Forgive me if this prospect has been posted - I wouldn't be sure what to search for to see if it had, but doesn't it seem that hard formats like Blu-Ray and HD DVD are both destined to be overtaken very soon by downloads and individuals holding their entire media library on a harddrive format as opposed to individual expensive discs?

As I just purchased a 1080p LCD television, I started researching which Hi-Def format would be best... then started thinking that both will probably be rendered obsolete sooner than later.

Since consumers became able to eliminate entire cd libraries and consilidate into tiny players, I see no reason why the general public will want to buy entirely new DVD libraries.

It's almost like the SACD format that came out a while ago that no one really embraced... it was bypassed for the mp3 preference... actually as I think about it, Sony has been pretty unsuccessful with many of their new format offerings, Beta, Mini-CD, SACD, et al. I guess that's another thread.

Perhaps someone can enlighten me as to what the long term and short term limitations are to the prospect of this happening or who might currently be working on the technology that would incorporate the superior video quality of Blu-Ray and HD-DVD in the format I've described.

Thank you in advance!

Do you know how long it takes to download 8GB over high speed...longer than I want to wait...and if HD programming is larger, forget it.

Also, what percentage of households have access to high speed? What percentage of household don't have internet access? Do you just leave the low speed / no internet customers out of your potential customers? Wal-Mart probably wouldn't like that.

If I could go to the store and purchase a SD card with a HD movie, would I...probably...but then what do I play it on....I'm not dragging my computer into my living room.

I remember during the dot.com boom when online newspapers were supposed to spell doom for their printed counterparts.... it never happened. This is the same case. The idea of having a hard copy available for any kind of media is a reason why people will continue to buy disc formats of the movies over downloading directly. Add this to the fact that downloading an 8GB movie that is clearly inferior in audio/video quality to its blu-ray/HD-DVD counterpart further supports the claim that internet downloading is not yet ready for mainstream and will not be for some time, IMHO.

It's a very real possibility that both will fail to ever become more than niche formats. That's life. You roll your dice, you take your chances.

In the meantime, we're watching some pretty solid video.

Downloading movies on a large scale isn't going to happen any time soon, if ever. As others have stated, it takes too long to do, takes up too much space and not everyone has or even will have the ablity to do so.
Then there's the ownership aspect. There is lots of Video On demand now, but people still buy DVDs, because they like to own a physical object that has the movie.
The SACD Vs. mp3 comparison may be semi-valid, because you have one medium emphasizing high quality audio, Vs. a medium that has low quality sound, but is extremely convenient. The masses will always go for convenience, that's why CDs beat out LPs years ago.
That said, the real competition with BD/HD DVD is SD DVD. I'm not convinced the masses care that much about quality-mp3s have pretty much proven that. The new formats may very well fail, or more likely just be niche formats, because many people just don't care about higher quality.
J

Do you know how long it takes to download 8GB over high speed...longer than I want to wait...and if HD programming is larger, forget it.

Also, what percentage of households have access to high speed? What percentage of household don't have internet access? Do you just leave the low speed / no internet customers out of your potential customers? Wal-Mart probably wouldn't like that.

If I could go to the store and purchase a SD card with a HD movie, would I...probably...but then what do I play it on....I'm not dragging my computer into my living room.


That's understandable with respect to large HD programming - that's what I'm wondering about.

Since we can't currently get these superior audio and video quality movies in a downloaded format, I guess my gut is just telling me that the market will start demanding this as an option before they dish out the bucks for all new movies and hardware as easily as we all did when switching from VHS to DVD's.

I'm not saying people shouldn't buy Blu-Ray or HD DVD and that they don't have merits - just wondering if it will truly catch on and become the standard before a digital format as I've described it catches on and takes over.

As I'm shopping, I just foresee someone offering the option to rip our existing DVD's (legally) to play on some form of upconvert Hard Drive-based player, and then have this coincide with some form of 1080p downloadable movie.

Just seems to me that it's not likely for the world to adopt 1 of 2 formats, currently surrounded by so much uncertainty for their future usablity, while we've just experienced the most important and widely accepted music media advent since the CD format was introduced and accepted.

But I'm with you - I know it would take forever to download... currently.

Just wondering if someone has heard of a company working on a plan as I've described it.

Thanks for the responses.


By the way, although newspapers are not dead - print is definitly dying... trust me, I work in that industry!

Since we can't currently get these superior audio and video quality movies in a downloaded format, I guess my gut is just telling me that the market will start demanding this as an option before they dish out the bucks for all new movies and hardware as easily as we all did when switching from VHS to DVD's.

No the issue is bandwidth, speed, etc. And by the "market" I take you mean the consumer. The consumer will take the path of least resistance and familiarity. That familiarity is associated with going down to the local video store and renting. Secondly, to use downloadable high def content you still need an HDTV, an HD receiver/hard drive to store the content, etc. In other words, you still need to invest in the hardware. And when hd players are dropping as sharply as they are (with panny's 1/2 price cut and the very low cost entry for HD DVD, rebates, etc.) you have a return to further familiarity with disk based content. The fact that the latter hardware can read your existing dvd collection as well is the kind of transition which vhs---->dvd could not do: in other words the transition can be faster.

Only difference is that HDTVs are on the ascendancy which means the market is still growing. You're not dealing with a huge existing market when people had their standard def tvs and moved from vhs to dvd. That's the difference in how the formats are being adopted. But by all accounts though the numbers are actually reflective of the rate of adoption of dvd from vhs. And remember it was only recently that dvd outpaced vhs in sales.

So downloaded content has less of a chance of success than either of the two formats in becoming the standard for the next several years.

I think the real issue is whether people really want HD or not. Most HDTV's aren't even hooked to a high definition source.

I have a feeling that for a lot, perhaps most people, DVD is good enough. They'll never see the benefit of HD DVD or Blu-ray...at least while both are substantially more expensive than DVDs. Perhaps things will change when you can buy new release HD titles at $15 and catalog titles for $10 and less.

Forgive me if this prospect has been posted - I wouldn't be sure what to search for to see if it had, but doesn't it seem that hard formats like Blu-Ray and HD DVD are both destined to be overtaken very soon by downloads and individuals holding their entire media library on a harddrive format as opposed to individual expensive discs?

As I just purchased a 1080p LCD television, I started researching which Hi-Def format would be best... then started thinking that both will probably be rendered obsolete sooner than later.

Since consumers became able to eliminate entire cd libraries and consilidate into tiny players, I see no reason why the general public will want to buy entirely new DVD libraries.

It's almost like the SACD format that came out a while ago that no one really embraced... it was bypassed for the mp3 preference... actually as I think about it, Sony has been pretty unsuccessful with many of their new format offerings, Beta, Mini-CD, SACD, et al. I guess that's another thread.

Perhaps someone can enlighten me as to what the long term and short term limitations are to the prospect of this happening or who might currently be working on the technology that would incorporate the superior video quality of Blu-Ray and HD-DVD in the format I've described.

Thank you in advance!

Every format eventually becomes obsolete. If you think downloads will make HD optical obsolete, then within a decade, something will come along that makes downloads (as we know them) obsolete.

If you are going to hold off on buying something for fear of becoming obsolete, then just sell all your A/V gear and buy some books... they may be the only format that never becomes completely obsolete (at least they've had the longest run).

Every format eventually becomes obsolete. If you think downloads will make HD optical obsolete, then within a decade, something will come along that makes downloads (as we know them) obsolete.

If you are going to hold off on buying something for fear of becoming obsolete, then just sell all your A/V gear and buy some books... they may be the only format that never becomes completely obsolete (at least they've had the longest run).


Not my point - I realize that eventually everything will become obsolete. Just wondering if the trends of downloads could render BD and HD DVD obsolete before they even get off the ground (to the extent that one or the other becomes a "standard" like regular DVD's are now).

Every format eventually becomes obsolete. If you think downloads will make HD optical obsolete, then within a decade, something will come along that makes downloads (as we know them) obsolete.

If you are going to hold off on buying something for fear of becoming obsolete, then just sell all your A/V gear and buy some books... they may be the only format that never becomes completely obsolete (at least they've had the longest run).

I don't need this to last as long as books...I'd settle for it lasting as long as the 480i NTSC standard. ;)

as long as there are 2 standards to fight over, the 1080p wars will continue to rage and the war itself will be the focus as opposed to the quality difference the standard offers. This one factor could very well limit total acceptance by the buying public. When you couple that with all the gear in your system that has to change to get any benefit out of HD plus the price to replace your existing media, and then add still further, the HDCP issue, I don't know. It's certainly an uphill climb and a bit of a stretch to see it ever becoming mainstream in it's current form. Of course, that doesn't mean it will die out. I just don't think you'll be seeing it in every household any time soon. People have better things to do with their money than to go out and re-buy movies they already have.

