Home Media Magazine Report: Movie Downloads a Tough Sell

http://www.homemediamagazine.com/index.cfm

Report: Movie Downloads a Tough Sell
Author: ERIK GRUENWEDEL
egruenwedel@questex.com
Posted: March 3, 2008

Unlike short-form videos and user-generated content, the nascent market for downloading feature-length movies via Apple TV, Amazon’s Unbox, Movielink and Vudu, among others, appears to be nearly non-existent, according to a new report.

A survey of 1,975 broadband users found that fewer than 9.5% regularly downloaded movies from the Internet onto their personal computers, according to The Diffusion Group.

The Dallas-based research firm found that nearly 54% of respondents were completely unfamiliar with movie downloads and 37% were aware of movie downloads but had not downloaded them.

Delivering movies to the cell phone is not considered “sufficiently desirable” for investors looking to get into the online movie distribution, according to the report.

The report found that delivery and quality of movie content from the Internet to the TV is key to market penetration and acceptance.

In addition, just 28% of respondents considered customization and interactivity of broadband-enabled video important, compared to more than 42% who considered it unimportant.

“Online movie download services should focus first on developing a strong library of content,” said the report. “When it comes to movie rentals and purchases, the quality of content matters.”

Failure to deliver movies to the TV coupled with consumer indifference contributed to Wal-Mart shuttering its movie download service late last year. Both Google Inc. and AOL scaled back video download services as well.

Bankrupt Movie Gallery Inc. terminated its Moviebeam service less than a year after acquiring it for $10 million.

Arvind Bhatia, media analyst with Sterne Agee in Dallas, said at the time the closures underscored the reality that movie downloads didn’t make economic sense.

“People still like to browse in person,” Bhatia said. “Stores are still relevant, DVD by mail is still relevant and kiosks are becoming more relevant.”

He said it signals a “thumbs up” for packaged media at least in the near term.

“The comfort level and technology [for movie downloads] are not there yet,” Bhatia said.

Well downloads is a combination of price, content, quality, speed, easy of use.

If I have access to a huge online library with PQ near HDM for a fair price it would be interesting. Since most movies isnt watched more then twice.

^ Interesting article.

I've wondered about the viability of downloads as an alternate or replacement for physical discs. I certainly like the idea of an on demand service where I can view HD movies and shows at a time of my chosing, yet I can't see ever wanting to abandon physical media.

Granted, they take up space and could possibly suffer damage from mis-handling. But it is nice to be able to just go over to a shelf and pick a movie to watch.

I suppose that flexibility would be possible with a good download to a home media server, but how many average consumers are going to want to do that? Plus, there would have to be some backup provisions for the content on the server, unless the download purchase included the ability for multiple downloads in the event of hardware failure.

Here is the future, and the death of DVD and Blu-Ray:

http://www.portomedia.com/index.html

A news article explains better what they do:

http://ecoustics-cnet.com.com/Coming-soon-Movies-on-flash-memory-cards/2100-11398_3-6232651.html?part=ecoustics-cnet

Here is the future, and the death of DVD and Blu-Ray:

http://www.portomedia.com/index.html

A news article explains better what they do:

http://ecoustics-cnet.com.com/Coming-soon-Movies-on-flash-memory-cards/2100-11398_3-6232651.html?part=ecoustics-cnet

Anything that requires you to leave your house and get a movie is probably not going to become a "standard" way of doing things in the future, or now, for that matter. I could subplant video rental stores, but NF has done a pretty good job of that.

larry

^ Interesting article.

I've wondered about the viability of downloads as an alternate or replacement for physical discs. I certainly like the idea of an on demand service where I can view HD movies and shows at a time of my chosing, yet I can't see ever wanting to abandon physical media.

Granted, they take up space and could possibly suffer damage from mis-handling. But it is nice to be able to just go over to a shelf and pick a movie to watch.

I suppose that flexibility would be possible with a good download to a home media server, but how many average consumers are going to want to do that? Plus, there would have to be some backup provisions for the content on the server, unless the download purchase included the ability for multiple downloads in the event of hardware failure.

all valid points. imo they are still working on all of those issues for music downloads.

physical media require a spec. the spec. locks the features and makes it inflexible. ultimately, it cannot keep pace with a pure digital distribution.

the advantage that downloads have is that they can just keep trying different solutions. it will just keep coming back in different forms until they hit the right combination.

Wow! A report on downloads that fails to mention XBox Live is missing the ball by a long-shot.

There are about 13 million XBoxes versus approximately 3 million Tivos (which is arguably the primary driver of Amazon's UnBox service), and a small minority of those Tivos are TivoHD's (whose owners would presumably not have access to OnDemand if they are only using CableCards).

OnDemand has pretty much trumped downloads, though. And OnDemand is one of Blu-Ray's biggest adversaries (standard-definition DVD being the other).

To me burning kiosks for Blu-Ray/DVD make sense as it cuts down on floor space. However, the issue with Portomedia is that it requires yet another box under the TV just like AppleTV, Vudu, media players, etc. Moreover, if the movies are priced "similar" to DVD, what is the incentive for the consumer to buy that instead of the DVD? I can loan a DVD out to friends. I can loan a Blu-Ray out to friends. Heck, I still loan VHS tapes and HD DVD's out to friends.

Sustained bandwidth of 95Mb/S~11.9MB/s--not bad.

BTW, talking about OnDemand and leaving out general PPV is a major disservice that many bloggers, cable and satellite operators do in order to hype DVR's.

9.5% is a large percentage. They should have asked those 1975 broadband users if they use blu-ray disc players. I'd bet it would have been under 9.5% of them ...

I also agree leaving out XBox live was a mistake.

