SANTA MONICA — The panelists at the high-definition discussion June 11 at the annual Digital Hollywood conference in Santa Monica, Calif., agreed on one thing: the success of HD home media, if it isn’t considered a success already, is inevitable.

What form of HD entertainment will come out on top, however, was a source of debate.

If Microsoft has its way, DVD, Blu-Ray Disc and HD DVD will all be rendered obsolete within 10 years, according to Richard Doherty, Microsoft’s program manager for Media Entertainment Convergence.

“I don’t know that [HD] will be delivered on an optical disc in five to 10 years,” he said, pointing to downloads and broadband delivery. “At Microsoft, we’d rather it wasn’t [on a disc].”

He added that Microsoft is “very firmly planted in HD DVD” at the moment, due to the cost of replication and because “Blu-Ray hasn’t delivered that interactive content [like HD DVD] has.”

Doherty acknowledged his bias: Microsoft’s Xbox 360 — which is HD DVD compatible — is competing with the Blu-Ray based PlayStation 3 from Sony. A scheduled moderator for the panel from Sony was unable to appear. But Doherty was adamant that “this will be the last optical [home entertainment] generation. If this one survives.”

Brett Gaines, VP of strategic business development for Silicon Image Inc., a leader in HDMI (high-definition multimedia interface) technology, pointed out that studios count on a majority of their revenue from DVD and its HD brothers.

“Over time it’s inevitable: delivery of content will be by the Internet and broadband. It’s just the cheapest way to get content into the home,” he said. “[But] before you move off optical media, you’ll need to tell the studios where [they’ll make up the money].”

“The economics here are not simple,” agreed Jack Buser, Dolby’s “WorldWide Technology Evangelist.”

“Dolby’s extremely neutral in the format war,” Buser added. “But we also really, really don’t like the format war. A lot of consumers right now are turned off by the format war. They’ve been burned before and they don’t want to be burned again.”

Besides wading into the middle of the ongoing format war, the panelists covered a variety of HD-related topics. Dolby’s Buser started the panel by asking how many of the 20-25 people in attendance owned an HD DVD player, with half raising their hands. Most of the other half raised their hands when he asked about Blu-Ray.

But everyone raised his or her hands when he asked who had a 5.1 sound system set up at home. “It’s pretty shocking to look at the number of 5.1 set-ups,” Buser said. “Sound is such a critical aspect of the high-def experience. It’s more than just a pretty picture. “As devices move into the living room, they all speak to those 5.1 audio setups you have.”

He touted the quality of Dolby’s True HD audio, which purports to deliver the same quality sound that came from a film’s mixing department.

“It’s amazing to me how much the studios have embraced Dolby True HD,” Buser said.

Silicon Image’s Gaines ran through the progress HD has made in all electronics over just a couple years. He said 91% of all TVs are HDMI compatible, as are 47% of DVD products.

“A TV that comes with only two HDMI inputs will not be competitive in the future market,” Gaines said.

However, a mere 6% of mobile devices are HD-ready, he said.

“The mobile opportunities are huge,” he said.

The panelists agreed mostly on what consumers expect from all sides of HD, hardware and software.

“At its baseline, people are trying to recreate the theatrical experience at home,” Microsoft’s Doherty said, adding that on the Xbox LIVE Marketplace download service, users are downloading HD programs four times as often as regular ones. “That’s the consumers’ ultimate goal.”

Gaines predicted that the HD DVD vs. Blu-Ray battle will be won based on the number of available titles.

“The video and audio experience is a given, [but] right now it’s a little bit tough to get what you want [on HD],” Gaines said. “It’s not all on HD DVD and Blu-Ray. We need more sources of HD programming.

“The ultimate determining factor is the availability of software.”

“Consumers really do have a holistic expectation of HD,” Buser said. “Moving forward we can’t ignore consumers‚ demand for portability, compatibility and interactivity.”

http://www.homemediamagazine.com/news/html/breaking_article.cfm?article_id=10757

Confirms what we all knew. Microsoft want downloadable movies to be dominant and the disc format to become obsolete. Their support of HD DVD perpetuates this rediculous format war and does nothing to promote the format, only create consumer confusion.

10years is a long time in today's fast moving tech and ever increasing bandwidth. If that makes no sense to you, then I don't know what to say. It's MS responsibility to it's shareholders and the future of it's company to forsee the market turns.

I'm always amazed that people can interact on a forum called AVScience and still act as the biggest luddites around.

Hey, let's grab some pitch forks and fire sticks and let's go declare war on 1 Microsoft Way, Redmond Washington.

It's ok to be a fanboy but don't leave common sense at the door.......

10years is a long time in today's fast moving tech and ever increasing bandwidth. If that makes no sense to you, then I don't know what to say. It's MS responsibility to it's shareholders and the future of it's company to forsee the market turns.

I'm always amazed that people can interact on a forum called AVScience and still act as the biggest luddites around.

Hey, let's grab some pitch forks and fire sticks and let's go declare war on 1 Microsoft Way, Redmond Washington.

It's ok to be a fanboy but don't leave common sense at the door.......


Spin it any way you like, but it does prove Microsoft's longterm goal is to kill optical discs in favor of downloads. Something most people with a brain already knew.

Microsoft is saying they hope optical discs are dead in as near as 5 years? How long did DVD last and it's still going, eh? Yet in 5 years they want not only HD DVD and Blu-ray dead, but all discs dead in favor of their downloads? And they even have the gall to call what they transfer over Xbox Live "high def," when it's not even in the same league as what is being offered on disc.

Oh, it's a high def resolution, alright. 1280x720 with Dolby Digital from yesteryear, but most consumers won't be able to tell the difference, right? Is that what you guys who are touting Microsoft's "great" support of HD DVD want for the future? 1280x720 movies with Dolby Digital <640? Because that's what Microsoft wants for you. And they see discs dead in as soon as 5 years.

If they see downloads taking over for discs that quickly, then they obviously see plainly and clearly what so many here have been saying: a format war will kill both formats.

Microsoft knows that without its extreme efforts to keep HD DVD alive along with Universal's strange and uncharacteristic support (likely a payoff), HD DVD would already be dead in the water. Certainly, HD DVD would be no better off had Microsoft not rushed to produce an impressive VC1 encoder for HD DVD when all other encoders (not produced by companies that had vested interests in a format's success or failure) for competing codecs were still immature and had Microsoft not rushed to create an easy-to-produce, simpler HDi to get HD DVD off the ground on "advanced features."

Toshiba's greed, Universal's lust for a quick buck, and Microsoft's eye for what it would mean for the future of disc-based formats if they made this format war stall both formats is leading us down this path to the No-Disc-Future that Microsoft greatly desires.

I own both formats, but damn if I don't see the writing on the wall. I say pick a format and buy as many titles as you can in that format or we'll not have either format for very long...

It wont be that easy to kill optical discs. Hell, even here in the Philippines, Im shocked some even use VHS and VCD and still are without regular DVDs. And some people(like me) would prefer hardcopy of movies, not just something stored. It will grow(downloadable content), but not enough to kill optical discs in 10 years.

There's a thread here:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=860390

where the person actually quoted in the article makes it clear that his quotes were taken out of context and that MS is *not* hoping that HD media becomes obsolete.

Home Media Magazine has now had 3 articles in as many weeks about HD/BD that are pretty poorly reported.

I'm trying to understand why everyone fears downloadable content. I see the same type of doom and gloom in audio places on the net regarding itunes and yahoo music.

Ultimately however much the conspiracy theorists might claim other wise, the consumer does have the ultimate say because they vote with their wallets.

That's also why the HDDVD vs. Blu Ray war is dumb too with people arguing passionately to pick a side and those that own both are just prolonging the war. My take is that anybody buying either is a good thing because it establishes that people want hi-def content period.

