I'm going to leave names out of this, with respect to forum rules, but it looks very clear to me that certain, consistently vocal HD DVD supporters/insiders are spreading FUD about blu-ray, even though it is clear that the tide has turned. One insider has even, overtly mentioned downloads in his more recent posts as the obvious choice going forward.

It now appears that the theories that Microsoft may have been playing Toshiba and the HD DVD Group all along, could turn out to be true.

Personally I could see myself doing some downloading, but I certainly do not want HDM to go away as Microsoft surely does.

Hopefully we will no longer be duped by the postings of these thinly-veiled, HDM Assassins!

if they can tell me when i can get 1080p24 downloads with lossless audio i'll be happy to listen. not interested in anything less. we have all that now with HDM.

ditto

1) what percentage of the population (worldwide) visits this site?
2) Can the 'members' provide the necessary bandwidth on their own (without companies) to provide downloads of 50GB to all in the world and will take less than 3 days?
3) Can a few 'members' here kill a whole format backed by big corporations?

It doesn't matter what is said here, it will have little to no bearing on the decisions made by big corporations. Now if you hold a large stake of shares in any of these companies, you may be able to slightly sway their interests, but not much.

Frankly I don't care about downloads ; I still want something physical in my hands, you know, the feeling of "owning" something:)

Its the "Since I lost, everbody should lose" attitude.

Most don't feel this way.

Sketcha bad timing on this thread as it is sure to get locked or nuked. Please refrain from baiting.

The shock of the Warner announcement has a lot of people very upset. I hope once the CES is over, and this news cools down cooler heads will prevail and we can once again discuss topics with civility.

the facts are that when i want a HDM, i would rather go to a store and pick it up. not wait hours for it to download and have crappy sound. who has the infrastructure so consumers can download 1080p24 w/ pcm, truehd, or dts-ma?

if they can tell me when i can get 1080p24 downloads with lossless audio i'll be happy to listen. not interested in anything less. we have all that now with HDM.

and not have to wait hours for it to download...
and no hassles to redownload titles that have been lost due to HD failure...

if they can tell me when i can get 1080p24 downloads with lossless audio i'll be happy to listen. not interested in anything less. we have all that now with HDM.

Probably never. Don't forget deleted scenes and all the other extras.

Few people will have or get the system to support such downloads.

At most downloads will replace netflix and blockbuster, but not Best Buy and Amazon. People will not stop buying physical media, they may just stop renting it.

I agree with the post above. If these same people think HDM will be a niche format now then do they honestly think downloads of these movies will be even bigger? There are more then a dozen negatives that I can come up with for downloads and it will be a long ways off before they are a truly feasable option.

Yes, there are quite a few members that have been touting piracy. Many members are taking the "misery likes company" approach. So if I can't win no one wins. It is funny that all the HD DVD guys said that Bill Gates was all about HD DVD and wanted the format to survive. Yet now Gates is saying downloads are the future which is why he wanted the format war to drag out. The war ending 2 years premature was not in his plans however.

There always has to be a choice otherwise we're are left with "media-aracy" (not the play on words from "midocracy" - rule by a mediocre person or group.

I'm going to leave names out of this, with respect to forum rules, but it looks very clear to me that certain, consistently vocal HD DVD supporters/insiders are spreading FUD about blu-ray, even though it is clear that the tide has turned. One insider has even, overtly mentioned downloads in his more recent posts as the obvious choice going forward.

It now appears that the theories that Microsoft may have been playing Toshiba and the HD DVD Group all along, could turn out to be true.

Personally I could see myself doing some downloading, but I certainly do not want HDM to go away as Microsoft surely does.

Hopefully we will no longer be duped by the postings of these thinly-veiled, HDM Assassins!

Quick, call Oliver Stone! Put on your tin-foil hats, and stay off the grid.
This may go up higher than MS, maybe the CIA, Pres. Bush or all the way to the top...Dick Cheney!!!

Seriously calling someone on a forum an "Assassin" is going too far.

if they can tell me when i can get 1080p24 downloads with lossless audio i'll be happy to listen. not interested in anything less. we have all that now with HDM.

++!!!!!