They can arrange the questions to get the answers they want to hear or "sell" ...

To me burning kiosks for Blu-Ray/DVD make sense as it cuts down on floor space. However, the issue with Portomedia is that it requires yet another box under the TV just like AppleTV, Vudu, media players, etc. Moreover, if the movies are priced "similar" to DVD, what is the incentive for the consumer to buy that instead of the DVD? I can loan a DVD out to friends. I can loan a Blu-Ray out to friends. Heck, I still loan VHS tapes and HD DVD's out to friends.

Sustained bandwidth of 95Mb/S~11.9MB/s--not bad.

BTW, talking about OnDemand and leaving out general PPV is a major disservice that many bloggers, cable and satellite operators do in order to hype DVR's.

I dont know about the other box theory. I wouldnt take much for Toshiba and Samsung to enable those USB ports on some of their players.

Just an observation.

Everyone mentions XBox here as though it's the holy grail for movie downloads. Yet, anytime the PS3 is mentioned about Blu-ray all you get is responses like, "looks like ****", and "I don't want a game console in my room."
Apparantly the XBOX looks incredible and isn't a game console anymore, or we have a bunch of hypocrites here.

I also agree with that article.

Everyone mentions XBox here as though it's the holy grail for movie downloads. Yet, anytime the PS3 is mentioned about Blu-ray all you get is responses like, "looks like ****", and "I don't want a game console in my room."
Apparantly the XBOX looks incredible and isn't a game console anymore, or we have a bunch of hypocrites here. +1

Also, if you're going to complain about poor transfers and DRM, XBLM has more poor films in 720p and DD with enough DRM to make DIVX almost look like open source.

I have to agree for many reasons

1) Current downloading services are a DRM mess. I want more features for my money, not less, and limiting the number of views I can have in a certain period, or the time I have in which to view it are all ridiculous compared to Netflix where I can rent a movie, watch it as often as I want and keep it until the end of time as long as I pay my bills. Downloads have nothing remotely close to this. I once rented Superman Returns HD off of Xbox Live to watch with some friends. My wife was returning from a trip and said she would like to watch it too. Unfortunately she arrived at about hour 23 of the 24 hour window, so we weren't able to watch it without paying again. Without fixing this, downloads are going nowhere.

2) Downloads are too expensive. The price you pay to rent an HD movie from any of the services is on par, or in some case more expensive than the price you would pay to rent a physical disk. I'm willing to pay for convenience, but only when #1 doesn't exist. Conversely I'd be likely to accept #1 if the price was right.

3) Downloads are slow, and I have extremely fast cable. Most people don't. I know they have all sorts of buffering technology, but frankly it doesn't take me more than 10 minutes to drive to Blockbuster and rent a BD. Downloads will remain niche until everyone has faster internet.

4) Download quality is terrible. This is a symptom of #3 and probably #1. Not much else to say here, but every download service I've experienced is best called DVD+. Sure the resolution is "HD", but with the crappy bitrates they use who can tell. Compared to HD DVD, these services just plain suck.

Just an observation.

Everyone mentions XBox here as though it's the holy grail for movie downloads. Yet, anytime the PS3 is mentioned about Blu-ray all you get is responses like, "looks like ****", and "I don't want a game console in my room."
Apparantly the XBOX looks incredible and isn't a game console anymore, or we have a bunch of hypocrites here.

I also agree with that article.

They mention XBox Live because it is easily the most successful movie download platform the world has ever seen.

People complain about the PS3 as a BD player because it has many drawbacks as a player (no analog outs, no IR, etc). I certainly wouldn't have gotten a 360 and an add-on.

The two are completely different issues.

BTW, I have a PS3.

They mention XBox Live because it is easily the most successful movie download platform the world has ever seen.

People complain about the PS3 as a BD player because it has many drawbacks as a player (no analog outs, no IR, etc). I certainly wouldn't have gotten a 360 and an add-on.

The two are completely different issues.

BTW, I have a PS3.

The 360 doesnt have analog out either. It doesnt even do lossless audio. Most Xbox 360s dont have HDMI. And those that do require a dongle to use optical and HDMI together.

Not to mention RROD.

The biggest issue with downloads is archiving, quality, and Bandwidth consumption. Till those get resolved Solid media will always have a place. I doubt that those will get resolved anytime soon so I believe we will have another media format post Blu-ray before we are in a download as a majority world.
Additionally I enjoy putting a disc in on the spur of the moment and kicking back and watching it, or lending a disc to friend as a classic must see feature.

Right now, and for the near future, XBOX Live has the biggest user base with access to downloadable movies. I'm pretty sure Live will still be there when the next XBOX console comes out. Anything it's missing today, will be there tomorrow (HDMI, Lossless sound), and will still have the largest user base.

Whatever weaknesses it has, will not be there forever. Just a thought to those that are speaking negatively to a service that is not Dependant on a console.

The 360 doesnt have analog out either. It doesnt even do lossless audio. Most Xbox 360s dont have HDMI. And those that do require a dongle to use optical and HDMI together.


Sorry but those options are not important to the real world! The consumers that make or break a product dont post on a AV forum and they sure the heck dont care about analog outs or lossless audio. Those options are not really important to anyone except a very small percentage of people. Who has analog-in receivers anyway...J6P doesnt!!

This isnt a 360 sucks because thread either....xbox live is pretty damn good and only can improve.

Sorry those options are not important to the real world!

it's a good thing you're here to tell us what's important to the real world then...:rolleyes:

t's a good thing you're here to tell us what's important to the real world then...

You guys post an article from a CEO talking about consumers, You guys then talk like the consumer posts or reads AVS.

Yes, its a good thing I post telling you that your opinions dont have much weight on what the current consumer base watches or likes.