Technology is both the opportunity and the barrier here. One reason that itunes and xbox live have relatively low res content is the limitations of devices and bandwidth. As those improve so will the quality of content. It will become a competitive advantage.

I for one am all in favor of downloadable content or even better real-time streaming. I want the celestial jukebox, with any content i could imagine right at my fingertips, but that is still a good way off.

Meanwhile back in 2007, the downloadable stuff has a purpose, i buy the occasional song off itunes because i have heard about the band, but not actually heard them so for a buck or two I can.

Same thing with xbox live movies. I have tried a couple of movies, sublime (very strange) and blood diamond (great, went and bought the movie)

It's interesting that on the leading edge of a major technology change that there is always a pause in sales of existing product without the corresponding jump in the new thing. When the consumer is unsure they wait.

It is on at least it's second cycle in music. When the CD was released there was a pause in vinyl and cassette sales that CD did not immediately compensate for. But then CD took off with greater sales than ever and led to a flood of back catalog titles for instance. Now we are in pause mode again because of downloadable music, but already a trickle of bands (wilco) have benefited from it.

I don't understand the attachment to physical media that much. Yeah album art can be cool and all that, but my love is the music or the movie

Downloadable content would be fine, but it would have to be "better" than what you can get on an optical disc. In order for me to say, "hey, I'd rather download":
1) It must be 1080p or better -- and compression must be similar to Blu-ray/Hd-dvd
2) Audio similar to that offered on HD-DVD and Blu-Ray
3) Special features like optical discs offer
4) Must be instantaneous. I don't want to wait 20 minutes before I can start watching a movie
5) You should be able to buy the "right" to view it over and over.
And with this:
A) If a newer, better version is available, say in 1440p or something, I should be able to watch that version.... After all, I'm paying for the right to see the movie, I shouldn't have to pay twice -- this is the biggest problem with physical media.
B) It should be competitve in price to DVDs/Blu-Ray.
6) It should be just-as or more reliable than an optical disc... No lags... no pauses...

The problem I see with downloadable content:
Studios make a lot of money when they re-release the same title over and over... and people keep paying for it. If it's downloadable, they would need to keep multiple versions of the same movie on the download list to accomodate those who "own" it. The other option would be to allow them to get a free upgrade to the newest one... or would they even bother re-releasing it? (My #5 above says it'd be nice to get the newest one for free if you "own" it... who knows what they would do)

Also..who would control the pricing? THe movie studios? How many distributors will there be? Currently, you can go to many stores and you see great discounts on DVDS all the time... will you ever see discounts for downloadable content? Have you EVER seen discounts?

Overall, if you look at it, people prefer physical media. That's why, in general, people still buy CDs over downlodable content. If your argument is "Cds are better quality, and downloadable content is over-compressed, which is why they keep buying cds"... You'll see that it will be a long time before downloadable movies will be "accepted" for reasons similar to audio.


At the moment, the best "download" and "watch now" that is offered is done via cable, and they do not have a huge catalog of titles -- it's mainly recently new releases. Besides, what would happen to places like Best Buy, Circuit City, etc, if they lost a chunk of revenue because they no longer sold movies or music? Yes, if they are smart, they will change their business model by the time it happens...

I hope not.
Me? Call me old school. I don't download mp3's, would rather have a disc, same with HD content.
Most people I know through my cousin and my better half's out here in Berkeley who are in the 20-25 range download everything and rarely, rarely say, buy a CD.
many of them watch episodes of TV on their Ipods and watch movies on their computers or watch YouTube all day. So, they are not IMHO, the most discrimnating when it comes to AV quality. Most would rather have the most songs possible on their mp3 players at the worst bitrate. Then the hook their players up to their little boomboxes or Ipod docks at parties and to me the sound quality is horrendous. Tinny, flat, compressed and with a "nails on a chalkboard" timbre. To them (and believe me, I've asked...) it all sounds just dandy.
Us old farts do prefer a physical product, I believe, especially if we come from the old LP days. Now? All the "album artwork" and lyrics are instantly accessed online so it's not that essential.
Alot of younger people I know say to me, "You're buying the CD..?!?!?" when I mention a new song or album....

I also predict that this thread won't stay civil, will soon get REAL ugly and be closed by the time I get home tonite unfortunately.

:)

Who honestly believes we'll get replace physical movie sales with downloads without some kind of DRM that goes way beyond encryption?

All it will end of doing is to pressure studios to keep bitrates down in an effort to save money on bandwidth.

I doubt this forum ever represented the mainstream.
I think most of the people around here are either audio, or hi-def junkies. When I played the first Hi Def film for my wife I was so thrilled and her reaction was so what!
People would like the convenience of downloading instead of buying or renting. Convenience is what got people out of the theaters and having that same experience at home.
Most people don't care about resolution per square area or more color intensity that todays technology offers. It's not the steak that sells but the sizzle......
Microsoft as a result would have complete control with streaming the video. There would be no copies or copy right infringments. It's just what the film companies would want.

I also predict that this thread won't stay civil, will soon get REAL ugly and be closed by the time I get home tonite unfortunately.

:)
What did you say you stupid jerk? :D :p

Unfortnately, IMHO that's true, Ian.

What did you say you stupid jerk? :D :p



Shut yo' mouth before I fill it!!!!!


:eek:


;)

Downloadable sucks, what happens if my hard drive crashes or accidentally gets formatted? I have to buy it again? **** that!

Who knows. In 10 years half of Planet Earth would be under fire or water. So let's enjoy whatever Hi-Def is being offered at the moment.

Ridiculous when in 2007 most of the USA still can not get more then 28.8k internet access. And satellite net access prices go up and bandwidth is less.

Microsoft as a result would have complete control with streaming the video. There would be no copies or copy right infringments. It's just what the film companies would want.

Is what the "film companies want" a bad thing?

It's their investment, and they can control it any way they want. If consumers don't like it, they will vote with their pocketbooks.

If you pay money for a movie ticket, that gives you a one time viewing license. Why does that model have to be different for home viewing if the content makers decide that is what they want?

For sake of full disclosure, I make a living in the film busines.

But whether or not I agree, I feel that any entity, be it a musician, record company (whether or not they are screwing the artists over), author or film studio have the absolute right to distribute and control their intellectual properties any way they see fit. Maybe the future will not be prosperous for them if they decide to be greedy or what we may consider to be unreasonable, but it's their ship, and they are in control.

Apple is no different than MS...its the wave of the future!

Until they can stream 1080p and 96/24 PCM audio (+/- 30mbs-50mbs) I won't hold my breath on this theory gaining traction.

Microsoft is always talking about supporting HD DVD and the future is media-less content blah blah blah. In the mean time Microsoft is fighting as hard as they can to win two areas: video codec support (VC1) and interactive content layer (HDi). Microsoft couldn't care less about HD DVD, but only as a platform to gain vast industry support for VC1/HDi. I believe if Sony/Partners gave in and agreed to use the VC1/HDi to master most Blu Ray discs Microsoft would fold up their HD DVD plans like a circus tent because it would mean one format in which they won what they wanted.

But why is Microsoft fighting so hard for HD DVD if HD Optical Media is small time today (in terms of revenue) and even in the future if Microsoft has their way? (media-less) Because VC1/HDi can be embedded on optical media, as a downloaded file or streamed through an IP network, satellite network or cable network. How much money is it worth if 5 years from now almost everything you watched in HD from any source was encoded in VC1 and had interactivity in HDi? Let's just say it would make Zune sales look like a rounding error, wait, Zune sales are a rounding error. It would be worth a lot.

The ship has sailed on audio codecs (Dolby, DTS) and music file/stream formats (mp3), but HD video is wide open and even though Microsoft is trying every trick in the book to get as big a piece of it as possible in all fairness, so is Sony.