As a AV SNOB, no way in hell I'm going to consider overly compressed crappy HD...wake me when there's a 100MB pipe directly to my front door.

Sketcha bad timing on this thread as it is sure to get locked or nuked. Please refrain from baiting.

The shock of the Warner announcement has a lot of people very upset. I hope once the CES is over, and this news cools down cooler heads will prevail and we can once again discuss topics with civility.
I don't share your opinion that my thread was "baiting." I apologize to you if it came off that way.

If it gets nuked, I will get over it... pretty quickly.

I am pointing to a select few members here. And I'm guessing they and most of us know who they are. And as far as future civility at AVS is concerned, it will not, likely happen until the type of posts, from the type of members that I mentioned, cease!

I don't think there's any question that downloads will become the way movies go, its just a question of when. Xbox Live is already making movies available for download. Itunes has changed its policy to allow Fox movies to be downloaded for rent only and now Netflix is coming out with a box top download center
http://www.chud.com/index.php?type=news&id=13101

I think we're all so caught up in the HD vs BD deal that we weren't paying attention to the digital download future.

That said, a disc medium will always be available, you can still buy LPs even though both CDs and digital downloads own the music industry now.

I don't think downloads can replace the quality of packaged HD media any time soon.

But it may not have to, the masses may be fine with 480p or sub-480p, or "HD" downloads which are in reality HD-Crystal Lite.

That could undermine packaged HD media, as MP3 has undermined CDs.

I'm speaking as someone who wants packaged HD media to be around a long time.

MS and Sony are both pursuing downloadable movies. So I don't think you can prop an insider for pimping their products. :D

For me personally, I have nearly $2,000 tied up in my HD DVD player and software. I'm not bitter. I knew it wasn't a done deal all along.

the question has always been , can either HDM format take on DVD. The format "war" was more like a small battle. I chose a side, invested, and "lost", as it were.

I'm just not willing to invest another $2,000+ on the otherside to see if they can pull it off. It's future is still very questionable, in my oppinion. I'll definitely reconsider, if they start making a sizeable dent in movie sales and profiles are something we used to talk about.

So since I still crave HD movies, I think downloads may fill that need best now. I think it needs some work as well, but part of it's charm is that it doesn't have to abide by any real standard and anyone can up than anty at any time.

HD media isn't going anywhere regardless of the winner(loser) in the format dispute. The reason CD has been able to stay up with DL music is the same reason HD media will not dominate the HD market and that for a couple reasons. 1) I buy more CD's today than I ever had because prices are low and I can then rip CD to pc and transfer it to my MP3 player and controle the AQ of the rip. This is not going to happen with HD media. 2) the hd market is getting even more competitive...see the front page and Comcast announcement. IMO, hd media will survive(BD IMO looks to be the victor) and the market will look like this:

DVD, BD, HD DVD (for at least 6 months unless something every drastic happens ),VOD, Comcast, netflix and some other smaller companies. We around here, regardless of allegiance will eventually get BD as a SA or a DF player(i will get the Sammy 5500) and enjoy all of our movies this way.....With the occasional HDNET movie and the VOD........we are technology driven and Technology doesn't stop and is actually moving faster now then when DVD was released. For the record, I never wanted either format to die...If BD wasn't there player prices would still be high and vice versa. In the end, both formats will have wished they could've came to a truce and combined the formats.

Quick, call Oliver Stone! Put on your tin-foil hats, and stay off the grid.
This may go up higher than MS, maybe the CIA, Pres. Bush or all the way to the top...Dick Cheney!!!

Seriously calling someone on a forum an "Assassin" is going too far.
:)

That's pretty funny, but I have to disagree with the last part. You DO understand that my word of choice is simply a metaphor, of course. There are a select, few members on these and other boards whose posts show a clear agenda. Thankfully the majority of us can pick a side and still have rational discussions about our choices.

It's no conspiracy
It's not "I lost so everyone else should too"
Business analysts, Internet and software companies and Hollywood Studios predicted from the very onset of this war that regardless of the victor, the existence of both could be very short due to the coming emergence of digital distribution.
The same talk would be going on if Warner switched the other way.