You have your needs but too bitch about a product that IS NOT even marketed to you is just foolish (IMO).

You guys post an article from a CEO talking about consumers, You guys then talk like the consumer posts or reads AVS.

Yes, its a good thing I post telling you that your opinions dont have much weight on what the current consumer base watches or likes.

You have your needs but too bitch about a product that IS NOT even marketed to you is just foolish (IMO).

My bad, I just figured that HD movie downloads would be marketed to people interested in HD movies...

My bad, I just figured that HD movie downloads would be marketed to people interested in HD movies...


um...it says movie downloads, not HD movie downloads.

The numbers are not even about HD movie downloads ;) and it wasnt a CEO (oops sorry). It was just a article about movie downloads.

I guess this thread is like posting a Microsoft software update in a Mac Forum ;) What posts did we think we would have?

um...it says movie downloads, not HD movie downloads.

The numbers are not even about HD movie downloads ;)

Mea Culpa again. I suppose when reading the HDTV Software Media Discussion forums I should check my HD hat at the door.

Short of the xbox and ps3, movie downloads are mostly constrained to the PC. How big of a market is that?

I think for the near future, the best chance downloads have are as rentals. Movie buyers are going to want to have physical media.

Mea Culpa again. I suppose when reading the HDTV Software Media Discussion forums I should check my HD hat at the door.


No but if people are going to post subjective arguements against or for an article they should first ACKNOWLEDGE who the consumers are and what they really want. AVSers generally are not the consumers most companies are marketing too.

So you have all these threads that have articles talking about Consumers, Products, Percentages and so on. Then you have posts talking about lossless audio/HDMI, 1080p/24 and so on. There is simply a disconnect.

Threads discussing the technology is one thing but arguements that lossless audio and so on is the reason why "consumers" are not buying into something is just dumb since the "consumer" ie...J6P or the 100 million OTHER consumers out there doesnt have a clue about lossless audio (WASTE of time, honestly!!) and so on.

There is simply a disconnected here in these so called debates and I was pointing that out.

Sorry to point out the obvious, go back to your secret HD/BR AVS world now :D

+1

Also, if you're going to complain about poor transfers and DRM, XBLM has more poor films in 720p and DD with enough DRM to make DIVX almost look like open source.

I've used it before my 360 fried. Overpriced and underwhelming in quality. I can rent blu-ray's for less and the quality is far superior to live downloads, plus the convenience factor isn't there, even with a high speed comcast (paying the premium for the faster connnection) it still is faster just to go to blockbuster and pick up a blu-ray. Hey, I had to at least try it :o I'll try PSN movies as well once they come but I'm not expecting them to meet my high standards set by blu-ray, heck even HD DVD is much better than Live and on demand.

Downloads got a long way to go before they can compete against optical media. A nest of incompatible DRM schemes, incompatible encoding formats, viewing restrictions, ISP TOS download caps, very poor content selection, and many other hurdles make downloads a long term prospect. All these issues have to be fixed before these services can grow. :cool:

The 360 doesnt have analog out either. It doesnt even do lossless audio. Most Xbox 360s dont have HDMI. And those that do require a dongle to use optical and HDMI together.

Not to mention RROD.

Wait. You didn't actually think that downloads were going to be 1080p high bit transfers with lossless sound did you? You did?? How cute!

The only costs associated with downloads are the servers and their associated costs (larger files will be considerably more expensive to deliver than stripped down HD Lite transfers, especially on a wide basis). There will always be tremendous pressure to find the lowest quality download customers will accept. My issue with downloads has always been that they will not be of high enough quality. This will be on ongoing battle even when the technology exists to transfer the larger files faster and more efficiently.

I will note that I completely expect downloads to be a pay-per-view product. I do not think download to burn will work for HDM.

Ah the wonderful topic of downloads and how I laugh at people who think this is some viable business model in the near future.

My ISP bitched at me last week for going over our bandwidth limit for the month....and I dunno wtf I even downloaded to go over. I'm sure they are just DYING to have thousands of users d/ling movies at the same time, as are all the other ISPs.

We're what, over 13 years since the net became a viable service for consumers yet there is STILL a huge % who are on dialup and the majority of broadband today is lame.

I think people thinking the download stuff is around the corner need to get out of their fantasy land. You have the bandwidth issues and the simply fact people LIKE to have the physical discs.

That was a good article. Thank-you for posting it.

I spend a lot of time thinking about and working with digial media.

The underlying roadblock stalling the digital revolution is two fold. First, the majority of consumers are either not technically proficiant or they simply won't use technology that isn't refined and easy to use.

The second roadblock is security. The small percentage of consumers who download media have rejected DRM techniques that distributors feel is required to prevent piracy.

Personally, I think that the real solution is in our sights, but still a couple of years away. With digital media proliferating on end-user devices such as the PS3, xbox and even on DVD players through divx support, there is a real end-to-end solution emerging.

IBM Unveils a Prototype Green Optical Network Technology for Sharing Huge Files in Seconds



Quote:
YORKTOWN HEIGHTS, NY - 28 Feb 2008: IBM (NYSE: IBM) Researchers today unveiled a prototype technology that could bring massive amounts of bandwidth in an energy efficient way to all kinds of machines -- from supercomputers to cell phones -- that could revolutionize the way people access, use and share information across many different applications.

The new technology uses light instead of wires to send information and could allow, for example, the transmission of 8 trillion bits (terabits) per second of information -- equivalent to about 5,000 high-definition video streams -- using the power of a single 100-watt lightbulb.