This is why the whole HD DVD vs. BR looks crazy. Believe me it's not. There is nothing crazy about hundreds of millions rolling in from royalty payments every year. If that's crazy I don't want to be sane.

Also, not to mention hard drive space. While I do have a few HD movies on my hard drive, I don't need MORE hogging my precious space. I'd rather be able to have them on a disc I can view at any time. Sure you can always buy more hard drives, but that takes up space, AND money! I don't like downloadable only content at all.

For what it's worth, I have no problem with renting a film or buying a video. I have this rather expensive hobby I sink into.
What I resent is corporations further eroding the choices I can make.
There's talk there are less films available as a result of hackers hacking the security features of HD films. It's an unsecure format...and so therefore.....control the distribution of the product.
I still see lots of DVD's being released and that's more unsecure than Blu-ray or HD-DVD. So somebodies making money I guess.
It's that recurring theme all over again do we as a society accept choice or another form of control in our lives.

Also, not to mention hard drive space. While I do have a few HD movies on my hard drive, I don't need MORE hogging my precious space. I'd rather be able to have them on a disc I can view at any time. Sure you can always buy more hard drives, but that takes up space, AND money! I don't like downloadable only content at all.
Ya, I totally agree with that. Spend money to upgrade internet service so it wont take a week to download a movie, then buy more hard drvies and back up drives in case the main one crashes. I dont like that idea at all. Oh, and zero resale value - cant sell those downloads on ebay or anything.....

Ya, I totally agree with that. Spend money to upgrade internet service so it wont take a week to download a movie, then buy more hard drvies and back up drives in case the main one crashes. I dont like that idea at all. Oh, and zero resale value - cant sell those downloads on ebay or anything.....

To you, that's a bad thing. For the producing companies, that's a great benefit because if you want the movie you will be forced to buy it from them, and not from someone who already had the rights to it.

This thread has been good, it's provided some very interesting points and I'll definitely be following this one! :)

One thing I want to add is that many of you argue that it won't work unless they can match the specs of Blu-Ray/HD-DVD. I don't believe that at all, because the everyday consumer that they are going after doesn't truly understand all of the benefits of TrueHD or PCM audio. If the picture looks good to the everyday consumer and sounds good, they'll bite.

I really think that people aren't looking forward. Yes hard drives crash, just like optical media can get scratched or warped.

The model we are headed toward is licenses for content. They could be anything from play one time only within a limited time frame or in perpetuity.

Those who talk about space limits today you are right. But 10 years ago you'd be hard pressed to find a hard drive that could hold more than a handful of albums at the bit rate we listen to them.

I'd rather not have to worry about hard drive space or where it's physically located. Right now if you dont have the disk generally speaking you dont have the movie.

If i had a license to it and a connection to get it, i could have it on any device.

Before you guys wonder what I'm smoking, i'm talking about an end goal and my expectation is that it will take awhile and several evolutionary steps to get there; but possibly quicker than we think.

Who would have thought live video on a cell phone was possible 5 years ago?

I think that we need to start thinking about the DVD or CD simply as a delivery mechanism, nothing more and certainly better ways are on the horizon. It's the content stupid.... (to horribly turn a phrase)

I don't care what MS or any other company wants to happen, I will be one of the last persons on earth to ever support downloading movies/TV shows. There are still too many negatives, just look at XBL. You only have 24 hours to watch a movie once you hit play (this BS and I will never support a PPV system). Don't think for a second that if downloading becomes the norm that studios will let you pay once and watch the movie as much as you want. Everything will turn into PPV, count on it.

Unfortunately, I did buy one movie form XBL to see what the quality was like and boy do I regret it. MS has the nerve to call that HD, it didn't even look as good as the HD cable channels I get much less come close to the quality of BD/HD DVD. Not to mention this weird stutter that happened every 15 seconds, talk about annoying. I can't believe that some people on AVS think that it looks good and is acceptable HD quality. The sound flat out sucked compared to BD/HD DVD. Plus, it only took 4 hours for the thing to download. Download times will have to get faster then the amount of time it would take to drive to a store and buy the disc (which is about 20 minutes round trip for me). This one experience turned me off completely to downloading content. Just too many negatives IMO. When downloads are 1080p, uncompressed audio and extremely short download times then maybe I'll give it a second look.

This is some weird logic. The content of your discs are digital bits just as they would be from a download. I'm guessing, just as it has compared to 10 years ago, the average internet speed in each home will be much greater. I'm guessing, that the average storage space per computer or NAS will be much larger. Many of us have plenty of space now. Don't know what's so strange or newfangled downloading is. Seems totally feasible, especially with the Fios speeds and people with 1 or 2 TB in their HTPCs. Then there's solid state HDs getting bigger and cheaper everyday. Its just won't make sense to use optical disks anymore.

As for how long the download takes, I'd bet they can get the same movie to you faster than you can walk or drive to the video store.

Anyone paying attention to this pillow fight that some are calling a war that isn't also blind...should not be shocked by this at all.

Say goodbye to 1080p as well as high bit rate/ bandwidth video and PCM, DD THD and DTS-MA for eventual downloads.
And get ready to welcome forced mediocrity.

To you, that's a bad thing. For the producing companies, that's a great benefit because if you want the movie you will be forced to buy it from them, and not from someone who already had the rights to it.

This thread has been good, it's provided some very interesting points and I'll definitely be following this one! :)

One thing I want to add is that many of you argue that it won't work unless they can match the specs of Blu-Ray/HD-DVD. I don't believe that at all, because the everyday consumer that they are going after doesn't truly understand all of the benefits of TrueHD or PCM audio. If the picture looks good to the everyday consumer and sounds good, they'll bite.

I agree again - that was my personal opinion on the matter - I'm sure the recording companies would be more than happy to sell downloads. They don't have to build plants to make disks, hire truckers to deliver them, hire people to sell them and such. But I personally would not buy that. I like disks. And I know that younger people download iTunes with pretty bad quality and listen tho them and dont care much about quality or resale value, so who knows - if we dont teach our kids right - we might end up with those movie downloads that would be wide accepted by the younger gen.
And a comment about someone's comment - that hard drive might crash as well as an optical disk can get damaged - well - if the hard drive gets damaged - you will loose your whole movie coolection. One disk is much easier to replace. I'm sure when somebody would loose 100-200 movies in less than a few seconds due to a hard drive failure - they wouldnt be so willing to try saving everything on one hard drive again. just my opinion

Bandwidth pricing and availability better go through the roof in MS's 10 year window. For the average consumer, we have been given 3 internet speed choices for how long now? And IMHO, neither DLS or Cable has any true advantage over one another. So, there had better be an advanced internet service waiting in the wings to make downloading true HD content efficient and smooth.

Those who mentioned losing entire movie collections due to hard drive crashes won't get the chance. It will be PPV format only.

My reasoning is this: if you were able to download a movie in a format that allows it to stay on your HD for unlimited useage, what would stop you from adding this movie (and others) to some sort of shared folder on a bit torrent site? Or something similar that would allow illegal downloading from someone who legally purchased the download.

My last comment/question is this: how do I get a downloaded or streamed HiDef movie to my TV? Secondly, will it be a true HiDef resolution by the time it gets from my computer to my TV?
What more will I have to buy to be able to view a true HD movie from my computer to my TV?

To me personally, I think this format war is just a glimpse into the future of not only the movie industry, but all AV as well. The prices for these players are absurd. Yes, I remember how much the first DVD players were.

I have a $2,500 Sony LCD HD TV that cable and Satellite HD looks phenom with. The PS3 connected with HDMI cable to the Sony TV doesn't even look close.

Better than normal DVD's? Yes.