I don't need this to last as long as books...I'd settle for it lasting as long as the 480i NTSC standard. ;)


when was 480i NTSC introduced? what year?

are you tallking about on DVD or 480i in general?

Until J6p can go into wal-mart, target, etc and buy an hd player(either format) for less than $200 and purchase hd movies on the regular release date for less than $20 per title both hd formats are on a bit of shakey ground imo.

Otherwise sd dvd just keeps getting more penetration into j6p's home and that is the "trench" in which these types of wars are won or lost. It's easy for me to see the difference in sd vs. hd as I have a large fp setup. Trying to convince j6p, who just bought a new widescreen tv because he thought it'd get rid of the black bars, that he now needs to spend another $400-$1000 for a real hd player and then buy special discs that cost nearly double what he's use to is another story...and still have the black bars on most movies. :D

Heck a lot of uninformed buyers think that the $80 upconverting dvd player packaged with the tv they just bought is giving them true hd now. ;)

If the studio's really wanted to help either hd disc format they would just put a seperate(not combo disc) sd dvd copy of the movie in the box with the hd version and keep the pricing at or close to a regular sd movie. Then we'd see a ton more interest in the hd formats as people would not have to choose between buying in sd for the kids room, car, etc. or buying in hd for the living room/theater.

As to the whole downloading aspect...for even sd movies that is problematic for many. What with the digital rights managment issues etc the studio's just aren't ready for that even if every house in the country had access to 10mb/sec download speeds. I envision spending hours to download one overly compressed sd movie that then could only be played via the computer that downloaded it. There'd be no way to play it via portable dvd players or in the players alot of new cars come with to keep the kids quiet on the trip to grannies house. :p

Bottom line for mainstream movie downloading...there's a lot of issues both technical and intellectual that will need to be sorted out before it's ready for primetime.

That's understandable with respect to large HD programming - that's what I'm wondering about.

Since we can't currently get these superior audio and video quality movies in a downloaded format, I guess my gut is just telling me that the market will start demanding this as an option before they dish out the bucks for all new movies and hardware as easily as we all did when switching from VHS to DVD's.

I'm not saying people shouldn't buy Blu-Ray or HD DVD and that they don't have merits - just wondering if it will truly catch on and become the standard before a digital format as I've described it catches on and takes over.

As I'm shopping, I just foresee someone offering the option to rip our existing DVD's (legally) to play on some form of upconvert Hard Drive-based player, and then have this coincide with some form of 1080p downloadable movie.

Just seems to me that it's not likely for the world to adopt 1 of 2 formats, currently surrounded by so much uncertainty for their future usablity, while we've just experienced the most important and widely accepted music media advent since the CD format was introduced and accepted.

But I'm with you - I know it would take forever to download... currently.

Just wondering if someone has heard of a company working on a plan as I've described it.

Thanks for the responses.


By the way, although newspapers are not dead - print is definitly dying... trust me, I work in that industry!
i think downloading [as i understand it] takes to long at the present time and its along way off before thats happens.one more thing people like myself like to collect!!!!,we like the cases hd and bd discs come in ,we like to look at the cover ,read the back,all that stuff. even if downloading is up to par with hd and bd,its still gonna be a real hard sell,like someone said here people still buy newspapers even though you read the newspaper on line.your wasting your time waiting and hey you could die tomorrow,so pick your format and enjoy ,life is short!

I can imagine downloads being very good for providing a nice alternative to PPV or rentals. Even I would rather download than take a trip to Blockbuster, and I *HATE* the idea of downloading.

That said, physical media is a much better deal, IMO, and I think enough people out there agree with me that it won't kill DVD/BR/HDDVD anytime soon.

The joke was that if it lasts as long as 480i, I'd be happy. I'm not sure exactly when it was invented, but I'm thinking it's almost 50 years old now. It is one of those standards that outlasted what it should have, much like the PC architecture with 640k of conventional memory. Or the gasoline engine. Sometimes things work really well, and they get so big that they don't give way to newer ideas very easily.

I remember during the dot.com boom when online newspapers were supposed to spell doom for their printed counterparts.... it never happened. This is the same case. The idea of having a hard copy available for any kind of media is a reason why people will continue to buy disc formats of the movies over downloading directly. Add this to the fact that downloading an 8GB movie that is clearly inferior in audio/video quality to its blu-ray/HD-DVD counterpart further supports the claim that internet downloading is not yet ready for mainstream and will not be for some time, IMHO.

Actually, subscriptions to newspapers are WAY down. Most publishers are hurting big time. As the older folks die off, less and less people read newspapers.

Perhaps someone can enlighten me as to what the long term and short term limitations are to the prospect of this happening or who might currently be working on the technology

It seems to me that having millions of copies distributed all over the planet of any one
movie is wasteful. Waste is cost and efficiency. It would be cheaper and more efficient
to have every movie ever made available for viewing by anyone at any time. Downloading
is just as wasteful as making a million disks to distribute. If you're going to watch it a couple
of times, even worse. (sci fi, kid movies or animation are a different matter)

Pay-per-view doesn't work well because of limited selection. The cable/satellite companies
only have so much bandwidth, so they have to pick what to offer. A video store has shelf space
issues as well as a number of copies limit. Netflix or other service, can scale up, but
only so far. Still more efficient, but not perfect. A service where any movie every made
(HD or SD) is available at any time you want it (stored on a service providers server) is
about as efficient as you can get. Yes, you'll need a box or receiver, and pay them, but we're
not talking open source videos though.

This kind of thing is not ready just yet, but seems to be on the way. Therefore a disc
solution is a likely intermediate solution that enables a lot of businesses to stay
in business and is familiar to consumers. Eventually though, it would seem mr and mrs
consumer will not want to drive to the store or mail discs or even purchase a disc when
they are all readily available with some slick (easy to use) software for searching,
previewing, etc....

http://www.sun.com/aboutsun/pr/2007-04/sunflash.20070426.1.xml

They're not doomed. Electronic distribution is likely not coming for several years. As it currently stands, NetFlix gets to my door several days quicker than downloading an HD movie.

After the movie is downloaded in a couple days, storage isn't even cost effective yet. At $0.25 per GB, the two Pirates of the Caribbean movies I just purchased requires a 200GB hard drive, $50!

The current options are pay per view, netflix, or the traditional buying. And for full quality, netflix is by far faster than downloads for most people. So no, these formats are not in danger of becoming obsolete anytime soon.

So, I will acknowledge that I am far from "J6P" so I won't try and speculate as to what will be broadly acceptable soon. But in contrast to most of what has been said here, I would happily adopt a download model today, if one were available. And that would drastically reduce my disc purchasing if it were.

I got my first VCR in about 1980. Paid something like $500 for it, while just married and still in grad school. Until we had kids (in 1987) and they were into watching kids movies, I did almost 100% rental. In those days, most new tapes were really expensive - $70 or so.

Along came DVD. I bought into that about a year after it came out, and went nuts on buying disks. I have over 600 (average 1 per week over 11 years) and found that most have only been watched 1 time, some a couple. I rationalized this against the cost of going to the theater. However, as the HD formats loomed, I found myself using my Netflix account more and more, even for movies I would have bought in SD previously.

I bought an HD DVD Player the first day they came out last April (2006) and own less than 20 movies so far. I have rented plenty on Netflix. The presence of this war has made me a more cautious consumer.

My only complaint with Netflix is sometimes the four movies I have home aren't what we want to watch that night.

At my current 6Mbps cable modem download a 30GB HD movie would run about 11 hours to download (plus overheads would make that longer). That is faster than a Netflix mail delivery.

With some of the technology improvements in development, in 2-4 years, I would expect double or triple that speed. As soon as the download time is on the order of the movie play time (2-3 hours) you can envision a buffered download/play model.

Don't need to purchase it and store it. Give me a rental model with a viewing and discard the copy, and I would be just fine.

As to when that experience would be acceptable enough for a sustaining business model, I am sure that Netflix is working on it now.

Ken

With the promise of digital HD downloads, the first thing everyone complains about is speed. I don't really see why though... Netflix, with an approximate 3 day turn around for me is plenty fast, especially when I have 3 movie options at a time. As long as digital downloads arrive faster than 3 days for my current 480p content, it will be an improvement. Chalk me up as someone who doesn't care about real time HD streaming the second I press play. Also, as someone who owns like 500+ DVDs, for all but a few select movies, I've lost my past rabid desire to own my content. Netflix now works great for 95% of my content needs. Lately, I've only bothered buying foreign DVDs which Netflix doesn't carry.

My dream...