This kind of bandwidth can drive energy efficiencies inside of datacenters and speed the sharing of large datasets, whether it's scientists crunching data to discover new drugs and forecast the weather, people sharing high-definition movies between devices and friends, doctors sending high-definition medical images to a specialist in seconds for diagnoses while patient is in office, or bringing the power of high-definition to mobile phones.

Consistent with green computing initiatives, the new optical technology could save massive amounts of power in supercomputers. For a typical 100 meter long link, the power consumed by the optical technology is 100 times less than today's electrical interconnects, and offers a power savings of 10 times over current commercial optical modules.

This prototype "green optical link" is designed to meet the bandwidth requirements for peta- and exa-flop supercomputing, marking a significant leap from related work unveiled by the same research team a year ago. The new technology puts optical chips and optical data buses in a single package with standard components.

"Last year we unveiled an optical transceiver chip-set that could transmit a high-definition movie in under a second using highly customized optical components and processes," said IBM Researcher Clint Schow, part of the team that built the prototype. "Just a year later, we've now connected those high speed chips through printed circuit boards with dense integrated optical 'wiring.' Now we have built an even faster transceiver and have moved the optical components away from custom devices to more standard parts procured from a volume manufacturer, taking an important step toward commercializing the technology."

The applications for this technology range from cell phones to supercomputers and span industries from consumer electronics to healthcare, including:


High-definition content everywhere: As high-definition video becomes more widespread, this technology will enable widespread HD video sharing and video on-demand by dramatically increasing the bandwidth of video servers. Web-serving sites that host videos could use the technology to access libraries with millions of high-definition movies and video clips in seconds, speeding up access for users. By incorporating an optical data port in laptops, HD video recorders, personal mp3 and video players, cell phones, or PDAs, HD video content could be stored and displayed on high- resolution external screens.
Patient Care: Physicians and researchers could send high-definition images such as MRIs, heart scans which are huge files, for real-time analysis and 3-D visualization.
Consumer electronics: "Scaled-down" versions of the optical interconnect technology may find applications in a range of consumer products. For example, in cell phones, one chip could sit in the base of the phone and the other could sit in the display, allowing for very large files, even high-definition content move from one to the other. The advantage is that by using optics instead of wires, the display can be flipped up and down or moved from side-to-side without being impeded by electrical wires.
Massive Bandwidth for Supercomputing: The improved bandwidth of data interconnects will enable massively parallel supercomputers to have a profound impact in many fields: offering improved molecular dynamics calculations, accelerating drug discoveries, providing accurate weather/climate modeling, as well advancing our understanding of sub- nuclear physics such as quantum chromodynamics.
The prototype that the IBM scientists revealed today is the world's fastest and most integrated optical data bus that could lead to connecting an unprecedented number of high-performance computers to work as a single system.

Tech Specs Behind IBM's Green Optical Network Technology
The optically-enabled circuit boards, or "Optocards," employ an array of low-loss polymer optical waveguides to conduct light between transmitters and receivers. The complete databus constructed with these Optocards not only incorporates a large number of high-speed channels, but also closely packs them to achieve unprecedented density: each waveguide channel is smaller in size than a human hair. The packaging approach for the complete system is unique in that it utilizes hybrid chip integration to produce a highly integrated optical module, or "Optochip."

The Optochip is a multi-component 3-D assembly, that is constructed with conventional surface mount solder processes similar to those currently used in the mass-production of electrical chips. The 10 Gb/channel databus is the first ever demonstration of an integrated module-to-module, 32-channel optical datalink on a printed circuit board. The need for high-bandwidth photonic communications between chips or modules has been discussed in technical literature for more than a decade, and various small pieces of the technology have been shown. IBM has assembled a fully functional and integrated solution, significantly advancing the field of chip-level optical interconnects. By proving the viability of high-density parallel optics, IBM has accelerated the prospect of real-world deployment of practical, high-capacity interconnects between chips.

In addition to the optical data bus, IBM also has developed a parallel optical transceiver module with a higher number of channels and an increased speed of operation: 24 transmitters and 24 receivers that each operate at 12.5 Gb/s. The resulting total bi-directional data transfer rate is an unprecedented 300 Gb/s, nearly doubling the performance of the earlier generation. Compared to current commercial optical modules the transceiver provides 10x greater bandwidth in 1/10 the volume while consuming comparable power. To enable low-cost volume production, the new transceiver uses standard 850-nm vertical-cavity surface emitting lasers (VCSELs), high-speed versions of the inexpensive devices found in many computer mice. By focusing on innovative packaging of low-cost and low-power technologies such as VCSELs and CMOS chips, IBM Research is paving the way to the widespread adoption of optical communications.

IBM has a long history of research into high-bandwidth parallel optics, and the current breakthroughs were achieved as part of a DARPA-funded program, launched in 2003, to demonstrate high-bandwidth chip-to-chip interconnects through polymer waveguides integrated on a printed circuit board. Further details of this work will be provided through two presentations at the 2008 Optical Fiber Communications Conference in San Diego, CA. Clint Schow will present "300-Gb/s, 24-Channel Full-Duplex, 850-nm, CMOS-Based Optical Transceivers," on Feb 25th and Fuad Doany will present "Chip-to-Chip Board-Level Optical Data Buses," on Feb. 28th. The team that developed the optical data bus and transceiver technology spans the worldwide IBM research labs, and the collective author list for these presentations includes : J. Kash, C. Baks, D. Kuchta, P. Pepeljugoski, C. Tsang, C. Patel, N. Ruiz, R. Horton, J. Knickerbocker, R. Budd, F. Libsch, R. Dangel, F. Horst, and B. Offrein.

http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pr...ease/23607.wss

Wee, another new tech that's going to change the world. I'm still waiting for these Gigabit connections using nothing but my powerlines that I was promised back in the 90s...

