heh...I never noticed that you couldn't rent HD except on aTV? iTunes didn't give me the option for HD rental...maybe I did something wrong...
You can only rent HD on the AppleTV and anything you rent via the AppleTV can only reside on the AppleTV. If you rent an SD movie through iTunes you can move it to and from the AppleTV.
*It's on loan to my company to showcase our HD demo reel in the local Chamber of Commerce window."
Glad you think I'm a mighty forum god.. but I thought the "morans" bit was well known, and as it seems it was not, I had covered that eventuality by placing the word in quotes, your reading skills did manage to pick up on that, so well done you! forum godhood might not be so far away for you after all.
Thanks for not responding in kind to my not-quite-flame. I was in an unpleasant mood all around when I posted that. I stand by my points, but not my tone. Thanks again and I apologize.
Oh, that's lame and a half. I was going to rent some HD next month when I get my TV back from myself*, but I planned on watching it via my MacBook. An aTV is aways off.
I don't think you'd get much benefit from th e HD stream on the 13" MB screen.
I believe the reason they prevent renting HD movies from the iTunes application is to prevent an even worse "that's lames" scenario?and possibly class action lawsuit?when customers are denied the option to copy that 720p @ 4.5Mb/s video to their iDevices which can only handle 640x40 @ 1.5Mb/s according to Apple's Tech Specs.
I'm sure you wouldn't expect such a large movie to play well on an ARM processor, but we at AI tend to be more tech savvy than Apple's average customer.
I don't think you'd get much benefit from th e HD stream on the 13" MB screen.
Me neither. But I have this nifty DVI -> HDMI cable so my MacBook is tethered to the TV a lot of the time.
Me neither. But I have this nifty DVI -> HDMI cable so my MacBook is tethered to the TV a lot of the time.
Good point. I hadn't thought of that.
Maybe its time to check your logic? it seems it might be what is at fault?
Good use of logic would imply that you should have considered all factors, the admission that you weren't paying attention shows that your logical assessment was not complete.
No, its not "in the bag" nothing is impossible. I warned of caution re Downloads above, yet there is ample wishful thinking about that to, just as there was/is ample wishful thinking about HD-DVD. a while back I took most of the factors into account and arrived at the prediction that HD-DVD would fail, it has.
I don't see BD and Downloads as direct a competitor to each other as some people here seem to, touching on a fairly large portion of common ground YES. but for instance Downloads cant really be used for backup storage, can they? in fact they need to be backed up themselves, BD as a recordable medium will fill this role.
why is it up to SONY - ONLY? do the studios not have a stake in this? Is it up to them to supply the software? and see that the price is reduced to competitive levels with SD-DVD as you might wish?
Realism alert, if you DON'T want Downloads it is looking like the ONLY option, so try supporting it with your dollars .. mmm?
Cassettes were "useful" at best, great for sampling new music, but I personally preferred Vinyl, Still have my collection in hiding.
but disc recordings were around 50 odd years when tape got going, cassette managed a respectable 30 years-ish, CD passed 25 last year (I bought in year one) mp3s might be the most common new format, but its Apples DRMed ACC that is the next new format commonly on sale, arround for?? 4/5 years.
celluloid had been around for? 50/60 years before TV studios at least, started using it for editing on, VHS as you say 21 years, DVD 11, BD? who knows.
Is it too soon for a new consumer video format? yes most likely just a bit too soon. HDTV adoption is on the one hand slow, but on the other.. is it faster than colour adoption? most likely yes, I think it might be the best option to offer the next gen hi-def optical format at the SAME time as offering HDTV sets.. just as colour TV programming was offered at the same time as colour TV sets.
is it too soon for "the world" going digital download? yes, most likely too soon. is it "just around the corner"? possibly.
Is the mass consumer adoption of HDM optical "just around the corner"? again, possibly/probably. I say probably because it has already been proven that the average consumer will buy the little 5" discs for music AND for movies.
It has been proven that a lot of people will but PMPs for music playback, but not yet for movie playback.
this is what makes things interesting.. no crystal balls. only total error, or the best possibly application of logic
Not by your measure, you want BD to take over in 5 years, yet it took DVD 8 years.. so by your own "wishful thinking" DVD was a failure?
Or are you so filled with personal bias due to investment in HD-DVD that you cant admit when your own personal "wishful thinking" is affecting your logical thinking?
what sony has to to now, see my above reply Re the studios selling the content, and i KNOW sony is one of them. but seriously, if you are tired of repeating it, maybe you should just give the heartburn a chance and stop?
Did the studios have to convince the public to pay more for DVD versus VHS? YES do you seem to want to forget that happening? YES.
Walter seriously bottom line show me the numbers that exist right now to justify your position. And I'll want links to your sources. Then I'll be optimistic like you.
I'm used to playing this game in " Political Outsider ".
By the way the growth rate for DVD made it clear it had it " in the bag " by the end of the 4th year. True it didn't surpass VHS until later but it was clear long before then what was going to happen.
Also Walter technology is moving so much faster now days. That's why I said 10 years is too long. Something not even discussed here will come along by then. Purhaps something like movies on a swipe card with no moving parts. Now that would be a serious contender if they could get the data to fit on such a thing.
Just speculation of course but you know something like this will happen.
Engaget are reporting Tomorrows HD-DVD is dead announcement in case anyone is even slightly interested.
If Tosh pull the media BY march as engaget are reporting, then whats that gonna do to Marz when he posts the Nielsen ratings for march ?
come to think about it, whats it gonna do to 180 and lens boy? and .. hasn't lens boy been VWERY VWERY quiet all of a sudden?
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/news/...-_For_Now/1474
Then there's this from " The Digital Bits "
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/#mytwocents
So you never know what's the most current info.
What movie was this?
It was the movie Next.
Some stats:
Size: 2.99 GB
Time: 1:36:20
Total Bitrate: 4430kbps
Resolution: 1280x530