A Netflix P2P set-top box
Free box with 6 month commitment
$20/month rental fee for 5 movies out at a time ($30/month for 10)
Only needs HDD space for 5-10 movies
Automatically downloads the top 5-10 movies in your queue
P2P with other peoples boxes for faster downloads
---Could even give you a download time estimate, with popular movies downloading faster
Box gives you the option to delete after you've watched
Can manage your box content/queue from your tv
1080p/720p/480p options to meet the full spectrum of speed/quality folks needs
Movie size/language/subtitle default preferences set up once (only downloads what you need)
---Option to modify individual downloads for picky folks
Option to download special features in place of 1 movie on your box


There is absolutely NOTHING, from a technical standpoint, stopping this from happening today. If built en mass, they would probably only cost $100-150 to manufacture. If I had the above box, I would be a happy man... and only get happier as faster internet speeds/cheaper storage progressively allow me to receive a larger local list more quickly. And eventually, when speeds are fast enough, the same box could handle direct streams (and probably 480p streams from day one).
-Matt


EDITED: To point out that the 5/10 movie limit is what would exist on the box, you could still download and watch as many movies per month as you could physically sit through assuming you had the bandwidth.

Agreed, khoyme. You posted while I was pondering my dream box features :-)

I'm with you Ken. I'd go downloadable if the limitations of bandwith, etc could be overcome. In the meantime, I'll keep struggling with which format will have the longest life with the most potential for price drops in media. Maybe while I agonize over it, there will be another reduction ? :eek:

I never thought I'd be the guy to disregard the importance of liner notes in CD's - but here I am - if the particular album/artist is important enough to me, I'll buy the hardcopy.

So that leads me to believe I could do the same with my movies.

I get no real sense of satisfaction out of telling others "I have over 100 movies, WITH CASES in my DVD library."

I'd get the same satisfaction out of telling them "I have over 100 movies on my harddrive and access to whatever I want for a single viewing (based on subscription or one-time fee, etc.)"

But if it's a long way off... I need to actually get back to work here and try to earn a bonus to pay for my new 1080p player... whatever that might be. :cool:

With the promise of digital HD downloads, the first thing everyone complains about is speed. I don't really see why though... Netflix, with an approximate 3 day turn around for me is plenty fast, especially when I have 3 movie options at a time. As long as digital downloads arrive faster than 3 days for my current 480p content, it will be an improvement. Chalk me up as someone who doesn't care about real time HD streaming the second I press play. Also, as someone who owns like 500+ DVDs, for all but a few select movies, I've lost my past rabid desire to own my content. Netflix now works great for 95% of my content needs. Lately, I've only bothered buying foreign DVDs which Netflix doesn't carry.

My dream...

A Netflix P2P set-top box
Free box with 6 month commitment
$20/month rental fee for 5 movies ($30/month for 10)
Only needs HDD space for 5-10 movies
Automatically downloads the top 5-10 movies in your queue
P2P with other peoples boxes for faster downloads
---Could even give you a download time estimate, with popular movies downloading faster
Box gives you the option to delete after you've watched
Can manage your box content/queue from your tv
1080p/720p/480p options to meet the full spectrum of speed/quality folks needs
Movie size/language/subtitle default preferences set up once (only downloads what you need)
---Option to modify individual downloads for picky folks
Option to download special features in place of 1 movie on your box


There is absolutely NOTHING, from a technical standpoint, stopping this from happening today. If built en mass, they would probably only cost $100-150 to manufacture. If I had the above box, I would be a happy man... and only get happier as faster internet speeds/cheaper storage progressively allow me to receive a larger local list more quickly. And eventually, when speeds are fast enough, the same box could handle direct streams (and probably 480p streams from day one).
-Matt


Okay... can we forward this over to netflix? This would be ideal. Well done.

Okay... can we forward this over to netflix? This would be ideal. Well done.

I agree... I'd quit blockbuster right now for it.


Granted I still would buy movies. I watch far more than 10 movies a month. ;)

digital = do not want

Give me a pretty little disc in a pretty little case or I'm not paying for it. Period.

Blu-ray or DVD, thanks.

Only needs HDD space for 5-10 movies
Automatically downloads the top 5-10 movies in your queue
P2P with other peoples boxes for faster downloads
---Could even give you a download time estimate, with popular movies downloading faster
Box gives you the option to delete after you've watched
Can manage your box content/queue from your tv

Why would netflix bother with actually giving you the bits? There's going to be DRM
issues at a minimum. How would you actually know if you physically had 5 - 10
movies in your box, or if it just looked like you have 5-10 movies in your box? Maybe
we're saying the same thing. Whether the bits coming in are streamed or
actually downloaded, or some combination, probably is meaningless to consumers.

With the promise of digital HD downloads, the first thing everyone complains about is speed. I don't really see why though... Netflix, with an approximate 3 day turn around for me is plenty fast, especially when I have 3 movie options at a time. As long as digital downloads arrive faster than 3 days for my current 480p content, it will be an improvement. Chalk me up as someone who doesn't care about real time HD streaming the second I press play. Also, as someone who owns like 500+ DVDs, for all but a few select movies, I've lost my past rabid desire to own my content. Netflix now works great for 95% of my content needs. Lately, I've only bothered buying foreign DVDs which Netflix doesn't carry.

My dream...

A Netflix P2P set-top box
Free box with 6 month commitment
$20/month rental fee for 17-20 movies ($30/month for 25)
Only needs HDD space for 5-10 movies
Automatically downloads the top 5-10 movies in your queue
P2P with other peoples boxes for faster downloads
---Could even give you a download time estimate, with popular movies downloading faster
Box gives you the option to delete after you've watched
Can manage your box content/queue from your tv
1080p/720p/480p options to meet the full spectrum of speed/quality folks needs
Movie size/language/subtitle default preferences set up once (only downloads what you need)
---Option to modify individual downloads for picky folks
Option to download special features in place of 1 movie on your box


-Matt

Fixed***

I go over 15-20 movies a month with Netlifx's 17.99 plan. Why would I pay more for less. How EFFICIENT ;), is that.

Not my point - I realize that eventually everything will become obsolete. Just wondering if the trends of downloads could render BD and HD DVD obsolete before they even get off the ground (to the extent that one or the other becomes a "standard" like regular DVD's are now).

HD releases take anywhere from 15 to 50 gigs of space. Nobody wants to wait to download files of these sizes, it wont be plausible for quite a while yet.

Even when it does become possible people aren't just going to switch over from having actual copies on disk to storing movies on hard drives overnight (which can crash etc)

Eventually we may have some sort of nearly foolproof storage medium and insane bandwidths but even the necessary components of this type of HD media distribution
is really a long way off.

<snip>
My dream...

A Netflix P2P set-top box
<snip>
-Matt
Matt,

Perfect -- I would buy into that. As a chair of a patent committee in a high tech company (and holder/filer of nearly 30 patents) I would have suggested you patent that baby.

Except, by posting this you have now put the idea in the open press. You have one year to file in the US, and your non-US patent rights are pretty much gone. :o

Hope someone is working on this one, though....

Ken

Granted I still would buy movies. I watch far more than 10 movies a month. ;)
Sorry, I should have been more clear. It would work the same as existing Netflix service. For example, I have unlimited movies per month, with no more than 3 out at a time. The box would work the same, unlimited movies per month, with between 5 and 10 on your box at any given time.

Fixed***

I go over 15-20 movies a month with Netlifx's 17.99 plan. Why would I pay more for less. How EFFICIENT ;), is that.
See above. Considering they are downloads and you can get them faster if you go 480p, you'd could probably do more than 15-20 per month total.

when was 480i NTSC introduced? what year?
If you mean broadcast NTSC, the original format was defined in 1941. The standard was revised in 1953 to add color and was backward compatible. So the standard has been around for 66 years. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTSC.

On Demand movies like Comcast has will begin to take over.

on Demand over the air...that's what I'm waiting for....or else the "in your hand" format better not die.

I don't have cable / satellite and don't plan to anytime in the near future.

On Demand is another competitor..but if we are whining about HD DVD's costing $20(as opposed to $5-$10 dvd's) are people going to be willing to pay $8 or so for a one time viewing?

On Demand movies like Comcast has will begin to take over.
My problems with the On-Demand system are few, but significant:

- Very small selection
- (As I understand it) Cable bandwidth limitations mean selection can't grow too much
- Less than DVD resolution (<480p)
- Usually not widescreen
- As Zappcatt mentioned... way too costly

For me the quality and selection just aren't there. I would much rather have access to a larger library at higher quality even if I had to wait a day or two to download (aka my Netflix dream box). My $0.02.
-Matt

I'm talking about HD On Demand, although if you add SD to the mix there are at least 200 titles available at any time on Comcast here. HD only has a few dozen available at any time.