That was a good article. Thank-you for posting it.

I spend a lot of time thinking about and working with digial media.

The underlying roadblock stalling the digital revolution is two fold. First, the majority of consumers are either not technically proficiant or they simply won't use technology that isn't refined and easy to use.

The second roadblock is security. The small percentage of consumers who download media have rejected DRM techniques that distributors feel is required to prevent piracy.

Personally, I think that the real solution is in our sights, but still a couple of years away. With digital media proliferating on end-user devices such as the PS3, xbox and even on DVD players through divx support, there is a real end-to-end solution emerging.
There's more than just that, though.

Right now, it costs about ~$5 to rent a movie from XBL or most other download services. That's not really a price improvement over Blockbuster or Netflix, and the difference in selection is pretty steep, too. For that matter, many DVDs can be purchased for the same or similar amount, and that's another big deterrent.

For HD movie delivery, I agree that it is the HD game consoles that will spearhead the download model, since they're closed systems that can be readily protected via DRM. More importantly, XBL and PSN have other revenue streams to defray costs, so you've got a nice win-win with decent margins.

Wee, another new tech that's going to change the world. I'm still waiting for these Gigabit connections using nothing but my powerlines that I was promised back in the 90s...

Promised by who? IBM?

I love how technologies that aren't even available for purchase yet, let alone available to everyone are going to somehow save digital downloads today.

I love how technologies that aren't even available for purchase yet, let alone available to everyone are going to somehow save digital downloads today.

It is not something that can be "fixed" in a matter of months . . . or even years.

But the speeds are increasing. Comcast just announced a new HS Broadband for So. FL available 2009 - 100 Mbps.

It will take some time to build up the infrastructure . . . but it is coming - you can take that to the bank.

Another alternative:

VOD revenue set to hit $10 billion by 2012

MARCH 3 | FROM VARIETY: Revenue from video-on-demand services look set to top $10 billion by 2012, according to research from the U.K.'s Informa Telecoms & Media.
The report, published Friday, forecasts that 909 million homes will have access to VOD or near-VOD technology by 2012, equivalent to 78% of the world's TV households, as competition between rival platforms drives the roll-out of new services.

The report forecasts that North America and Europe will account for a combined 83% of global on-demand revenues by 2012, with North America leading the way with close to a 50% share.

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6537296.html

So what is BD's forecast for expected revenue for 2012?

You can't make a equal comparison of Blu-ray (a format) vs VOD (a rental service). A better comparison would be VOD vs Netflix or Blockbuster.

It is not something that can be "fixed" in a matter of months . . . or even years.

But the speeds are increasing. Comcast just announced a new HS Broadband for So. FL available 2009 - 100 Mbps.

It will take some time to build up the infrastructure . . . but it is coming - you can take that to the bank.

Another alternative:

VOD revenue set to hit $10 billion by 2012


http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6537296.html

So what is BD's forecast for expected revenue for 2012?

I can't even get DSL in my area. That people think downloads are going to be a viable alternative anytime in the next 5 years is laughable.

Wow! A report on downloads that fails to mention XBox Live is missing the ball by a long-shot.

There are about 13 million XBoxes versus approximately 3 million Tivos (which is arguably the primary driver of Amazon's UnBox service), and a small minority of those Tivos are TivoHD's (whose owners would presumably not have access to OnDemand if they are only using CableCards).

OnDemand has pretty much trumped downloads, though. And OnDemand is one of Blu-Ray's biggest adversaries (standard-definition DVD being the other).

Hi Willy,

I think you have a point, but personally I find archiving "free" HD content to an expanded capacity DVR represents even more competiton to Blu-ray.

I've got two TiVoHDs and a Verizon DVR. Although I have access to both UnBox and Verizon's VOD, frankly I prefer recording and saving for, an indefinant duration, cable programs for "free". I like it that the TiVoHDs permit the connection of a Plug and Play 500 GB external drive to expand the storage capacity. This augments my DVD and HD DVD collections. I have been able to even archive some HD Blu-ray exclusive content. It's not enough storage capacity, but its a start and it is certainly better than the Verizon DVR. Maybe in the future they'll permit daisy-chaining multiple external drives.

I'm sure I would have used the other services if:


UnBox had high definition programming
Both UnBox and VOD had cheaper rentals
Both UnBox and VOD permitted unlimited duration archiving at a reasonable purchase price.


I'm inclined to believe that after a while these services will figure out what the price points have to be to stimulate more sales, and when they do that certainly won't help Blu-ray sales.

As an enthusiast I'm not suggesting that in the near term the quality of these services will be a suitable substitute for Blu-ray content, but most consumers are not enthusiasts with 10 foot screens. On their relatively small HDTVs I'm sure that HD VOD, or even regular HD programming, will present Blu-ray with some very stiff competition.

Larry

I can't even get DSL in my area. That people think downloads are going to be a viable alternative anytime in the next 5 years is laughable.

Guess you must be in the 6%?:rolleyes:

Broadband Connects With 8.5 Million U.S. Customers In 2007

The 19 largest U.S. cable and telephone providers -- representing about 94% of the market -- acquired more than 8.5 million high-speed Internet subscribers in 2007, according to findings from Leichtman Research Group.

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6537478.html

Guess you must be in the 6%?:rolleyes:

Broadband Connects With 8.5 Million U.S. Customers In 2007



http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6537478.html

Edit: I just looked at the article and it doesn't mention anything about 94% availability.

Using that number, more people own blu ray players than have broadband.