Let me start by saying, I want HD optical media to continue, so though I'm currently HD DVD only, I intend to get a BD player as soon as a final profile is available for $250 or less.

Having said that, as stated above it's been a well known fact among various businesses affiliated with home video that the future is digital distribution and several of those entities are putting their full resources behind being the first to offer what will be the delivery system of choice.

The comments you've seen recently by various members are comments regarding that talk. It's spiked now due to uncertainty about the future of HD discs due to the Warner switch, but is not part of a grand conspiracy to do in Blu-ray because HD DVD lost.

If you actually read some of the posts as opposed to simply rejecting them all as conspired attacks, you'll find quite a few are well informed and insightful.

As AV nuts and Early adopters, our eyes have been completely focused on HD discs as the future of home video. The Hollywood Studios and various software companies haven't had such a narrow vision.

But it may not have to, the masses may be fine with 480p or sub-480p, or "HD" downloads which are in reality HD-Crystal Lite.


When I watch my HD channels, specially movies, I'm always amazed by the subpar PQ: my upscaled DVDs look at least 10 times better.

MS and Sony are both pursuing downloadable movies. So I don't think you can prop an insider for pimping their products. :D

Good point!

++!!!!!

As a AV SNOB, no way in hell I'm going to consider overly compressed crappy HD...wake me when there's a 100MB pipe directly to my front door.

Ditto... I don't want any insiders that work for Microsoft trying to convince me that low bitrate, low bandwidth x-box 360 downloads are the wave of the future.. Already, Comcast has HD video on demand that look like crap in comparison to actual real 1080p24 content found on Blu-ray and current HD-DVD... I like owning my movies and I like being able to do with them what I please as well...

I think the best idea would be to create a new forum for this kind of talk.... (which has been asked before). The problem is there is no better place to talk about downloads and its mixing in with the hd-dvd and bluray talk.

That said I cant wait for downloads (and already use xbox live all the time). Its a really great service and hopefully ms will realize people want a subscription and give us that. I am getting really close to selling my hd-dvd and bluray players and going to xbox live permenantly because its so much easier to get movies via it compared to netflix/bb online. I will never buy most of my movies again (maybe the 1 or 2 movies a year i want to watch more than once)

The same talk would be going on if Warner switched the other way.

I have no doubt about that!

I will be buying/renting ZERO HD downloads in favor of physical media.

I'll enjoy higher quality video/audio, extra features, and watch the content on my terms with physical media.

You guys can enjoy lower quality video/audio, zero extra features, and watch the content in a 24 hour window using a proprietary set-top box with limited storage and DRM.

Enjoy!

HD DVD network port = downloaded content player.
;)

What some members say here would have no measurable influence on download vs HDM.

What has huge influence is the BILLIONS of dollars Comcast, AT&T and yes, Microsoft are pouring into the download market.

In fact, there is an article about Comcast doing this on the front page of this forum right now...

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=972981

I really like the idea of being able to custom order a movie. Choose which resolution, do I want lossless sound or is Dolby Digital fine?, Which subtitles do I want?...... All of this is coming, relatively soon, and I will just wait for it rather than invest hundreds into an overpriced shady format.
Digital Distribution is the future. You can't deny that any more than you can deny that BDA is winning right now.

Because I am disgusted with how this war has turned out, and if HD DVD loses all studios, then yes, i will pursue the future looking technologies. If I have to use technology that is "work in progress" I'd prefer to use DD.

And all you spec whores that always favored Blu Ray over HD DVD for bitrate can't say you won't be in the same boat when DD starts offering far higher bitrate than Blu Ray, which they will. It might initially require a high buffer time before you can watch, but who cares.

i care about the download time, but i care more about where is the bandwidth to carry that much information regardless of download time?

Ditto... I don't want any insiders that work for Microsoft trying to convince me that low bitrate, low bandwidth x-box 360 downloads are the wave of the future.. Already, Comcast has HD video on demand that look like crap in comparison to actual real 1080p24 content found on Blu-ray and current HD-DVD... I like owning my movies and I like being able to do with them what I please as well...