On Demand is another competitor..but if we are whining about HD DVD's costing $20(as opposed to $5-$10 dvd's) are people going to be willing to pay $8 or so for a one time viewing?
Nope. The BD or HD DVD is the far better choice economically. 8 dollars every time I want to watch the matrix? I dont think so. Heck an HBOHD sub only costs 10-12 bucks a month. LOL

I'm talking about HD On Demand, although if you add SD to the mix there are at least 200 titles available at any time on Comcast here. HD only has a few dozen available at any time.
Interesting, my Charter On-Demand service doesn't offer HD movies. And they only have <100 movies at a time or so. 200+ is great, but compared to the 75,000+ selection on Netflix it is still very, very small in my opinion. Especially considering I still can't find everything I want on NF!

The way I envision my dream NF box above, it wouldn't so much as supplement my movie watching (aka an HBO subscription here, a movie on demand or two there, etc...) as it would become the center of it. In essence, it would replace my existing system which is a large DVD collection + NF subscription. 480p streaming for last minute impulse watches, with HD downloads for the planned out list. Simple.

Had Apple not crippled the Apple TV, it could basically do everything I want minus the 1080p processing. Now I'm counting on Netflix... give it to me already!
-Matt

Interesting, my Charter On-Demand service doesn't offer HD movies. And they only have <100 movies at a time or so. 200+ is great, but compared to the 75,000+ selection on Netflix it is still very, very small in my opinion. Especially considering I still can't find everything I want on NF!

The way I envision my dream NF box above, it wouldn't so much as supplement my movie watching (aka an HBO subscription here, a movie on demand or two there, etc...) as it would become the center of it. In essence, it would replace my existing system which is a large DVD collection + NF subscription. 480p streaming for last minute impulse watches, with HD downloads for the planned out list. Simple.

Had Apple not crippled the Apple TV, it could basically do everything I want minus the 1080p processing. Now I'm counting on Netflix... give it to me already!
-Matt

How did they cripple the Apple TV? Are you saying b/c it doesn't offer the 1080p processing... (and only stereo sound, right?)

So no one has OTA HD on demand? :p I don't think that will work to kill the "hard format" unless you can somehow get 100% of the people. With DVD's you can, the users just have to buy a single $30 player and no revolving charges....a little easier to handle than ~$100 a month + rental for HD On Demand.

How did they cripple the Apple TV? Are you saying b/c it doesn't offer the 1080p processing... (and only stereo sound, right?)
Sorry, I didn't mean to come off as combative... crippled is probably a bit harsh as I'm sure it works great for some people's needs. It just doesn't work for my needs. It seems to me they split the difference between a Tivx-like media server box and a download box, while not really hitting the mark on either. As a media server, the formats it supports are way too limited... no ripped DVDs, no MPG, Divx, Xvid, etc.

As a download box, I don't really like their pricing scheme. I don't mind buying content, but I want to own it, transport it, use it on many devices of my choosing, etc... like with DVDs. And on top of paying for DRM'd digital content, you have to pay $300 for the device itself. I personally don't like buying DRM'd digital only media... I want more future flexibility than it offers. I don't buy online music either. You get less quality with more restrictions, I'd rather just buy the CD and rip it. I'm not saying it doesn't work for tons of people out there... just not me.

If I'm to be subject to all those limitations, I would prefer to just rent... ala Netflix.

And yes, 2-channel is also a deal killer for me.
-Matt

...I don't mind buying content, but I want to own it, transport it, use it on many devices of my choosing, etc... like with DVDs.-Matt

But Matt don't you envision your netflix dream box working the same way? Wouldn't it most likely be a sealed box with DRM'ed movies that can only be shared via P2P with other netflix dream boxes and then ONLY with the blessing of a Netflix server that keep tab of the number of flicks you watch?

TIM

Forgive me if this prospect has been posted - I wouldn't be sure what to search for to see if it had, but doesn't it seem that hard formats like Blu-Ray and HD DVD are both destined to be overtaken very soon by downloads and individuals holding their entire media library on a harddrive format as opposed to individual expensive discs?

As I just purchased a 1080p LCD television, I started researching which Hi-Def format would be best... then started thinking that both will probably be rendered obsolete sooner than later.

Since consumers became able to eliminate entire cd libraries and consilidate into tiny players, I see no reason why the general public will want to buy entirely new DVD libraries.

It's almost like the SACD format that came out a while ago that no one really embraced... it was bypassed for the mp3 preference... actually as I think about it, Sony has been pretty unsuccessful with many of their new format offerings, Beta, Mini-CD, SACD, et al. I guess that's another thread.

Perhaps someone can enlighten me as to what the long term and short term limitations are to the prospect of this happening or who might currently be working on the technology that would incorporate the superior video quality of Blu-Ray and HD-DVD in the format I've described.

Thank you in advance!

my cable company launched an on demand HD movie channel recently. I can tell you that if they constantly add content as quickly as they have to this point, I would never need to buy media again, soon.

But Matt don't you envision your netflix dream box working the same way? Wouldn't it most likely be a sealed box with DRM'ed movies that can only be shared via P2P with other netflix dream boxes and then ONLY with the blessing of a Netflix server that keep tab of the number of flicks you watch?

TIM
Yes, which is why I said this at the end of my post:

If I'm to be subject to all those limitations, I would prefer to just rent... ala Netflix.

Apple's model is to have users purchase heavily restricted content, not rent it cheap. In my mind there is a big difference.
-Matt

The new formats may very well fail, or more likely just be niche formats, because many people just don't care about higher quality.
J

I do not agree. If that was the case then new HD TV's would not be selling so well. Every guy that I know either has or wants a HD TV. I think it is cost rather than do not care.

my cable company launched an on demand HD movie channel recently. I can tell you that if they constantly add content as quickly as they have to this point, I would never need to buy media again, soon.

But it's a limited size library. As new titles move in, old move out. And there's even fewer choices in HD.

I have Verizon FIOS, and I believe we're a long way from VOD in any form replacing physical media that people can buy once and own forever. And I think that the final form VOD in the longer run won't be what most here are talking about. I think it will probably be used more like current TIVO's and DVR's. TV shows will get aired, and then offer subsequent viewings on VOD. HBO already does this. And frankly, it's the only time I've every even used my VOD.

What has more chance to doom both formats is probably not as much hd downloads as it is PIRACY.

How long will studios find it profitable to support optical formats if they end up just as easily pirated and sold on the street as dvd is but with only a tiny fraction of the consumer base to offset the losses of piracy?

What has more chance to doom both formats is probably not as much hd downloads as it is PIRACY.

How long will studios find it profitable to support optical formats if they end up just as easily pirated and sold on the street as dvd is but with only a tiny fraction of the consumer base to offset the losses of piracy?

:rolleyes:, piracy can be a mild concern, but still only mild. DVD has made record breaking profits for all company's involved and it has been readily cracked and pirated since the first year or so since inception. If Piracy was such a massive leak for them DVD would have died years ago. Piracy is a concern in any format, but the cries of piracy from the studios has been blown waaaaaaaaaaaaaay out of proportion. Many cable company's have been hacked and allowed to DVR stuff that has a no-record flag etc... Piracy will exist in whatever format, whether Physical or Digital, the studios release on. If you can see it, you can copy it some way or another.

Seems to me the debate of HD downloads was addressed quite nicely in the closing editorial from the most recent issue of Pefect Vision:

1. Slow download speeds,
2. Quality-degrading compression to speed download,
3. People are collectors by nature,
4. Hard drive as poor long-term storage medium, and
5. Portability of files given DRM.

All lead to the inevitable conclusion that there is plenty of life left for physical media.

And lets be quite clear: SACD/DVD-A failed in deference to MP3 because very few people can atually hear the difference when/where they listen to music.

Simon

Why do people rent movies? The way I see it either go to the theater or get DISH with every single channel they offer or BUY a movie that you really love. If you absolutely HAVE to see something just out at home you've still got pay per view.

Renting movies is so yesterday--who does that--the trailer park people who star on Jerry Springer?

Yes, I live in a "golf course community" trailer park....come on. I don't have dish, I don't have cable...I don't like going to the theater by myself, so yes, I rent (online and in store). I refuse to pay over $100 a month to watch 2-3 channels that I can't pick up over the air.

If I really love the movie after I rent it, I will go out and buy it.

I don't think you will make many friends by insulting people that live in trailer parks and saying that anyone that still rents movies lives in trailer parks....Netflix and Blockbuster online are still doing pretty well last time I checked.

;)

Why do people rent movies? The way I see it either go to the theater or get DISH with every single channel they offer or BUY a movie that you really love. If you absolutely HAVE to see something just out at home you've still got pay per view.