However, the difference in quality of a normal DVD player compared to a HD or BluRay player does not substantiate the difference in cost.

Honestly IMHO if I had known the difference in quality between DVD/BluRay, I wouldn't have bothered.

Lucky for me, the games made up for the BluRay let down. The games are fantabulous and are worth the money.

Anyone paying attention to this pillow fight that some are calling a war that isn't also blind...should not be shocked by this at all.

Say goodbye to 1080p as well as high bit rate/ bandwidth video and PCM, DD THD and DTS-MA for eventual downloads.
And get ready to welcome forced mediocrity.

Not a shot at you, but an attitude that I don't get is that anything different then what we have now is inherently going to cost more or have worse quality.

Both can be both true and wrong at the same time.

Cost might be higher, but many might be willing to pay it if with it comes increased flexibility such as playing it anywhere and/or multiple devices.

The same thing goes for the quality equation, it may not need to be blu-ray quality to play back on a 7" portable dvd player.

To use audio for example (because i know it best), in my car or on my ipod, it's very difficult to hear improvement above 256k rips. Conversely in my home system, i can hear major differences and only listen to the CD themselves or lossless rips.

There are lots of companies out there looking to make a buck and they do that by finding a market niche and then filling it. If you want the ultimate quality/convenience/flexibility there will be someone to sell it you.

One last thought. We are all getting tons of content streamed in high def all ready. OTA HD. What's missing now is individualized content and control of when and where. It's coming and PVRs are a baby step in that direction.

Those with arguments about hard drive:

Who said you will store your movies on a hard drive? Imagine there is a "box" you connect to your TV. you can use the "Movies" button on your remote control. Select "My Movies" to let you see a list of movies that you "purchased" -- you can rewatch as many times as possible. Then you have the option to view other movies. You can purchase them directly, or rent them. After "renting" them, you have the option to buy it at a "discount" -- you save a buck :) Now, if the bandwidth was there, why would you need a hard drive? When you want to watch a movie you "own", they will just stream it to you. The hard drive is used for nothing more than caching. This way they can stop you from sharing with anyone else.

If this was the case, and the quality was as good, or better than Blu-Ray/HD-DVD, and the streaming was reliable (no pauses, loss of signal noise, etc), why would it matter if you had the physical disc? This would certainly be easier for the average person. Oh, and for the record -- I doubt this will happen anytime sooner than 10 yrs...I personally like the physical media, but if the process was seamless and you could still "own" movies, it wouldnt be so bad as long as the quality was top notch...

If this "box" can hold 400 or more of "my movies" then I am all for it being connected to my TV.

Here and again, the larger capacity "box" will be costly just as the higher capacity HD DVR's are costly. So, if your not buying additional hard drive space to keep these HD movies then your buying an expensive "box"

And if they are streamed, we need a lil' more than cable or DSL. And I am for one do not feel like paying for a dedicated T1 line then paying for the movie download or stream. Which I may or may not get to watch more than once.

This will get absurd before it gets better.

I think people are forgetting that both Sony and Microsoft have made comments that downloads will be the future.

i have had bad experience with download games an d onlien autorization and all that crap. it always fails at some time and if the company that distributes it yu are done for if you ever need to reformat. bah to it at all!

maybe they could do it properly, but most of those pushing for it don;t want to do it properyl since that defeats the only reason they really care about getting rid of solid media.

I'm trying to understand why everyone fears downloadable content. I see the same type of doom and gloom in audio places on the net regarding itunes and yahoo music.

Ultimately however much the conspiracy theorists might claim other wise, the consumer does have the ultimate say because they vote with their wallets.

That's also why the HDDVD vs. Blu Ray war is dumb too with people arguing passionately to pick a side and those that own both are just prolonging the war. My take is that anybody buying either is a good thing because it establishes that people want hi-def content period.

Technology is both the opportunity and the barrier here. One reason that itunes and xbox live have relatively low res content is the limitations of devices and bandwidth. As those improve so will the quality of content. It will become a competitive advantage.

I for one am all in favor of downloadable content or even better real-time streaming. I want the celestial jukebox, with any content i could imagine right at my fingertips, but that is still a good way off.

Meanwhile back in 2007, the downloadable stuff has a purpose, i buy the occasional song off itunes because i have heard about the band, but not actually heard them so for a buck or two I can.

Same thing with xbox live movies. I have tried a couple of movies, sublime (very strange) and blood diamond (great, went and bought the movie)

It's interesting that on the leading edge of a major technology change that there is always a pause in sales of existing product without the corresponding jump in the new thing. When the consumer is unsure they wait.

It is on at least it's second cycle in music. When the CD was released there was a pause in vinyl and cassette sales that CD did not immediately compensate for. But then CD took off with greater sales than ever and led to a flood of back catalog titles for instance. Now we are in pause mode again because of downloadable music, but already a trickle of bands (wilco) have benefited from it.

I don't understand the attachment to physical media that much. Yeah album art can be cool and all that, but my love is the music or the movie

Bandwidth pricing and availability better go through the roof in MS's 10 year window. For the average consumer, we have been given 3 internet speed choices for how long now? And IMHO, neither DLS or Cable has any true advantage over one another. So, there had better be an advanced internet service waiting in the wings to make downloading true HD content efficient and smooth.

Those who mentioned losing entire movie collections due to hard drive crashes won't get the chance. It will be PPV format only.

My reasoning is this: if you were able to download a movie in a format that allows it to stay on your HD for unlimited useage, what would stop you from adding this movie (and others) to some sort of shared folder on a bit torrent site? Or something similar that would allow illegal downloading from someone who legally purchased the download.

My last comment/question is this: how do I get a downloaded or streamed HiDef movie to my TV? Secondly, will it be a true HiDef resolution by the time it gets from my computer to my TV?
What more will I have to buy to be able to view a true HD movie from my computer to my TV?

To me personally, I think this format war is just a glimpse into the future of not only the movie industry, but all AV as well. The prices for these players are absurd. Yes, I remember how much the first DVD players were.

I have a $2,500 Sony LCD HD TV that cable and Satellite HD looks phenom with. The PS3 connected with HDMI cable to the Sony TV doesn't even look close.

Better than normal DVD's? Yes.

However, the difference in quality of a normal DVD player compared to a HD or BluRay player does not substantiate the difference in cost.

Honestly IMHO if I had known the difference in quality between DVD/BluRay, I wouldn't have bothered.

Lucky for me, the games made up for the BluRay let down. The games are fantabulous and are worth the money.

agree more or less except for the bit about bluray let down if you blurray looks worse than cable you are doing something WAY wrong!

Not a shot at you, but an attitude that I don't get is that anything different then what we have now is inherently going to cost more or have worse quality.

Both can be both true and wrong at the same time.

Cost might be higher, but many might be willing to pay it if with it comes increased flexibility such as playing it anywhere and/or multiple devices.

The same thing goes for the quality equation, it may not need to be blu-ray quality to play back on a 7" portable dvd player.

To use audio for example (because i know it best), in my car or on my ipod, it's very difficult to hear improvement above 256k rips. Conversely in my home system, i can hear major differences and only listen to the CD themselves or lossless rips.

There are lots of companies out there looking to make a buck and they do that by finding a market niche and then filling it. If you want the ultimate quality/convenience/flexibility there will be someone to sell it you.

One last thought. We are all getting tons of content streamed in high def all ready. OTA HD. What's missing now is individualized content and control of when and where. It's coming and PVRs are a baby step in that direction.

I see the future download scenario, the same way I saw Divx, only this time with the possibility of no optical disc for competition.
The writings on the wall that the latest generation accepts low bit rates good enough MP3 music, and that enthusiast that want the best are a dying breed.