I don't think anyone ever tried to argue that Xbox Live Movie downloads are a viable replacement for current HDM. They serve their purpose. People forget that most HDTV owners can't do/can't notice 1080p.

But Xbox movies do look damn good. Far better than DVD. And I will be using it until VuDu or xtremeHD or any of the other announced DD services just recently start ramping up.

What I find hilarious is that somehow you guys always assume DD must inherently mean low bitrate. There is nothing to say that is true. Someone could easily offer a 100 mb/s movie download service. You would just have to have a long buffer time and fast connection.

And all you spec whores that always favored Blu Ray over HD DVD for bitrate can't say you won't be in the same boat when DD starts offering far higher bitrate than Blu Ray, which they will. It might initially require a high buffer time before you can watch, but who cares.

As much as I'd like to believe that 50gb downloads per movie will be feasible for the general public in the near future I just don't see it happening. The rise of DD for movies will be just like the rise of music downloads, a tradeoff of convenience for quality.

How many audiophiles do you know who rave about iTunes and mp3s?

People in general are not ready to buy something that they cannot hold. Sure people buy MP3s. But thats very few compared to CDs. And think of how many advantages MP3s hold over CDs(you can carry thousands with you everywhere to workout, drive, travel... etc.

How many people do you think would buy MP3s... if they couldnt cherry pick the songs, could only buy full albums for $12.99 each, and were limited to playing the MP3 on one machine?

Digitally distributed movies have none of the advantages of MP3, other than instant access. Are they going to let you buy the best 10 minutes of the movie for $1.00? Who will pay for the hardware to watch these movies, what happens after a crash?

As much as I'd like to believe that 50gb downloads per movie will be feasible for the general public in the near future I just don't see it happening. The rise of DD for movies will be just like the rise of music downloads, a tradeoff of convenience for quality.

How many audiophiles do you know who rave about iTunes and mp3s?

zero. i have never used either.

Campaigning and political gamesmanship doesn't end just because a format war might be ending. MS was never behind hdm to begin with. They saw an opportunity with hd dvd to bolster their position with the xbox 360 vis a vis the ps3 by offering an add on. Format fails, dump the add on, perhaps even consider a bluray add on. If MS had been truly behind hd dvd, then they would've seriously looked to incorporate the hardware internally into a sku. All we got that on count were unsubstantiated rumors.

As much as I'd like to believe that 50gb downloads per movie will be feasible for the general public in the near future I just don't see it happening. The rise of DD for movies will be just like the rise of music downloads, a tradeoff of convenience for quality.

How many audiophiles do you know who rave about iTunes and mp3s?

Codecs are getting more efficient, and bandwith will only increase, rather quickly, as fiber ISP's grow. It's only a matter of a little time before high bitrate downloads happen - they have to happen, if they want to truly compete with HDM.

I really like the idea of being able to custom order a movie. Choose which resolution, do I want lossless sound or is Dolby Digital fine?, Which subtitles do I want?...... All of this is coming, relatively soon, and I will just wait for it rather than invest hundreds into an overpriced shady format.
Digital Distribution is the future. You can't deny that any more than you can deny that BDA is winning right now.

Because I am disgusted with how this war has turned out, and if HD DVD loses all studios, then yes, i will pursue the future looking technologies. If I have to use technology that is "work in progress" I'd prefer to use DD.

And all you spec whores that always favored Blu Ray over HD DVD for bitrate can't say you won't be in the same boat when DD starts offering far higher bitrate than Blu Ray, which they will. It might initially require a high buffer time before you can watch, but who cares.
See now this is a post that I can appreciate! There is no hidden agenda here. Whereas it seems so clear to me that certain posters are trying to keep the war alive (some always have been) simply to curtail mass adoption and clear a nice, easy path for downloads.

As long as we can all see this for what it is, then little will come of it.

I'm going to leave names out of this, with respect to forum rules, but it looks very clear to me that certain, consistently vocal HD DVD supporters/insiders are spreading FUD about blu-ray, even though it is clear that the tide has turned. One insider has even, overtly mentioned downloads in his more recent posts as the obvious choice going forward.

It now appears that the theories that Microsoft may have been playing Toshiba and the HD DVD Group all along, could turn out to be true.