Renting movies is so yesterday--who does that--the trailer park people who star on Jerry Springer?

what if you miss a movie at the theatre and you want to watch it right at this moment, you can go out and hire it for $3 bucks. whats so wrong with that?

what if you miss a movie at the theatre and you want to watch it right at this moment, you can go out and hire it for $3 bucks. whats so wrong with that?

Hell, if you rent enough movies per month at Netflix or BB online It's less then 89 centers per movie :D.

I hate paying exorbitant prices at the theater for movies, thus I usually wait, netflix the movie and If I like it go out and buy the movie at 4 for $20 at Hollywood video or BB when they sell off their new release stock :D

for Hi-def films I'm kinda forced by finances (and now an ultimatum by the wife :D) to be moderate in the films I buy.

Why do people rent movies? The way I see it either go to the theater or get DISH with every single channel they offer or BUY a movie that you really love. If you absolutely HAVE to see something just out at home you've still got pay per view.

Renting movies is so yesterday--who does that--the trailer park people who star on Jerry Springer?

no i don't live in a trailer. i have cable.(analog, digital and HD) everything TWC has to offer. also OTA antenna. DISH compressed crap sux IMO. I'd much rather rent DVDs and watch them at home, in my chair, in my controlled environment on my 60" TV and pop my own corn than go to a theater and have to deal with multitudes of people that cant shut up long enough to enjoy the movie. sorry but the group of kids talking smack, or the momma who just had to bring her crying newborn to the movies does not enhance the movie experience. i don't care to hear people laughing at what i don't think is funny or screaming at what i don't think is scary. they ruin the movie for me. I'd pose the question, Why would any fool want to go to the theater?
as for PPV i can usually rent a movie 1 or 2 weeks before it is available on PPV. rent DVD for 5 days watch as many times as i like, when i like, and loan to friends.
it is very rare that i purchase a movie to own.

now back to the topic of this thread. i just don't see downloads making disc's obsolete. not for movies anyways. music is another story(to my dismay). people for some reason just cant hear the difference. I can. the days of the CD album are numbered unless the manufacturers add more multimedia content to the disc and lower prices. there was a time when you could buy a whole album and like every song on it. that is rare anymore, causing a lot of people , especially the younger generations to just want the popular single. why pay $16 for a disc with 1 good song on it when you can download that song for $0.99 or free from P2P. then burn a compilation disc of what you like. i still know people who only have cassette players in their cars and haven't got a clue what an MP3 is. but download sales have topped CD sales and where do you find cassettes these days.

movies would have to burnable to disc after download, playable anywhere and be quick to download before the DVD-vs download war could start. people like having a movie they can loan out, watch anytime, anywhere (my house, your house, in the car). the war right now is not BD-vs-HDDVD. its HD-vs-SD. when Walmart has a $200hd player and the shelves at the rental store have a BD and/or HDDVD section it will mark the beginning of the end for SDDVD. however i feel like unless the HD disc makers add the SD version to the disc as well it will be a tough sell. at one time all disc were full screen then we began seeing dual full and wide, now most are wide and a few are available in both. disc makers need to have the HD version of a film packaged with the SD version at a reasonable price point before people begin to see the benefit of HD. heck theres only one other person in my hood with an HDTV and out of 300 people i work with only 5 of us have HD. i ask at a local Hollywood video when they would be carrying HD or BD and the managers reply was "thats the first time I've been asked that" "i have no idea" "probably when more people request it".

I've read that downloading movies may ultimately account for about 20% of sales - who really knows at this time? I know I don't want to depend on downloads for movies I want to watch more than once (otherwise, I'd just wait for them to show up on HBO or ShowTime).

Only a small percentage of people are currently interested in HD content. This is normal (there were a lot of VHS tapes sold, even after DVDs were available). BUT - once people experience HD, they won't want to go back. It will be interesting to revisit this topic in a year or two...

:rolleyes:, piracy can be a mild concern, but still only mild. DVD has made record breaking profits for all company's involved and it has been readily cracked and pirated since the first year or so since inception. If Piracy was such a massive leak for them DVD would have died years ago. Piracy is a concern in any format, but the cries of piracy from the studios has been blown waaaaaaaaaaaaaay out of proportion. Many cable company's have been hacked and allowed to DVR stuff that has a no-record flag etc... Piracy will exist in whatever format, whether Physical or Digital, the studios release on. If you can see it, you can copy it some way or another.

Piracy of dvd is balanced by the large number of legitimate sales.

The point is what would make high def formats worth investing much money and content into if there is not that large number of legitimate buyers to make up for the piracy?

After seeing how pathetic the sales of the Pirate movies on Blu-ray and the Matrix movies on HD-DVD were, I'm inclined to agree that it would appear both formats are doomed. Damn format war.

After seeing how pathetic the sales of the Pirate movies on Blu-ray and the Matrix movies on HD-DVD were, I'm inclined to agree that it would appear both formats are doomed. Damn format war.

That's my biggest concern. I'd gladly give up either format if I knew that it meant the other would take hold and survive. I think Sony especially will fight long and hard before letting Blu-ray bite the dust as a movie format. I don't expect either format to supplant DVD as the standard, but I hope that at least one format gains enough acceptance to stay in the market and get support from all the studios.

I don't expect either format to supplant DVD as the standard, but I hope that at least one format gains enough acceptance to stay in the market and get support from all the studios.

If this doesn't happen, then the high def format won't survive. The only reason DVD survived is because it became the standard. The reason laser disc didn't survive is because it didn't become the standard (among other things). I think that backwards compatible players (BD or HD DVD) is the key to making sure it does become the standard.

After seeing how pathetic the sales of the Pirate movies on Blu-ray and the Matrix movies on HD-DVD were, I'm inclined to agree that it would appear both formats are doomed. Damn format war.

Um... seeing how this is the 'dual format player' forum, I think this thread is ill placed. I bought both Pirates, and Matrix. And I would think that anyone with dual-format capabilities would most likely have bought both as well. In other words, if the sales aren't steller of either title, I don't think it has as much to do with the "format war", as much as it has to do with the fact that 1080p displays and and players have just recently come to market. And I think it's simply way too early to declare anything dead.

Um... seeing how this is the 'dual format' forum, I think your post is ill placed.

Um...seeing as how the name of this thread is "Both Formats Doomed?", I would say that my post was perfectly placed. Perhaps the thread is ill placed? :rolleyes:

Um...seeing as how the name of this thread is "Both Formats Doomed?", I would say that my post was perfectly placed. Perhaps the thread is ill placed? :rolleyes:

Yes that's what I meant. I changed my post to reflect that. But my point was really focusing more on your contention that the format war is the blame for the low volume sales of the Matix and Pirates movies.

I think the real issue is whether people really want HD or not. Most HDTV's aren't even hooked to a high definition source.

I have a feeling that for a lot, perhaps most people, DVD is good enough. They'll never see the benefit of HD DVD or Blu-ray...at least while both are substantially more expensive than DVDs. Perhaps things will change when you can buy new release HD titles at $15 and catalog titles for $10 and less.

For the life of me, I can't understand this logic. Our world is based on change, and progress. How anyone can think that "HD is just a fad", or "it won't catch on", just amazes me. :confused:

Walmart has already stated in several months its stores will only sell HD televisions. The switch to HD may not be fast, but it will happen.

To those who may counter with, "people didn't buy higher quality audio formats, why will they want HD?" Bottom line: most people care more about visual quality than audio quality. (this forum excluded, of course. :) )

Art

If this doesn't happen, then the high def format won't survive. The only reason DVD survived is because it became the standard. The reason laser disc didn't survive is because it didn't become the standard (among other things). I think that backwards compatible players (BD or HD DVD) is the key to making sure it does become the standard.

I believe that one HD format could survive as a higher-end alternative to standard def DVD. You used Laserdisc as an example, I'll use it as well. LD was never the predominant format during its lifetime, but over 42,000 titles were released on Laserdisc worldwide during the almost 20 years that movies were released on LD. I'd take that kind of longevity and title selection from one of the two current HD formats.

I believe that one HD format could survive as a higher-end alternative to standard def DVD. You used Laserdisc as an example, I'll use it as well. LD was never the predominant format during its lifetime, but over 42,000 titles were released on Laserdisc worldwide during the almost 20 years that movies were released on LD. I'd take that kind of longevity and title selection from one of the two current HD formats.

Well, let's don't forget that DVD is what put the final death nail in LD. Better quality, and less expensive. HD-DVD and BD are definitely better quality than DVD. They are also starting to drop down in prices closer to DVD's in some retail outlets. As the two formats grow, prices will get more competitive with DVD. Then I think you will see them really start to take off.