Add this together with the studios wanting to protect their content along with maximum profits, and software companies only too willing to help them for a piece of the pie, and I see a PPV as well as possible pay through the nose to own system where high bit rates and bandwidth as well as lossless audio...are a thing of the past.

Its not future HD downloads I fear...its having downloads as the only option.

The writings on the wall that the latest generation accepts low bit rates good enough MP3 music, and that enthusiast that want the best are a dying breed.


Its not future HD downloads I fear...its having downloads as the only option.

I dont buy that argument and it's related to the whole piracy thing in general. The companies talk about the billions of dollars that they lose to piracy every nano-second but it's a misnomer. The kids accept the low quality downloads because they are easy to obtain for free. However if they couldn't get them that way, they would not turn around and buy them instead, they would just turn to something else.

The true enthusiasts (like most here) have always been the minority, but they are the passionate consumers who buy the players and buy the high quality content. It was what drove the transition from LP to CD and VHS to DVD. After we get buy in to it, work out the kinks, and evangelize it to our friends, it gradually becomes mainstream and then everyone is buying it.

The true enthusiasts are now in the startup phase for hi-def. 5-10 years from now, it will be the mainstream (in whatever form, physical or download or both) and this group will be trying out ultra blu-HD content from a special terrabyte network, or solid state memory devices the size of a quarter that drop in to a slot in our 106" SED displays.


Or not....

I am not going to spend one week to download a 50GB movie. Bandwidth is not going to increase that much nor be cheap either within 5 years or even 10 years. **** I am paying $60 a month for 3megbit speed and that is incredibly slow now adays. My cable provider do offer 10megabit/1megbyte speed however that is $90 a month. The prices of cable internet have nothing but gone up since we first got it. We were paying $30 a month for 1megabit speed. They no longer offer that speed so they bumbed us upto their slowest speed they offer and charge double what we were paying. I doubt consumers want this internet transactions anyways. Unless it is instant like a split second, fantastic quality and easy to use. I don't foresee that in 10 years. They want to know they have the movie on something physical and separate. Not just a HDD in my opinion.

agree more or less except for the bit about bluray let down if you blurray looks worse than cable you are doing something WAY wrong!

Skibum,

BluRay movies do not look as good as Hi Def Cable/Satellite channels. They just don't look that good. Some scenes during a bluray movie look as good as say a football game in HiDef, but not the entire movie. Not even close.

And respectfully, no I am not doing something wrong, unless NOT using $300 HDMI cable is wrong.

Skibum,

BluRay movies do not look as good as Hi Def Cable/Satellite channels. They just don't look that good. Some scenes during a bluray movie look as good as say a football game in HiDef, but not the entire movie. Not even close.

And respectfully, no I am not doing something wrong, unless NOT using $300 HDMI cable is wrong.

:eek: I really hope you're joking. I enjoy hidef on cable/satellite, but the amount of pixelation and compression artifacts that are also seen during broadcast is disgusting.

I am not going to spend one week to download a 50GB movie. Bandwidth is not going to increase that much nor be cheap either within 5 years or even 10 years. **** I am paying $60 a month for 3megbit speed and that is incredibly slow now adays. My cable provider do offer 10megabit/1megbyte speed however that is $90 a month. The prices of cable internet have nothing but gone up since we first got it. We were paying $30 a month for 1megabit speed. They no longer offer that speed so they bumbed us upto their slowest speed they offer and charge double what we were paying. I doubt consumers want this internet transactions anyways. Unless it is instant like a split second, fantastic quality and easy to use. I don't foresee that in 10 years. They want to know they have the movie on something physical and separate. Not just a HDD in my opinion.


Think streaming....... ownership of some type of physical media, DVD, blu ray, hard drive is going to become outdated. The content is what has value

Steelhead, you must agree that the amount of pixelation and noise in high definition content over cable/sat/dish etc is just horrible!

You also have to consider the source. HD Television shows were shot WITH HD cameras. Whereas movies are using film which gives a very DIFFERENT look. So if you see that same movie on Television, the result will be very underwhelming, even moreso than what you are talking about with the Blu-ray movies.

Honestly, I cannot watch most "HD" content on regular TV anymore, simply because it just doesn't look nearly as good as what I am used to with Blu-ray (or even HD-DVD for that matter).

HD shot on video is also a different frame rate.

Think streaming....... ownership of some type of physical media, DVD, blu ray, hard drive is going to become outdated. The content is what has value

Oh thats even worse in my opinion hahah. Personally I'd rather have the movie on a disc rather then in a digital form like stored on a HDD. But that is just me.

Ridiculous when in 2007 most of the USA still can not get more then 28.8k internet access. And satellite net access prices go up and bandwidth is less.


Tell that to Intel. Wimax wil be king in the not too distant future. Anywhere there is Wi-Fi there can be Wi-max and or where there are cell towers.

http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/04/16/intel_spills_montevina_beans/

Down the road, Intel will likely add support for 802.16m, or "gigabit WiMAX," which offers speeds of up to 1Gbps per channel, but the 802.16m standard is unlikely to be officially ratified by the IEEE before early 2009.


The future will be downloads on the fly. It has already begun on a small scale with slower speeds, but give it three years.


And whose to say you won't be able to backup downloaded content to some form of disc or other drive.

Here is my version of the (distant) future:

Huge bandwidth Wireless everywhere streaming seamlessly to any device you may have anywhere you are.

All your content with a Storage provider with unlimited space that expands as you need it. Pay per terabyte :) Buy/rent will still exist. Buy goes into storage, rent for a one-time streaming. Hard media no more.

Now where did I put that Apocalypto BD?! ;)

Bandwidth pricing and availability better go through the roof in MS's 10 year window. For the average consumer, we have been given 3 internet speed choices for how long now? And IMHO, neither DLS or Cable has any true advantage over one another. So, there had better be an advanced internet service waiting in the wings to make downloading true HD content efficient and smooth.

Those who mentioned losing entire movie collections due to hard drive crashes won't get the chance. It will be PPV format only.

My reasoning is this: if you were able to download a movie in a format that allows it to stay on your HD for unlimited useage, what would stop you from adding this movie (and others) to some sort of shared folder on a bit torrent site? Or something similar that would allow illegal downloading from someone who legally purchased the download.

My last comment/question is this: how do I get a downloaded or streamed HiDef movie to my TV? Secondly, will it be a true HiDef resolution by the time it gets from my computer to my TV?
What more will I have to buy to be able to view a true HD movie from my computer to my TV?

To me personally, I think this format war is just a glimpse into the future of not only the movie industry, but all AV as well. The prices for these players are absurd. Yes, I remember how much the first DVD players were.

I have a $2,500 Sony LCD HD TV that cable and Satellite HD looks phenom with. The PS3 connected with HDMI cable to the Sony TV doesn't even look close.

Better than normal DVD's? Yes.

However, the difference in quality of a normal DVD player compared to a HD or BluRay player does not substantiate the difference in cost.

Honestly IMHO if I had known the difference in quality between DVD/BluRay, I wouldn't have bothered.

Lucky for me, the games made up for the BluRay let down. The games are fantabulous and are worth the money.

I can't speak for anyone else, but my opinion about this whole D/L debate is thus:

1. Most people are still happy with dial-up. Even if that changes significantly in 10 years to where most people then have let's say 15Mbps broadband down and up (somewhat arbitrary number), who is going to wait that long to watch a movie they want to watch right at this moment? These movies are Gigs in size, I as Joe Consumer don't want to wait forever to download something.
2. Most people like having physical, original copies of their movies, me included. Not only for collection purposes, but for the convenience/portability factor. I can lend it out easily, pop it into my laptop easily, etc.
3. Is the stability of server storage going to increase that significantly to where I feel comfortable storing all my movies on one drive without having to make routine backups?
4. Doesn't it make more sense to jump to another physical medium with much higher storage capacity, like HVD?