Cripes! At least READ the link I provided. That was for 2007 alone:

The top broadband providers now account for over 61.9 million subscribers,

:mad:

Cripes! At least READ the link I provided. That was for 2007 alone:



:mad:

Perhaps you should read it. It says the providers have 94% of the market, not that 94% of the market has access to broadband.:rolleyes:

Perhaps you should read it. It says the providers have 94% of the market, not that 94% of the market has access to broadband.:rolleyes:

You were the one who said more people own BD players than have broadband. I should pay attention to your conclusions?:rolleyes:

Originally Posted by iceperson
Using that number, more people own blu ray players than have broadband.

Ah the wonderful topic of downloads and how I laugh at people who think this is some viable business model in the near future.

My ISP bitched at me last week for going over our bandwidth limit for the month....and I dunno wtf I even downloaded to go over. I'm sure they are just DYING to have thousands of users d/ling movies at the same time, as are all the other ISPs.

We're what, over 13 years since the net became a viable service for consumers yet there is STILL a huge % who are on dialup and the majority of broadband today is lame.

I think people thinking the download stuff is around the corner need to get out of their fantasy land. You have the bandwidth issues and the simply fact people LIKE to have the physical discs.


Hi Rob,

I agree that the article appeared to be narrowly focused on Internet-based download services. I share your belief that this particular type of download is not ready for primetime yet.

However, I think it is rather short-sighted of us if we fail to consider other types of "downloads" such as cable/satillite VOD and related delivery methods that have good bandwidth right now and are much more user-friendly. I wouldn't be surprised to see a portion of the next year's additional digital Over-the-Air bandwidth opened up to new download services. Such approaches could deliver significant bandwidth to a very large portion of the viewing public without investing in a lot of new infrastructure.

Just food for thought.

Larry

You were the one who said more people own BD players than have broadband. I should pay attention to your conclusions?:rolleyes:

I said that based on your incomplete information. Then again, I'm guessing you did that on purpose in order to manipulate the data to prove a point you knew to be factually incorrect. Or do you stand by your statement that only 6% of the market doesn't have access to broadband?

I can't even get DSL in my area. That people think downloads are going to be a viable alternative anytime in the next 5 years is laughable.

Certainly you can see space from your house right? Ever look up?

I just upgraded my DirecTV to HD DVR's. Went from 3 LNB to 5 LNB dish for increased bandwidth. I will now order HD movies for recording and watch on movie nights. $4.99 per show is very good. I notice they run new releases every 1/2 hour so finding time to record one is a snap.

They also have a DVR scheduler that allows you to schedule a movie from your cell phone or PC (at work) to record and watch when you get home. What could be easier?

Another interesting story.

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/ByteOfTheApple/blog/archives/2008/01/itunes_movies_o.html

I said that based on your incomplete information. Then again, I'm guessing you did that on purpose in order to manipulate the data to prove a point you knew to be factually incorrect. Or do you stand by your statement that only 6% of the market doesn't have access to broadband?

My incomplete information?:confused:

See the :rolleyes: after the 6%? That is a sign for being sarcastic. I have no idea how much of the USA has access to broadband.

YOU on the other hand . . .

It is not something that can be "fixed" in a matter of months . . . or even years.

But the speeds are increasing. Comcast just announced a new HS Broadband for So. FL available 2009 - 100 Mbps.

It will take some time to build up the infrastructure . . . but it is coming - you can take that to the bank.

Another alternative:

VOD revenue set to hit $10 billion by 2012



http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6537296.html



Hmmm, according to this article from 2006 http://industry.tekrati.com/research/news.asp?id=7746 predictions were being made that by 2010 revenue for VOD would be $13billion. Both the 10 and 13 figure are worldwide. I wonder if VOD will continue to underperform as it has in the past. Your link indicates the revenue will come from 909million homes that averages to what 2-3 VOD purchases per year.

Why does everyone flock to these threads to tell us why streaming/VOD is no good? I believe you're all telling the truth about your bandwidth, but I live in an area that Comcast supports at a decent-not-great level, and I can watch an Apple TV HD movie within two minutes of purchase. Also, HD On Demand is increasing significantly and is now a factor in considering how to spend our entertainment time.

I don't see these services as a threat to Blu-ray at all. They are a convenient way to rent movies, and for my needs, far exceed the brick and mortar or Netflix route. Isn't it okay for new technologies to surface and provide entertainment options for consumers?

I also find it interesting that the article concludes that 9.5% of users downloading movies is low. That's higher than I would have estimated.

I guess the age of endless debate did not end with the end of the format war.

Why does everyone flock to these threads to tell us why streaming/VOD is no good? I believe you're all telling the truth about your bandwidth, but I live in an area that Comcast supports at a decent-not-great level, and I can watch an Apple TV HD movie within two minutes of purchase. Also, HD On Demand is increasing significantly and is now a factor in considering how to spend our entertainment time.

I don't see these services as a threat to Blu-ray at all. They are a convenient way to rent movies, and for my needs, far exceed the brick and mortar or Netflix route. Isn't it okay for new technologies to surface and provide entertainment options for consumers?

I also find it interesting that the article concludes that 9.5% of users downloading movies is low. That's higher than I would have estimated.

I guess the age of endless debate did not end with the end of the format war.

We're not arguing that there isn't a market for downloads, we're just informing the people on the coasts and in the big metro areas who think that optical disk is going to be obsolete in the next 5 years that in the US the infrastructure doesn't exist that would allow that to happen, and won't for a very long time. Heck, even places that have access to the bandwidth have caps that would make downloads an issue for many.

Seeing that I collect DVD's, I have no plans to purchase downloadable content, except perhaps TV shows that I miss. I prefer the physical media.