For the life of me, I can't understand this logic. Our world is based on change, and progress. How anyone can think that "HD is just a fad", or "it won't catch on", just amazes me. :confused:

Walmart has already stated in several months its stores will only sell HD televisions. The switch to HD may not be fast, but it will happen.

To those who may counter with, "people didn't buy higher quality audio formats, why will they want HD?" Bottom line: most people care more about visual quality than audio quality. (this forum excluded, of course. :) )

Art

I've been having a conversation with a coworker very related to this. basically he has shown me great interest in going high def and he comes to me with questions regarding the newer audio/video tech. but for the life of me i cant get him to jump in and get his feet wet. he says things like "I'll buy a big screen when the prices drop to $500" "I'll get HD sat. when every channel is HD" "I'll buy an HD player when i can buy one at Walmart for $100 and half the blockbuster store is HD." he doesn't like the idea of buying into the technology in its infancy and prefers to wait until everything has matured. which i find really strange considering he's an electronics engineer :eek:

I've been having a conversation with a coworker very related to this. basically he has shown me great interest in going high def and he comes to me with questions regarding the newer audio/video tech. but for the life of me i cant get him to jump in and get his feet wet. he says things like "I'll buy a big screen when the prices drop to $500" "I'll get HD sat. when every channel is HD" "I'll buy an HD player when i can buy one at Walmart for $100 and half the blockbuster store is HD." he doesn't like the idea of buying into the technology in its infancy and prefers to wait until everything has matured. which i find really strange considering he's an electronics engineer :eek:

Has he bought into DVD yet? Or is he still waiting for that to mature as well? :D

Has he bought into DVD yet? Or is he still waiting for that to mature as well? :D

Jeez, no kidding!

Why do people rent movies? The way I see it either go to the theater or get DISH with every single channel they offer or BUY a movie that you really love. If you absolutely HAVE to see something just out at home you've still got pay per view.

Renting movies is so yesterday--who does that--the trailer park people who star on Jerry Springer?

I don't want to go to a theater with a $h***y projection system and I don't want to pay $7 each time for something that looks worse than what I can have at home.

I don't buy junk on pay per view because I don't like low bitrate ugly looking SD crap.

Who still rents? Everyone except you..

I've been having a conversation with a coworker very related to this. basically he has shown me great interest in going high def and he comes to me with questions regarding the newer audio/video tech. but for the life of me i cant get him to jump in and get his feet wet. he says things like "I'll buy a big screen when the prices drop to $500" "I'll get HD sat. when every channel is HD" "I'll buy an HD player when i can buy one at Walmart for $100 and half the blockbuster store is HD." he doesn't like the idea of buying into the technology in its infancy and prefers to wait until everything has matured. which i find really strange considering he's an electronics engineer :eek:
Every station will never be in HD, digital but not HD.

well come on - never say never.


Unless you're epxcting th collapse of civilization - EVENTUALLY every channel will be HD.

well come on - never say never.


Unless you're epxcting th collapse of civilization - EVENTUALLY every channel will be HD.

Nick at Night won't be HD for a long time...their programming wasn't shot in HD. (or most of it film, but very unlikely that it will be remastered in HD (even 4:3 HD) for TV anytime soon.

Nick at Night won't be HD for a long time...their programming wasn't shot in HD. (or most of it film, but very unlikely that it will be remastered in HD (even 4:3 HD) for TV anytime soon.

Er... somehow I have a feeling that it's a very short line of people who are waiting to get HD until 'Nick at Night' is in HD.

Um... seeing how this is the 'dual format' forum, I think this thread is ill placed. I bought both Pirates, and Matrix. And I would think that anyone with dual-format capabilities would most likely have bought both as well. In other words, if the sales aren't steller of either title, I don't think it has as much to do with the "format war", as much as it has to do with the fact that 1080p displays and and players have just recently come to market. And I think it's simply way too early to declare anything dead.
i agree, this both formats doomed?....this thread got to go,its just stupid,first hdtv is to stay,2nd soon or later the public will want hd movies,not dvd at 480p.once they relize there hd displays are 1080p or 1080i or 768,they will want,the formats that can display these [p,s].in the long run sddvd is no match for hd or bd.as the man said its to early to call.

Has he bought into DVD yet? Or is he still waiting for that to mature as well? :D


i can tell he really wants to go HD but he is fighting it with every excuse he can think of. i think he wants it so bad he can taste it but justifies not having it by pointing out what i feel are the exact reasons others have not adopted it yet, price and availability of content.

i havent asked him but somehow i get the feeling he might have gotten burnt with a $1000 betamax :D

The comparison to DVD is not valid. You did not need to purchase a new TV set to be able to appreciate the PQ of DVD. An HDTV is required to view HDD.

There are approx. 1 million HDD players attached to HDTVs. It is obvious from the sales figures of The Matrix and tje POTC movies that the owners of HDD are not buying movies. Are they renting them from Netflix and BB?

So with the low sales figures - what constitutes a "must have" title? It sure isn't these three.

HDD's biggest competitor is the HD programming available to HDTV owners. They are paying for it monthly and guess what? Many of the movies on HDD are also on HDTV through the different services available. I only own HD DVD yet I have seen both Cars and POTC - DMC in HD.

So if I can see a movie in HD for a fee that I pay anyway - why should I go out and spend $300 or $600 for a player, then start spending $25 to $35 a movie? Just so I can play it anytime time I want? That reasoning has gotten lame and you can see it in the sales of HDD movies in general.

HDD will be a SLOW growth format. It would have been this way even if there was no format war due to again, the content being available to the public who have HDTV's.

And please don't tell me that HDD is the best that HDTV can look because of the almost 30 million HDTVs that populate the USA - only about 2 million are attached to an HD feed. So the other 28 million either think they are watching HDTV or they just don't care and they bought that HDTV because anything bigger than 42" is going to be an HDTV set no matter what.

DVD offered great benefits over both VHS and LD. The only benefit that HDD offers over DVD is better PQ and guess what? The majority of the viewing public in the USA doesn't know about better PQ, isn't interested in better PQ, or thinks they already have better PQ - and they don't.

Do not use this forum as a judge of anything. We represent the top 1% so there is 99% more to deal with - the masses - the uneducated masses.

HDD is it until we go to another format in about 7 to 10 years like "Super HDTV" which starts at 2500x2000 and goes up to the new NHK 7000x4000 Super Hi-Vision format.

And once again we will have the chance to introduce one format.

your numbers seem way off to what I've read on other sites....less than 7% of people with an HDTV view HD programming? Come on.

Not sure what HDD is either...to me that means Hard Disc Drive

Frankly, on a 1080p display, I believe the benefit of HD-DVD/BD over SD-DVD far exceeds the benefit of SD-DVD over VHS and LD. You must remember that when DVD first hit the market, large screen HDTV's had just come out as well. Most households at that time had on average 26" NTSC TV's. Which really didn't show off the PQ difference of DVD vs. VHS. As people moved to larger 720p HDTV displays, that difference became more apparent. Now we have 1080p capable displays available and they are quickly surplanting all previous TV's in new sales as prices fall. 1080hp is the new 'standard', and as people buy 1080p TV's, they will also want 1080p disc players.

So if I can see a movie in HD for a fee that I pay anyway - why should I go out and spend $300 or $600 for a player, then start spending $25 to $35 a movie? Just so I can play it anytime time I want? That reasoning has gotten lame and you can see it in the sales of HDD movies in general.

.
i somewhat agree with this statement. HDDVD and BD have the capacity to hold so much more content yet to my knowledge its not being taken advantage of. the makers of these formats need to add more content that the average consumers want. why not besides the movie also have the soundtrack to the movie, music videos, and games. although that will certainly cut into Cd and game sales. the point is the average consumer has to believe he is getting more for his money and i dont believe he thinks he's getting that for his $30 right now.

i somewhat agree with this statement. HDDVD and BD have the capacity to hold so much more content yet to my knowledge its not being taken advantage of. the makers of these formats need to add more content that the average consumers want. why not besides the movie also have the soundtrack to the movie, music videos, and games. although that will certainly cut into Cd and game sales. the point is the average consumer has to believe he is getting more for his money and i dont believe he thinks he's getting that for his $30 right now.

Same issue when DVD's first came out. In 1998 (2nd year of DVD's)...the players were about $500-$600 and discs about $25-$30. Which, at the time, was a lot more money than today. By those standards, HD DVD and BD is less expensive.

Even then you could pay for HBO, Showtime, etc. For the people with that reasoning, it is best to wait for the players to come down in price (I.e. 3-7 years) and then buy the $5.50 HD DVD's / BD Disc from the Wal-Mart bargain bin.

Even new DVD's currently cost $20, so $25-$30 for a new release HD Version isn't that bad for the increased picture quality...who watches extras anyway?