If downloading content were to take off, you would have to have a significant improvement in infrastructure over the next decade -- significant. Then, you have to allow people to burn their content easily, as in minimal/no stupid copy protection. And the burned media would have to be able to be stored conveniently for portability, such as on a HVD which can contain terabytes of data. So then I can store most or all of my movies on one disk and take it everywhere.

You have to make it worthwhile to the consumer, not to the corporation. I think MS is going about this the entirely wrong way...they're worrying about manufacturing/stocking convenience on the vendor side. You have to make it convenient to the consumer.

My problem with your message is that content does not "belong" to the content makers or providers. Should an author of a book specify when, how many times and who can read it's contents? What about newspapers? Can an auto company tells it's customer when he can turn on his car, and where he can or cannot got with it?
We, as consumers, buy music or films when we want to have them on our collections, forever, to be seen or head whenever we feel like it, no matter if internet connection is working or not. Unless something really bad happen(fungus, fire, scratches), we will keep those discs for many, many years. There is also content that is a quick consumable, stuff that you can listen or watch a couple times and then never ever think about it again. Lots of musics nowadays have this characteristics, specially those that are used only as social context(party/club background sound). Some TV shows are also like that. For this type of content, a donwloadable, per-view system makes perfect sense. But for better quality content, the objective is different. My point is, while there is different content that might be suitable to being controlled by the maker, since it is supposed to be one/two times usage only, almost like a service, there are other contents that do NOT follow that pattern, and keeping them under the strict control of the maker takes away from the rights and capacity of the consumers to keep and store knowledge as much as they store money. Although we're living in an increasingly "digital/virtual" world of trading and goods, there is no need to forget that, in 50-100 years, only the good stuff we have today will still be relevant, like paintings, and people will need more than downloadable content to keep it alive...



When we pay for a movie ticket, we're not only paying to see the movie, we're paying to see it on widescreen, 500' with 13.1 sound, comfy chairs in a dark room. It's the whole package, not only the movie rights. Lots of people buy DVDs because they have good enough systems in their homes, but it is not without limitations. I am sure there is lot's of young people that don't care about quality, only quantity and mobility, but these people have been taught by the fast-consumable market to live by these rules and principles. But you should never confuse the needs of such markets with anything that has lasting value. Even these people will get older, wiser, and start craving more for quality/duration. It does happen to all of us.

Allan

ps. I know the issues run much deeper, but in the same manner people fight over patents over software(very arguable), artistic content(music and movies) has always been something that belongs to everyone(although the owner gets paid by it somewhat). It's the balance that must be kept, or we risk losing our liberties.

Is what the "film companies want" a bad thing?

It's their investment, and they can control it any way they want. If consumers don't like it, they will vote with their pocketbooks.

If you pay money for a movie ticket, that gives you a one time viewing license. Why does that model have to be different for home viewing if the content makers decide that is what they want?

For sake of full disclosure, I make a living in the film busines.

But whether or not I agree, I feel that any entity, be it a musician, record company (whether or not they are screwing the artists over), author or film studio have the absolute right to distribute and control their intellectual properties any way they see fit. Maybe the future will not be prosperous for them if they decide to be greedy or what we may consider to be unreasonable, but it's their ship, and they are in control.

I see the future download scenario, the same way I saw Divx, only this time with the possibility of no optical disc for competition.
The writings on the wall that the latest generation accepts low bit rates good enough MP3 music, and that enthusiast that want the best are a dying breed.

Add this together with the studios wanting to protect their content along with maximum profits, and software companies only too willing to help them for a piece of the pie, and I see a PPV as well as possible pay through the nose to own system where high bit rates and bandwidth as well as lossless audio...are a thing of the past.

Its not future HD downloads I fear...its having downloads as the only option.

But what medium are you going to store those movie files on when you want to get on a plane, or put them in your car, or lend them to a friend? They have to be stored somewhere convenient, and they have to have a medium big enough to hold a lot of them at once, like iPods.

There's no way dedicated D/L content will work unless it's in conjunction with a host of other factors, like HVD and infrastructure improvements...unless you simply want to store SD content which is much smaller and more in line with MP3 content in terms of quality. But then the files are still bigger than MP3, so you're back at square one. I personally think D/L content as the primary form of content gathering to be a pipe dream of techies.

Why do you think MS backed a dying horse, ie HD-DVD? They want to continue this war until both are destroyed. They think it's in the best interest of their shareholders to do just that. Hollywood would be their next best friend.

You support MS in this silly war, you might as well support Ipod "quality" downloads where THEY have all the power. No thank you.

Dan

You guys keep talking about hard drive failure. No offense and all, but I don't think this will apply in ten years. Companies are already working on making solid-state HDDs (meaning no moving parts). Yeah, there's still a chance of hard drive failure with that technology, but no wear near as much as the standard ones we are used to. Technology is developing so fast, I'm willing to bet that in 10 years time, we will have a different technology with our hard drives...it's only a matter of time

btw: i do not support paying for the downloaded movie...give me discs!!!

You guys keep talking about hard drive failure. No offense and all, but I don't think this will apply in ten years. Companies are already working on making solid-state HDDs (meaning no moving parts). Yeah, there's still a chance of hard drive failure with that technology, but no wear near as much as the standard ones we are used to. Technology is developing so fast, I'm willing to bet that in 10 years time, we will have a different technology with our hard drives...it's only a matter of time

btw: i do not support paying for the downloaded movie...give me discs!!!

I wouldn't mind downloading content at all, provided I have a convenient medium on which to store my entire collection and very high-rate broadband like FIOS becomes standard. If I could store them on HVD I would be fine with that. But I'm not going to store them on a hard drive unless it's terabytes in size and it's easily portable, say the size of a CD or MP3 player, etc. Pop it in and out of your gaming console or other CE devices with ease, then maybe plug it into your car. I could see that working.

But why not use HVD to do the same thing? Now that they've advanced HVD pretty far, all they would have to do is get the price down to commercial levels, which could reasonably be done in 10 years.

MSFT's current plan doesn't impress me in the least though.

Why do you think MS backed a dying horse, ie HD-DVD? They want to continue this war until both are destroyed. They think it's in the best interest of their shareholders to do just that. Hollywood would be their next best friend.

You support MS in this silly war, you might as well support Ipod "quality" downloads where THEY have all the power. No thank you.

Dan

Nah there's no greater conspiracy going on here. They made a wise business decision IMO, at least for the short-term.

WON'T support MS on this, whatsoever!

What bothers me MOST with Digital download (Digital Distribution) is the Price. (While I still prefer to have physical products, but price is the BIGGEST concern here, period.)

I always believe a Physical format will go on sale/Clearance for much cheaper price when it becomes old. However, with Digital, it usually never does go on sale. Not to mention, you can not resale it to make back some money, when you are not interested in the movie anymore.

Any one looked on Xbox Live Marketplace? Those contents on there are Expensive/Overpriced and most stuff that came out in 2005 are still in their original prices.

That's the way MS wants it to be, Nick & Dime us consumers, with VERY few sales, and HELL NO I can NOT tolerate it!

I Welcome, and thankful for a lot of Digital technology in this era, but alas, this is NOT one of them! This is something that's only going to spawn Greed/Evil!

Also..who would control the pricing? THe movie studios? How many distributors will there be? Currently, you can go to many stores and you see great discounts on DVDS all the time... will you ever see discounts for downloadable content? Have you EVER seen discounts?


YUP! Exactly!!!

Almost always, Physical products goes cheaper much much much better than Digital downloads!

I don't see this happening until bandwith, back-up services and media servers are prevalent and full featured.

I want to be able to take my disc to my friends house to watch, or on a trip. When I can see my content or bring my content anywhere, then this may become prevalent.