Why does everyone flock to these threads to tell us why streaming/VOD is no good? I believe you're all telling the truth about your bandwidth, but I live in an area that Comcast supports at a decent-not-great level, and I can watch an Apple TV HD movie within two minutes of purchase. Also, HD On Demand is increasing significantly and is now a factor in considering how to spend our entertainment time.


The answer is actually really quite simple. The people who flock to these threads with their claims that HD downloads are no good are Blu-Ray supporters. The people who flock in and claim that HD downloads spell the downfall of Blu-Ray are HD DVD supporters. It's not always this way, but almost always.

Both parties here are guilty of a bit of delusion. Blu-Ray supporters who foolishly underestimate downloads obviously ignore the impact that download services have had on the physical music and games industry. On the flip side of the coin, HD DVD supporters who parade HD VOD as Blu-Ray's kryptonite ignore the exact same thing, in that music and game download services are far from killing their physical counterparts.

At this time SD DVDs are an easy sell, while HDM and downloads are a tough sell to the average consumer.

Over time downloads will be an easier sell (just like MP3s), while HDM may not. Even if an HDM disc costs the same as and SD disc, the average guy won't want it because it is not compatible with most or all of his players.

What is with one will fail while the other will work around here mentallity. Downloads (includes VOD, Xbox live, Apple TV, the soon to come PS3 network, etc.) isn't going to just fold up and disappear. The world of Physical media isn't going belly up either. Both have strengths and weaknesses. For downloads its easy access to a large library of movies when you want it. Just the other night I decided with some friends to order Superbad since no one was really interested in Wathcing the Planet Earth in HD that I had from Netflix nor one of my 180 or so DVDs. Ordered ondemand in HD and the image was better than DVD but not as good as HD DVD. And guess what we were entertained. Last week we had a sword and sandals movie night and watched 300 and Troy on HD disc (On hand and I didnt need to rent anything). Everyone was entertained. I just don't understand why so many people here feel the need to support the only one type of format to the exclusion of others (which is not a problem) and denegrate anyone else who doesn't support their point of view (which is a problem). The format war on this site is obviously not dead. People are just choosing new sides. Makes one wonder..

I just upgraded my DirecTV to HD DVR's. Went from 3 LNB to 5 LNB dish for increased bandwidth. I will now order HD movies for recording and watch on movie nights. $4.99 per show is very good. I notice they run new releases every 1/2 hour so finding time to record one is a snap.

I agree that DVR recordings from PPV and movie channels are a great convenience. They kept me going for a few of years between their arrival and this year when I went BD/HD. But they're not even close to HDM. They're a convenience for when you don't feel like trekking out twice to the video store, you've got nothing to watch from Netflix and it's something not worth owning.

The problem with downloads is it’s like the HDM wars all over again. MANY player options in the market and no one is compatible with any of the others so if you change services or move to where it’s not available or practical then your SOL and have to buy in again.

Detractors
Applies to all systems below except maybe the PC in that you still have no true 1080-HD. What about other extras and what about PIP that is so important that many refuse to buy BD until those features are available? Most are just too expensive for single movie rentals.

Xbox live - the biggest and the worst from many peoples prospective as they find the PS3 too noisy and the Xbox is the PS3 times 2 in the noise department plus limited connectivity options for your receiver. Good side is you may already have one and don’t mind the noise.

PC’s – noisy unless they are hidden away somewhere and have a media head end (EXPENSIVE to purchase and support two boxes)

PS3 – rumored to be right around the corner, but I’m sure it will not be full 1080 and you still have the problem of no built in IR and limited connectivity options for older receivers. Good in that it’s a BD player and Game machine also.

Apple TV – Another proprietary box to support, more cash outlay, stand alone so it is what it is.

I personally think the cable/satellite companies with VOD have the best chance since most people will have them as service providers and it simplifies everything else. I have VOD, but its currently BW starved so I’m not happy with the quality.

Lee,

I used to think you just really liked HD DVD, now I know you just really hate BD.

Lee,

I used to think you just really liked HD DVD, now I know you just really hate BD.

Probably more specific company directed, All I know is they can pull those shiny disc's from my cold dead hands.
:D

I don't mind an occasional downloaded movie, however for me it is never going to replace having a personal copy of a movie I moderately like, for some series I have double dipped SD, and HD, ie the potter series, blade runner etc.

Lee,

I used to think you just really liked HD DVD, now I know you just really hate BD.

Just don't worry about it. Some people are here for intelligent and honest discussion, others are just around to push an agenda. It isn't against the rules to be unreasonable, so just make use of the ignore list. I know using it has improved my AVSForum experience quite a bit :)

More directly related to the topic at hand, I'm sure that downloads are the future, in some far distant future, but in 5 years? Doubtful. Maybe in 10.

Other than the reasons I specified above, there are still more things downloads need to solve that nobody is even talking about.

1) No universal format. Downloads are like the HD format war on steroids. Do your itunes movies play on your 360 and vice versa? What about those VUDU downloads? The marketplace is split a thousand ways.

2) No ownership. You can't sell the movie you buy and you can't loan it out. People like to do this with disks. I like to sell my DVDs when I upgrade to a BD copy, but kiss that right goodbye with downloads, at least as they stand now.

Downloads have a LONG way to go, and bandwidth concerns are the least of their worries.

Detractors
Applies to all systems below except maybe the PC in that you still have no true 1080-HD. What about other extras and what about PIP that is so important that many refuse to buy BD until those features are available? Most are just too expensive for single movie rentals.


PS3 – rumored to be right around the corner, but I’m sure it will not be full 1080 and you still have the problem of no built in IR and limited connectivity options for older receivers. Good in that it’s a BD player and Game machine also.