The 7% number comes from announcements from both the CBL industry and the SAT industry. Each has "sold" about 750,000 HD STB's = 1.5 million. The other 500,000 are using OTA to get their HD.

You all are applying wishful thinking versus what the reality is.

"people have 1080P HDTV's so they want 1080P players." - so why aren't the sales of players and HDD's (High Definition Discs) selling way above where they are?

13,000 HD DVD owners bought The Matrix in the first week it was out - of the approx. 500,000 that could have. The same with BD. 47,000 bouth one or both of the POTC movies - again out of approx. 500,000 potential buyers.

And if HDD is less expensive than DVD - then why the pathetic sales numbers for the movies being sold (the average title does about 30,000).

"The point is the average consumer has to believe he is getting more for his money and i dont believe he thinks he's getting that for his $30 right now. "

Now this is a true statement that reflects what is happening - not what should be happening - or may happen.

At less than $249, HD-DVD doesn't seem to be doomed. They sold out all of the HD-A2 players in one day at Amazon.com. The Costco in my area sold 32 units on a 24 hour period, I went in on a Thursday at 6pm and then back again on Friday at 4pm. The Costco guy said they are flying off the shelf, considering they were only selling 10-20 a week max before the $100 rebate. This sale throughout most of June will almost certainly cripple BR, in the long term.

Every station will never be in HD, digital but not HD.

I disagree with that statement, give it 5-10 years.

I just went to Blockbuster and they had 4 SDVDs for $20. These were previously rented, but recent name brand titles. Contrast that to $120 for the HD versions and I can see why alot of the general public isn't moving as fast on the HD material. If HDD wants to gain mass market acceptance they need to get the movies alteast under the $20 mark, probably under $!5.

SDVD? HDD? I don't understand. If you mean SD DVD's and HD DVDs/Blu-Ray that is one thing...your acronyms are confusing and I've never seem them used at AVS like that before.

Contrast that to $120 for the HD versions

Plus, I've never seen a single HD DVD / Blu-Ray that sold for $120.

You can't compare new high def DVD's (HD DVD / BD) to used SD DVD's. Now when Blockbuster starts selling previously viewed HD DVD's and BD Discs, then a comparison can be made.

Right now you should compare the pricing to the new SD DVD's at Blockbuster and you won't see much of a difference.

Plus, I've never seen a single HD DVD / Blu-Ray that sold for $120.



LOL! Even the entire Matrix collection on HD-DVD isn't anywhere close to that amount.

LOL! Even the entire Matrix collection on HD-DVD isn't anywhere close to that amount.


He was meaning that 4 HD-DVD's would cost $120 and they can get 4 of the SD versions for $20 at Blockbuster. If you shop online though, I could probably get the 4 same HD-DVD's for around $80, which is the same cost for SD DVD's. I just bought The Skeleton Key on HD-DVD for $6.

I guess my post was not clear. I was in Blockbuster, they had 4 used name brand recently released DVDs for $20. To buy the same 4 name brand recently released HD DVDs / Blu Ray from a retail outlet would have cost $120. I understand it may not be fair to compare used to new, but this is the choice that was available to me. I know alot of average Joe consumer's that can't make the leap to pay the extra money when they feel that Standard DVD quality is fine. If Hollywood really wants to get people to make the leap they should be more agressive on the pricing of HD DVDs / Blu Ray than standards DVDs atleast for a little while. This would get more people to try HD DVDs / Blu Ray and then they could bump the price back up a lilttle.

Movies are going to be like music. At first not many people downloaded music… as broadband became more common, downloading music became popular. Most of the people I know have not bought a CD in years.

For right now xbox live is the only place that lets you download HD content (as far as I know)

The XBOX360 is on the right path... xbox360+hdtv+vista media center = the way things should be.

I use vista media center to record OTA HD content. Play it through my xbox360 on my HDTV. Also use it for playing a massive mp3 collection. This is seamless and vista media center looks very sexy on a big screen. There are no subscription fees, no content to buy.

Xbox live offers HD content for download. I tried out one HD movie (right now movies are only available for rent, tv shows you download you can actually keep) it is 720p and the file was 5gb. Took a few hours to download (was not timing it, but felt like 3-5 hours) PQ was very good... movie sucked (The Wicker Man) You can actually can start watching movies before they finish downloading.

As soon as we get to the point where we can start watching movies as soon as they start to download, downloaded HD programming will gain much more acceptance. Once we can download a HD movie in less than 2 hours, we are set :-)

HDD's biggest competitor is the HD programming available to HDTV owners. They are paying for it monthly and guess what? Many of the movies on HDD are also on HDTV through the different services available. I only own HD DVD yet I have seen both Cars and POTC - DMC in HD.

So if I can see a movie in HD for a fee that I pay anyway - why should I go out and spend $300 or $600 for a player, then start spending $25 to $35 a movie? Just so I can play it anytime time I want? That reasoning has gotten lame and you can see it in the sales of HDD movies in general.

How is that different from DVD? Granted, some people may have bought the DVDs just to get movies in OAR, but that could still apply now in cases where the movie is shown in "fullscreen HD." Sure, the higher price of HDDs is a factor, but it took years for sub-$10 DVDs to arrive.

Then there are new releases, which don't show up on TV for several months. They may be available soon afterwards on PPV, but that didn't kill VHS or DVD rentals either.

How is that different from DVD? Granted, some people may have bought the DVDs just to get movies in OAR, but that could still apply now in cases where the movie is shown in "fullscreen HD." Sure, the higher price of HDDs is a factor, but it took years for sub-$10 DVDs to arrive.

Then there are new releases, which don't show up on TV for several months. They may be available soon afterwards on PPV, but that didn't kill VHS or DVD rentals either.

First Paragraph:I am not understanding your post. I am comparing HDD to HDTV and you have introduced DVD into the conversation. Again - apples to apples.

Second Paragraph:Again I do not understand your point. Please clarify

First Paragraph:I am not understanding your post. I am comparing HDD to HDTV and you have introduced DVD into the conversation. Again - apples to apples.

Second Paragraph:Again I do not understand your point. Please clarify

You asked why people should pay for HD discs when they could watch the movies on television. I said that this isn't different than it was with DVD, where you could watch the movies on television instead, and yet the format became successful.

The second part says that with new release movies, you can't just watch them on television until they air, which is after the video releases have been out. Sometimes people will buy new release movies in order to see them sooner than they could on television. They delay the TV showings so they don't directly compete with the DVDs/HD discs.

I understand that some people will choose to watch movies on television instead of buying them, but this isn't anything new.

Okay for all those people that are saying that no one will be willing to wait for downloads of HD movies check out this article first.

http://www.screendigest.com/online_services/intelligence/games/updates/gi-040607-e2theb/show

I think that some of these sweeping statements that are posted like facts such as downloads are years off have not done the research. It is here and now and expanding at faster rate than you might think. If we look at these numbers then we see that there were 272K downloads of Hidef movies on Xbox live in the first quarter and that works out to 21K per week now with a projected doubling of this volume in the coming months. With 35 movies available now and a lot more to come this number will expand rapidly. Just look at how happy Lionsgate is with these numbers and you'll notice that paramount and warner are on-board who have had new releases that people definitely want to see. Warners slate can expand quickly since they have embraced the VC-1 codec making it easy to transfer releases into the library. I would not be surprised to see other studios sign up in the near term future either. And I have to say after watching some of these releases the quality is pretty darn good, certainly better than on-demand HD movies.

I've been having a conversation with a coworker very related to this. basically he has shown me great interest in going high def and he comes to me with questions regarding the newer audio/video tech. but for the life of me i cant get him to jump in and get his feet wet. he says things like "I'll buy a big screen when the prices drop to $500" "I'll get HD sat. when every channel is HD" "I'll buy an HD player when i can buy one at Walmart for $100 and half the blockbuster store is HD." he doesn't like the idea of buying into the technology in its infancy and prefers to wait until everything has matured. which i find really strange considering he's an electronics engineer :eek:
Actually, I share the same sentiments as your coworker. I've been in the technology (computer) industry for almost 30 years and always been interested in technology and been an early adopter - especially in A/V. But, I still do not have either hidef DVD format despite realizing the benefits and wanting it. Why not?

When I was younger I chased all kinds of incremental upgrades, beta releases, funded vendors R&D efforts by buying 1st gen product and generally, was more susceptible to buying (literally and figuratively) into the cachet of being an "early adopter". Now product cycles are even shorter and the incremental improvement is even smaller. Take SD DVD players for example. Progressive and upscaling have been pushed by manufacturers and retailers as "must haves". Now I know that some people swear by them (and there's plenty of threads discussing these) but both of these "enhancements" really are kind of minor compared to moving from VHS to DVD. Even software vendors have been cutting back on the incremental releases as customers were complaining that they weren't getting the "big bang" benefits from upgrade-itis - especially when people only use 2% of the features of something like Word anyway.