But most people will still want a disc, and developing countries will still need a hard-copy.

In 20 to 30 years maybe, but definitely not in 10. You would be missing out on too large a percent of the world.

Speng.

And the prices definitely need to be cheap/competitive/on sales for it to succeed, Like physical products in store, all the time!

From Microsoft's point of view, of course it's better for them, cuz they WANT more money from consumers. With this way, it's gonna make them EVEN richer!!!

However, no Poor consumers who need to save money to live, should like this whatsoever!

These last posts make me chuckle and is what I meant by gloom and doom.

Inflation adjusted, even the download prices are bigger bargains than DVDs were 5 years ago. And you still get higher quality.

The whole download thing is just barely getting started. Think about how much the first HDDVD or blu ray players cost at intro and how buggy and problematic they were (perhaps are). Or go further back to the DVD. I have a reference sony dvd player that I paid over $1000 for at the time and now gets the snot beaten out of it by a $79.00 samsung. But i had it at the time and was using it when most were still using tape and it beat the crap out of that option

There is lots of competition on all sides, it will get better, it will get faster, it will get cheaper and it will happen in multiple evolutionary steps. And the final result may not look like anything currently out there.

The apple TV is an early primitive example of where we are headed. Before the criticism starts, yes its low res, yes it's low capacity, no i would not buy it YET.

But it's got a decent interface and the ability to stream trailers (shared sort of by xbox360 and PS3) is way cool. You dont have to wait more than a few seconds and already it works with standard def content over dsl connections

Personally, I fear that global warming is gonna submerse my entire collection under melted glaciers ...Oh well I'll keep buying discs. It just happens to be my preference. Digital downloads leave out the collector's like me. I love my iPod but I still own hundreds of CDs.

Personally, I fear that global warming is gonna submerse my entire collection under melted glaciers ...Oh well I'll keep buying discs. It just happens to be my preference. Digital downloads leave out the collector's like me. I love my iPod but I still own hundreds of CDs.

Heh, have you seen the waterproof housing that is available for the ipod? You could watch your movies underwater.....

But yes, i'm a huge consumer of content, approx 1700 CDs and about 350 DVDs.

When you get a collection that size, physical media starts to lose some of its charm

Personally, I fear that global warming is gonna submerse my entire collection under melted glaciers ...Oh well I'll keep buying discs. It just happens to be my preference. Digital downloads leave out the collector's like me. I love my iPod but I still own hundreds of CDs.

LOL!!! I totally agree with you man. Digital downloads don't interest me in the least, unless it complements physical storage. It would be great to store all my downloads on one disk, I admit that would be cool. But it doesn't sound like that's the direction MSFT is going, from what Amir in the Insiders Thread has been saying.

They seem to be under the impression that everyone is going to be "plugged in" in the next decade...that's a complete pipe dream. Decrease the physical size and increase the storage space of physical media and I would be happy. I think the techies are thinking idealistically and aren't thinking realistically...heck it's hard enough convincing my father to go HD from DVD, and he's a movie aficionado! He'd *never* jump for downloading content LOL! I honestly don't know what the techies are thinking...

Duh MS wants HD DVD and Blu Ray to die. They've been saying it since before they picked a format to "support". Why anyone would back a format where one (and possibly both) of the main supporters want it to die is beyond me.

Skibum,

BluRay movies do not look as good as Hi Def Cable/Satellite channels. They just don't look that good. Some scenes during a bluray movie look as good as say a football game in HiDef, but not the entire movie. Not even close.

And respectfully, no I am not doing something wrong, unless NOT using $300 HDMI cable is wrong.

LOL!
Today's most ludicrous post.

But we won't hold it against ya...being a newbie of 22 posts and all. ;)

You know what I would rather? That m$ is obsolete in 10 years.

You know what I would rather? That m$ is obsolete in 10 years.

I actually like MSFT believe it or not. Granted I haven't always agreed with some of their decision-making, but all in all you can thank them for the advancement of the computer software experience. They have made it possible for millions of computer illiterate people (for lack of a better term) have a relatively simple time easing into computing. Plus they're American, and as far as I'm concerned I'll give an American conglomerate a pass over a Japanese comglomerate any day of the week.

But just because I feel this way doesn't mean I have to agree with their philosophy on digital downloads.

Skibum,

BluRay movies do not look as good as Hi Def Cable/Satellite channels. They just don't look that good. Some scenes during a bluray movie look as good as say a football game in HiDef, but not the entire movie. Not even close.

And respectfully, no I am not doing something wrong, unless NOT using $300 HDMI cable is wrong.

well all i can say is that you are the first person to have said this and it sure doesn't remotely match what i see. it doesn't even make sense from a technical standpoint.

LOL!!! I totally agree with you man. Digital downloads don't interest me in the least, unless it complements physical storage. It would be great to store all my downloads on one disk, I admit that would be cool. But it doesn't sound like that's the direction MSFT is going, from what Amir in the Insiders Thread has been saying.

They seem to be under the impression that everyone is going to be "plugged in" in the next decade...that's a complete pipe dream. Decrease the physical size and increase the storage space of physical media and I would be happy. I think the techies are thinking idealistically and aren't thinking realistically...heck it's hard enough convincing my father to go HD from DVD, and he's a movie aficionado! He'd *never* jump for downloading content LOL! I honestly don't know what the techies are thinking...



They're thinking that the same argument was made 10 years ago when mp3's were showing up and companies like Apple were eyeing the digital distribution opportunities as ripe for a step into a new market while dancing around the music companies' own physical distribution.

Today, Apple controls the largest and most influential digital download distribution system and makes a ton of money off it. Meanwhile, CD sales are down across the board and Microsoft realized too late that they couldn't collaborate with hardware developers and make it a success.

Microsoft learned from its mistake and built the Xbox to be its brand rather a lot like the Zune that came too late in the life of the iPod. The Xbox, however, did not come too late, just cut it a little close.

So what are the techies thinking? They're thinking that 10 years ago this same conversation happened in regards to audio technology in a time when most poeple were using dialup to download songs that took 20-30 minutes. Now we're talking in an age of broadband where movies take an hour. Not much difference. Sure, mp3's or the Apple equivalent lose some of the quality of CD's (and a lot compared to SACD's and DVDA's that were supposed to replace them but got caught up in a format war that delayed either from replacing CD), but most consumers don't care about the extra quality as long as the convenience and cheapness is there.

Now the time for movies doing the same is here. Apple is leveraging iTunes and iPod to push into the home for video distribution. Microsoft is leveraging Xbox and Xbox Live to do the same. Offered cheap enough, most consumers WILL move over to the convenience and lower initial cost of digital distribution if the qualities of HD DVD and BD aren't made VERY apparent soon. Or if economies of scale haven't reduced the cost of these formats (and I'm not talking aobut just the player, but the discs themselves) to a mass-market appeal level.

Unfortunately, as long as the format war continues, these companies will bleed in the hardware sector and discs sales will be divided between both formats as consumers get divided (or don't bother to join at all). Without large sales of discs, we can't hope to see discs reduce in price and most consumers don't look at the player as much as the disc to see which format is cheaper.

Neither format looks particularly cheap considering the cost of the discs themselves. They're pretty much on parity.

So yes, it's a big deal that the primary software technological backer is aiming to kill both formats (and they said, "discs" not just these two) within 5-10 years. It isn't a big jump to think they backed one format over another just to ensure this happened if they're already talking about how they see discs fading away that quickly.

Seems odd to me that they say they back HD DVD because it has the features and efficiency to bring HD to the people, but then admit that they don't see it existing in as little as 5 years. What does that tell me? It tells me that either:

1) One hand doesn't know what the other is doing.
2) Microsoft intends one format to win and be replaced in a couple years after it wins.