For a second there I thought you were an HD DVD die-hard.:D

The great thing about downloads is that we will not have this CE created battle where studios only support the formats they are paid to. Some will use 360s, some will use PS3s, some will use PCs, some will use Tivo, some will use other networked devices, etc.

On a lighter note, you can actually create an HD DVD disc with an HDi program to turn an HD DVD player into an HD movie download player!

I just posted in the Video dowload services thread. A member linked a story about how many movies have been sold/downloaded on iTunes. I believe the point was to show how poor sales of BD and HD DVD were. The issue is the story is misleading. There are well over 100 million iPods out there and only about a tenth of that number are BD and HD DVD players. iTunes movies sales were were 7 million which is only a million more than BD sales. Ten times or more the players, but in reality movie dowloads were not ten times more.

Lee,

I used to think you just really liked HD DVD, now I know you just really hate BD.

Strong words don't you think?

I always felt that HD DVD was more consumer friendly and had a better chance at being a quasi-mass accepted format. I liked the fact that from day one - you got ALL the features of HDM (hardware equipped) in a player you bought.

Hate BD? No - nor Sony as I have numerous CE products from them. I just see that BD is all about the PS3.

"Be careful what you wish for . . . you may get your wish granted.";)

Strong words don't you think?

I always felt that HD DVD was more consumer friendly and had a better chance at being a quasi-mass accepted format. I liked the fact that from day one - you got ALL the features of HDM (hardware equipped) in a player you bought.

Hate BD? No - nor Sony as I have numerous CE products from them. I just see that BD is all about the PS3.

"Be careful what you wish for . . . you may get your wish granted.";)



For now it seems that way and for many of us the PS3 is great for BD. We are no dummies when looking at all it has to offer for the price. For those that don't want what it can do over and above BD it is a bummer.

I just see that BD is all about the PS3.



I agree 100%. Not only do we have BD, but also AVCHD. If you buy an HD camcorder that uses this format, you get files that play on the PS3, some Panasonic BD players, and are incompatible with most PC software.

Everything Sony is doing seems to need a PS3 these days.

Well apparently all the major studio heads do not agree with you. If they say BD as just about the PS3 it would be getting as much support as UMD which is all about the PSP. Its sad to see some members loathe BD so much just because HD DVD lost.

One of the hardest thing in the world is acknowledging your previous decision was incorrect. Until then, hard impossible to move on.

Well apparently all the major studio heads do not agree with you. If they say BD as just about the PS3 it would be getting as much support as UMD which is all about the PSP. Its sad to see some members loathe BD so much just because HD DVD lost.

I am sure Sony disagrees with you. They gave up a lot in the game console market and have said all along that the PS3 more of a home media device. The PS3 is for playing BD discs, Internet access, playing games, and soon movie downloads. That has been Sony's plan from the beginning.

btw, the HD DVD vs. BD thing over. Let it go. I am not sure why people still have to relate everything back to it.

^^ I am sure Sony and all the companies we discuss disagree with most of the nonsense we talk about in these forums. If corporate board members, company execs, marketing teams and management got a look at 1/10 the crap we spew they would laugh. They don't give a good damn about all the tech crap. They don't sit there and debate the merits of sound and video codecs and PQ. They want to know the bottom line. Are they making or going to make money on it and better the companies financial outlook is what they care about, and not if some flipping player upconverts, plays games or waxes the porpoise. The company PR people will make you think they care about those things, but that is just PR to pacify the masses.

It would be restrictive, but we could have a policy on this forum that no one can speak for a company without some kind of credibility proven. Half the time I think some members last names are Sony, MS, Toshiba, etc., yet I would surmise many of the companies would not like their name associated with the bogus comments many make on this forum.

^^ I am sure Sony and all the companies we discuss disagree with most of the nonsense we talk about in these forums. If corporate board members, company execs, marketing teams and management got a look at 1/10 the crap we spew they would laugh. They don't give a good damn about all the tech crap. They don't sit there and debate the merits of sound and video codecs and PQ. They want to know the bottom line. Are they making or going to make money on it and better the companies financial outlook is what they care about, and not if some flipping player upconverts, plays games or waxes the porpoise. The company PR people will make you think they care about those things, but that is just PR to pacify the masses.

It would be restrictive, but we could have a policy on this forum that no one can speak for a company without some kind of credibility proven. Half the time I think some members last names are Sony, MS, Toshiba, etc., yet I would surmise many of the companies would not like their name associated with the bogus comments many make on this forum.

I am pretty sure that Sony corporate is willing to admit that the purpose of the PS3 is to grab large market shares of the HDM player, game console, and soon movie download markets.

What they won't admit is, there is a reason AVCHD camcorders create discs that play on a PS3 and not Samsung, LG, Pioneer, or Sharp BD players.

Well apparently all the major studio heads do not agree with you. If they say BD as just about the PS3 it would be getting as much support as UMD which is all about the PSP. Its sad to see some members loathe BD so much just because HD DVD lost.

Bad assumption and you have been making them frequently in the last page or so of this thread.:mad:

Try a PM . . . you and I can speak "freely" to each other if you wish;)

I am pretty sure that Sony corporate is willing to admit that the purpose of the PS3 is to grab large market shares of the HDM player, game console, and soon movie download markets.

Translation: Make money. Yes I would agree. The rest of the technical aspects that make it sell they leave up to grunts and marketing.

Translation: Make money. Yes I would agree. The rest of the technical aspects that make it sell they leave up to grunts and marketing.

+1 100%:D

+1 100%:D


I left out a part.

The rest of the technical aspects that make it sell they leave up to grunts and marketing....

and us dummies at AVS to argue over. :D

I left out a part.

The rest of the technical aspects that make it sell they leave up to grunts and marketing....

and us dummies at AVS to argue over. :D


I agree again :D