The point I'm making is that, while I see the benefits of hidef DVD (and want it) I'm much more content to let this thing play out. Like your friend I'll jump in when there's a ton of releases available, I don't have to concern myself with what's being released on what format, the players are close to commodities, the A/V idiosyncrasies have been worked out with a few more generations and a fuller set of the formats specifications have worked their way into a wider range of products. I'm now at the stage where I'm looking for the most improvement at the lowest cost - especially when what I have is already very good.

Okay for all those people that are saying that no one will be willing to wait for downloads of HD movies check out this article first.

http://www.screendigest.com/online_services/intelligence/games/updates/gi-040607-e2theb/show

I think that some of these sweeping statements that are posted like facts such as downloads are years off have not done the research. It is here and now and expanding at faster rate than you might think. If we look at these numbers then we see that there were 272K downloads of Hidef movies on Xbox live in the first quarter and that works out to 21K per week now with a projected doubling of this volume in the coming months. With 35 movies available now and a lot more to come this number will expand rapidly. Just look at how happy Lionsgate is with these numbers and you'll notice that paramount and warner are on-board who have had new releases that people definitely want to see. Warners slate can expand quickly since they have embraced the VC-1 codec making it easy to transfer releases into the library. I would not be surprised to see other studios sign up in the near term future either. And I have to say after watching some of these releases the quality is pretty darn good, certainly better than on-demand HD movies.

I don't think anyone is denying that downloads are available now and will be at least somewhat popular soon. What's being debated is if and when they will make physical media extinct. iTunes, for instance, has been around for four years now, and yet you can still buy CDs.

I don't know why everything has to be a "____ killer," as if there's no such thing as co-existence. I don't doubt that downloads will be very popular with some people, but I don't think it's going to kill off physical media any time soon. I know I'll be holding out until the end.

I don't think anyone is denying that downloads are available now and will be at least somewhat popular soon. What's being debated is if and when they will make physical media extinct. iTunes, for instance, has been around for four years now, and yet you can still buy CDs.

I don't know why everything has to be a "____ killer," as if there's no such thing as co-existence. I don't doubt that downloads will be very popular with some people, but I don't think it's going to kill off physical media any time soon. I know I'll be holding out until the end.


I agree with you in that I don't believe that they will be doomed. Thats pretty drastic and even those that have quote failed certainly linger on if companies decide to continue to support them for the merrits. For example, LP's and SACD's come to mind for true audiophiles who continue to pony up money.

I do think that with all the choices available that HD-DVD and Blu-ray are not necessarily going to be the dominate format within their respective life times and may find it much harder to gain traction than say DVD. The DVD as we all know had many other advantages beyond an improvement in quality at the time. Nameably convienence, size, durability, portability. HD discs only provide an increase in quality and to a smaller degree other content.

These arguments can be applied to HDTV's as well particularly that flat and light is probably the most important selling point and not quality of the image. I can hang it on my wall or I don't need a really deep cabinet to put it in. HD CRT's do not sell well.

You asked why people should pay for HD discs when they could watch the movies on television. I said that this isn't different than it was with DVD, where you could watch the movies on television instead, and yet the format became successful.

DVD became successfuk due to it replacing LD - big, expensive and side changes (and sometimes disc changes - VHS - 2X the PQ, no rewinding, didn't wear out. If people wanted HDD's then they sales numbers would be much higher - which they aren't.

The second part says that with new release movies, you can't just watch them on television until they air, which is after the video releases have been out. Sometimes people will buy new release movies in order to see them sooner than they could on television. They delay the TV showings so they don't directly compete with the DVDs/HD discs.

"Sometimes" - yes, agreed. There are 120 million DVD players in the USA. A good sale of a movie will reach about 8 million - less than 10% choose to buy the movie.

Many of the HDD's that are being released have already been released on DVD and are already on HDTV in HD BEFORE they are released to HDD - CARS and POTC-DMC, THE ROAD WARRIOR - just to name three. If all my interest is , is to see the movie in HD, then again I don't have to buy it to see it.

I understand that some people will choose to watch movies on television instead of buying them, but this isn't anything new.

Exactly - but this contradicts your second statement.

Exactly - but this contradicts your second statement.

Really? The second statement was that new release titles may not apply to your contention that people can just watch HD movies on television now, since there is a period of time before they air. I said sometimes people will buy a movie when it is new, while other times they will choose to wait and see it on television. It all depends on how badly they want to see it and whether it's important to own a copy of it or not.

I remember during the dot.com boom when online newspapers were supposed to spell doom for their printed counterparts.... it never happened.

It did for me.

Got this off Cnet today:here (http://crave.cnet.co.uk/dvdpvr/0,39030701,49290965,00.htm)


Friday 8 June 2007
Onkyo DV-HD805: Finally, a new HD DVD player
Related entries: DVD & PVR


Toshiba's HD DVD division is like the kid who doesn't have anyone to play with -- overweight, lazy and beginning to develop an odd smell. Until now, that is -- there hasn't been much competition in the HD DVD market, but that's about to change with a new player from Onkyo, the DV-HD805.

But unlike the aforementioned loser, Toshiba has an awesome new toy and everyone wants to play with it. Onkyo is licensing the blueprints from Tosh, so the DV-HD805 is actually based on the Toshiba HD-XE1. The good news for us is that it could result in a substantial price drop for HD DVD players.

Onkyo is keen to point out it will be tweaking the hardware too, so while it is based on the Toshiba player, it's hopefully going to have a few tasty enhancements. It will also have an Onkyo-designed case, which is going to look a little different to the usual black Toshiba design.

There is no formal word on price yet, but we would hope Onkyo does its usual trick of producing decent hardware with a sensible price tag. If so, we could see this being a nice boost to the fortunes of HD DVD.

The other snippet of exciting news is that Onkyo also supports Blu-ray, which leads us to wonder if perhaps we could see a budget Blu-ray player, or maybe even a dual-format machine from the company in the next year. -Ian Morris

just curious... where can I find high quality full movies online to download ???
how much do they cost?
any free ones ?

download a 25-50GB HD Movie? I don't think you'll find that anywhere. I've seen low quality full length films to download for a fee, but most were encoded with DivX or xVID :(

I haven't seen full DVD's (~8GB) to download off the internet (legally, that is)

PKW2000: Of course this is the way to go, but I like owning something that I can hold. ;) What happens if your hardrive frys, or if Vista crashes for the 4th time in a day...These are big questions that need to be pondered, I don't like the control studios have on content, what happens if they decide to say you can't burn this to a disk and make a copy or they say time for pay per play, everytime they watch you they charge you a fee. I think it still will be a ways off before this even comes close to mainstream. You can download content on the PS3 now in HD, but Xbox is further ahead of the game, I use both but don't download movies, too slow and it will have to be under 30min for me to bite. I can hop in my car get off my a s s and go down to the store and rent one faster and run a few other errands, plus it is keeping more people employed... ;)

Or you can have Movielink not support your computer your using, just went to there web site and stated I needed XP or 2000 in order to use there site...

what happens if they decide to say you can't burn this to a disk and make a copy...

I don't think they will allow that at all. The whole supposed point of download services is that you don't need to use a disc.

SirDrexl: That is what I am afraid of, hopefully by then they will have huge flash memory drives.

I don't think they will allow that at all. The whole supposed point of download services is that you don't need to use a disc.Not really. Many people pay for downloaded music and then burn them to a CD. Some who download movies will still want to burn them to a disc.

It's more about not having to stock or deliver a disc (and make you wait for delivery or drive somewhere to buy it) in order for you to get the music, than it is about avoiding the use of a disc.

Do you know how long it takes to download 8GB over high speed...longer than I want to wait...and if HD programming is larger, forget it.

Also, what percentage of households have access to high speed? What percentage of household don't have internet access? Do you just leave the low speed / no internet customers out of your potential customers? Wal-Mart probably wouldn't like that.

If I could go to the store and purchase a SD card with a HD movie, would I...probably...but then what do I play it on....I'm not dragging my computer into my living room.

It takes me 24mins at my office :)

It takes me 24mins at my office :)

They just put in a 30Gbps pipe at my office, but then again, no job = no money = no movies...I don't want to get fired :p

D/L movies or VOD may someday take the place of rentals, but not the place of physical media that one can own and whip out to watch anytime they want. Even if the D/L times improve (which are still a long way from prime time), the space to store video is huge and expensive. There are also all the copyright issues as well. So I don't think either of these options are going spell trouble for HD-DVD/BD, anytime soon.