Either way, I'd not trust Microsoft to back the format that will last beyond those 5 years of their expectation.

Thus, since Microsoft will benefit if the format war kills HD DVD and BD and leaves the door open to digital distribution, I conclude that Microsoft does not mind the format war; and that Microsoft may well hope that it kills them both to make this transition easier.

And if a large group of consumers can be persuaded to connect iPods to PC's to download songs that sound "good enough" to be "close to CD," then I think a large group of consumers can be persuaded to use that same connection to download movies that look and sound "good enough" to be "close to HD" (720p).

Microsoft thinks so, too, which is why supporting the format they're supporting is tantamount to helping them kill both formats. I've been saying this for months. I don't know why people don't see it. Microsoft's done it before, it's not like this is anything new.

And I love Microsoft. I don't hate Windows, I love Media Player, I'm fine with Windows Media Codec and VC1, hell I don't even mind the Xbox though it trashed some great franchises (Shadowrun, Mechwarrior, Crimson Skies) and assimilated a lot of PC development teams (Bungie, Epic's wasting a lot of resources on console titles now, id is developing on Xbox first). The Xbox is a fine piece of hardware. Both of them. But understand what they are doing in the high def movie market.

They are fueling a war that kill the format they're supporting and the one they're against. I still hope Universal goes neutral to keep them from killing both formats I've invested in. I'd rather one over both so consumers will "jump in."

Whew, good post but way too long to respond to it all, at least for my attention span LOL.

There are several differences to MP3/audio and DD/video, in the eyes of Joe Consumer. And here's why it won't work unless it's a hybrid solution of physical storage, download, and broader infrastructure:

1. The reason a lot of people don't buy CDs is because they only want one song from the CD. So it makes sense to download that one song and rip it, and allows people to cherry-pick music content. With movies you're not only going to choose 5 minutes of the Matrix, that would be stupid. Also, the average person's car stereo doesn't really divulge the audio difference between a high quality MP3 and a CD. Sorry techies, but this is the plain and simple truth. Joe Downloader could give a rat's arse about any subtle differences that *may* be present anyways, as it is a good 95% solution for them.

2. Most people are quite content with the Internet speed they're using right now, and the vast majority still use dial-up. But let's just say for the sake of argument they *do* end up with say 15Mbps broadband in 5-10 years as the standard household solution. If I want to watch my movie now, why on Earth do I want to wait to download it?

3. And if I do download it, what do I have to delete to make room for it? Even someone that *does* like to download and watch movies is eventually going to hit critical mass.

4. And assuming none of these are factors in the Joe Downloader's mind, how do I get the content from my XBL/CPU/insert CE device here to my laptop/friend's CPU/car with ease?

5. Again assuming that hard drives will be large enough and common enough in cars/laptops, what are the chances that the protectionist, anti-consumer studios and content deliverers will allow people to move the content around without worrying about copyright protection?

6. For those of us that like to build libraries, what is MSFT going to do for us? Make us print our own DVD labels and manufacture our own "authentic" DVD cases for the movies? Or are they willing to give us a hybrid solution of downloading and say HVD to store everything on? Why not just allow us to burn new subtitles to copies of our existing disks?

7. Another difference between audio and video content is the fact that music is desired everywhere. People want it in the gym, on the way to work, in their office, *everywhere*. There was bound to be a time where something like MP3s and iPods came along and made it easy to do. Why would I want a similar, compressed and therefore less quality solution for a movie in the gym, or at work, or in my car on the way to work?

MSFT and anyone in favor of digital downloading as the de facto solution is simply not thinking in terms of the average consumer, they are thinking like high-techies. It really reminds me of the movie Big...it takes average consumers speaking up to these guys to say "Umm, WTF O? This makes no sense to me..."

Unless a hybrid solution is offered to people, it's not going to work. I for one will not sit there and dick around downloading stuff en masse when I can have the convenience of going to a store and buying the movie and having an original copy of my very own...not unless I can download it AND throw it on media that do not sacrifice quality, and that allows me to throw a massive number of movies on one disk.

EDIT: Oh and one other thing...I can see digital downloading being feasible if you're talking in terms of SD content in the next 5 years, and assuming they can rip it to a BD for instance. That could store a couple movies, and that is certainly feasible. But HD content would take a lot better infrastructure than what we'll have as standard in 5 years. And it would still be the same hybrid solution that I am thinking will occur. I.e. Download -> Media -> Portability.

Bandwidth pricing and availability better go through the roof in MS's 10 year window.

Bingo. While general consumers might not care about 720p vs. 1080p quality, they do care about convenience and price. I highly doubt the infrastructure will be in place for downloading to viably and completely replace disk-based media in 10 years. Downloading and disks will co-exist . The tech-savvy fiber-optic customers will use it; J6P dial-up customers will buy their Wal-mart DVD's.

Also, lost on the "MS/HD-DVD is the spoiler" crowd is that Sony supports movie downloads as well:
http://www.neowin.net/index.php?act=view&id=38216
http://www.itwire.com.au/content/view/9727/532/

Anyone who doesn't think downloading digital movie content is the (eventual) future is kidding themselves. MS is trying to position itself to make money from this the same as Sony. The only variable is how long it will take.

Anyone who doesn't think downloading digital movie content is the (eventual) future is kidding themselves. MS is trying to position itself to make money from this the same as Sony. The only variable is how long it will take.

Like I said, it will be viable if it's convenient, but not just because some techies think it's feasible. Big difference.

Downloading movie content en masse is only convenient if most people have the bandwidth to do so, and there is portable media with large enough storage size to store massive amounts of movies.

Maybe 20-30 years down the road, everyone's daily devices will be plugged into the Internet and everything can be dynamically updated/modified in a second's notice. But until I can get my HD (or better) video content from point A to point B without a hassle, there's no point.

Sisko197: Lets not forget that Microsoft owns the codec VC-1 that both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray uses, this is a win, win situation. If HD-DVD looses they will still sell the VC-1, they most like supported HD-DVD because Sony is there rival competitor in the gaming realm. Oh, and if they they try to launch there downloading software for movies on Vista we will surely be in trouble! Again the bandwidth issue, with an aging population who needs to remember 100 different pass codes every day, if they think downloads are the way to go, they have a ton of hurdles they are going to have to leap over before this even becomes near mainstream.. Apple right now has a huge head start over them, and frankly they are starting to get on the right track by letting the consumer download higher quality downloads, now all they need to do it with is HD

So they want to control not only how we can watch movies but the quality which is poor at the moment. Thank god for Sony.

fast moving tech and ever increasing bandwidth.

Over the past 5 years, my bandwidth has increased from 3 Mbps to 6 Mbps. And I live right in the middle of Silicon Valley.

Unless the Federal Government makes this a national initiative, I don't see how the bandwidth required for universal HD downloading is going to appear during the next 10 years.

Is what the "film companies want" a bad thing?

It's their investment, and they can control it any way they want. If consumers don't like it, they will vote with their pocketbooks.

If you pay money for a movie ticket, that gives you a one time viewing license. Why does that model have to be different for home viewing if the content makers decide that is what they want?

For sake of full disclosure, I make a living in the film busines.

But whether or not I agree, I feel that any entity, be it a musician, record company (whether or not they are screwing the artists over), author or film studio have the absolute right to distribute and control their intellectual properties any way they see fit. Maybe the future will not be prosperous for them if they decide to be greedy or what we may consider to be unreasonable, but it's their ship, and they are in control.

If studios are going to absorb the bandwidth costs, I am OK with it. They should also absorb the costs associated with storing downloaded content on permanent media.

This downloading thing should not become an opportunity to pass disc manufacturing costs on to consumers.

You guys should take a look at the problems owners of the XBOX 360 has had with downloadable content when their boxes break (and they all do at some point).