Personally I could see myself doing some downloading, but I certainly do not want HDM to go away as Microsoft surely does.

Hopefully we will no longer be duped by the postings of these thinly-veiled, HDM Assassins!

As I mentioned elsewhere, I think some HD DVD fans are probably venting. With that being said, maybe you should read today's front page AVS news and gain some perspective. Comcast to Offer 1,000 HD Choices (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=972981)

I don't think downloads can replace the quality of packaged HD media any time soon.
There's no way it will, but will most people care? While some around these parts may feel VOD is unacceptable, the vast majority of the population will be quite happy with it.

But it may not have to, the masses may be fine with 480p or sub-480p, or "HD" downloads which are in reality HD-Crystal Lite.
Every HD VOD material I've seen currently being marketed is 1080i or 720p.

Campaigning and political gamesmanship doesn't end just because a format war might be ending. MS was never behind hdm to begin with. They saw an opportunity with hd dvd to bolster their position with the xbox 360 vis a vis the ps3 by offering an add on. Format fails, dump the add on, perhaps even consider a bluray add on. If MS had been truly behind hd dvd, then they would've seriously looked to incorporate the hardware internally into a sku. All we got that on count were unsubstantiated rumors.

That has all been proven as FUD. Microsoft spent more on HD DVD than anyone but Toshiba.

And there are technical reasons HD DVD drives were not/are not included in any XBox. Most importantly the requirement of 12X DVD.

IMHO downloadable HD content will compliment Blu-Ray or physical media.

There's no way it will, but will most people care? While some around these parts may feel VOD is unacceptable, the vast majority of the population will be quite happy with it.

Every HD VOD material I've seen currently being marketed is 1080i or 720p.

There is actually a huge quality difference between Xbox Marketplace videos and Comcast. Comcast compresses the **** out of them so they can always be instant.

I would much rather see a fantastically authored 720p movie than an average 1080p movie.

Campaigning and political gamesmanship doesn't end just because a format war might be ending. MS was never behind hdm to begin with. They saw an opportunity with hd dvd to bolster their position with the xbox 360 vis a vis the ps3 by offering an add on. Format fails, dump the add on, perhaps even consider a bluray add on. If MS had been truly behind hd dvd, then they would've seriously looked to incorporate the hardware internally into a sku. All we got that on count were unsubstantiated rumors.
It's just sad that so many believed MS was really behind HD DVD.

Warner's denial 3 weeks ago was one thing, but to me, Microsoft's play has been much more sinister. I'm hearkened back to The Clone Wars. Pit 2 forces against each other, weaken them and slide into control. Guess who Bill is?

:D

That has all been proven as FUD. Microsoft spent more on HD DVD than anyone but Toshiba.

And there are technical reasons HD DVD drives were not/are not included in any XBox. Most importantly the requirement of 12X DVD.
MS also MADE money on HD DVD.

I like buying discs and being able to play them whenever I please without a subscription to any HDM download site.

I'm about to dump my Comcast due to their incremental increases that happen about every 6 months.
$90+ for a handfull of HD channels and hand full of HD VOD is highway robbery.
Then they want $5.99-7.99 for new HD VOD releases.

People in general are not ready to buy something that they cannot hold. Sure people buy MP3s. But thats very few compared to CDs. And think of how many advantages MP3s hold over CDs(you can carry thousands with you everywhere to workout, drive, travel... etc.

How many people do you think would buy MP3s... if they couldnt cherry pick the songs, could only buy full albums for $12.99 each, and were limited to playing the MP3 on one machine?

Digitally distributed movies have none of the advantages of MP3, other than instant access. Are they going to let you buy the best 10 minutes of the movie for $1.00? Who will pay for the hardware to watch these movies, what happens after a crash?
Ditto.

I'll add that everything about digital downloads currently is a big step backwards over Blu-Ray.

All the proposed "advantages" of digital downloads do not currently exist on the market yet.

So many HD-DVD owners are jumping on a bandwagon that's currently broken down and waiting to be fixed. Even if, years into the future, HD VOD overcomes all its hurdles, it will still control a small piece of the HDM pie.

Campaigning and political gamesmanship doesn't end just because a format war might be ending. MS was never behind hdm to begin with. They saw an opportunity with hd dvd to bolster their position with the xbox 360 vis a vis the ps3 by offering an add on. Format fails, dump the add on, perhaps even consider a bluray add on. If MS had been truly behind hd dvd, then they would've seriously looked to incorporate the hardware internally into a sku. All we got that on count were unsubstantiated rumors.

None of which ever came from Microsoft who said several times over that a HD disc drive was left out of the 360 intentionally for cost benefits for them and consumers and NEVER reversed that position.

How can they be blamed for a rumor they constantly knocked on its face?

Furthermore, Microsoft is a software company at its core mission. As such they would be idiots not to have their sights on digital distribution as the home video industry has been pounding away at the idea with big money investments.

Lastly, both Blu-ray AND HD DVD have benefitted from software Microsoft produced.

This format war has been engineered, run and ended by consortiums of CEs and Hollywood Studios. Any failure in HDM to take off is the responsibility of these parties.

++!!!!!

As a AV SNOB, no way in hell I'm going to consider overly compressed crappy HD...wake me when there's a 100MB pipe directly to my front door.

I wouldn't consider myself an AV snob, but I'm also not your average Joe either and even I don't want the compressed, cropped crap they push out!!! :eek:

We're some members trying to Kill HD DVD in favor of BD?

Why people like HD download? cheaper? i doubt it will any cheaper than HDM. In a few years HDM will be priced as DVD priced now.
one thing that physical disk better than download is you can bring the disk to other player and play it. HD download has DRM right? Also, many internet provider already concern users use too much bandwith downloading through bit torrent. And some even cut them off because they use too much.

Normal consumer like to have the disk that play in their car, bedroom, living room even bathroom. or bring it to their friend's house. Can a download do that? There are so many issue HD download need to overcome.

Perhaps we will have it by 2012.

It's just sad that so many believed MS was really behind HD DVD.

Warner's denial 3 weeks ago was one thing, but to me, Microsoft's play has been much more sinister. I'm hearkened back to The Clone Wars. Pit 2 forces against each other, weaken them and slide into control. Guess who Bill is?

:D

So do you still wake up every night in a cold sweet screaming about Netscape?
Are you still bitter that Blu-ray supports VC-1?

Will you some day ever come to the realization that digital downloads like MP3s are a viable option to physical media?

I still remember how you thought that Steve Jobs was behind Napster just so people would have MP3s to put on IPods.:D

IMHO downloadable HD content will compliment Blu-Ray or physical media.

I agree. I think the two will live side by side for years. I still know people who cannot even sign up for broadband in their homes.

There's no way it will, but will most people care? While some around these parts may feel VOD is unacceptable, the vast majority of the population will be quite happy with it.

This may be true, but my point is people who bother to become members of an internet community dedicated to AV shouldn't see this as a good thing for the hobby in general. Is it good that SACD and DVD-A failed along with any hope of greater than CD quality audio in the forseeable future? Being angry about the lost investment in a format is understandable, but it seems like a case of cutting off the nose to spite the face to hope that both sides now fail as soon as possible.

I'm going to leave names out of this, with respect to forum rules, but it looks very clear to me that certain, consistently vocal HD DVD supporters/insiders are spreading FUD about blu-ray, even though it is clear that the tide has turned. One insider has even, overtly mentioned downloads in his more recent posts as the obvious choice going forward.

It now appears that the theories that Microsoft may have been playing Toshiba and the HD DVD Group all along, could turn out to be true.

Personally I could see myself doing some downloading, but I certainly do not want HDM to go away as Microsoft surely does.

Hopefully we will no longer be duped by the postings of these thinly-veiled, HDM Assassins!No, SOny is doing a fine job of killing HDM. They dont need help. Player prices will remain high and BOGO's will end stagnating market penetration without competition.

See now this is a post that I can appreciate! There is no hidden agenda here. Whereas it seems so clear to me that certain posters are trying to keep the war alive (some always have been) simply to curtail mass adoption and clear a nice, easy path for downloads.

As long as we can all see this for what it is, then little will come of it.
Why do you assume that the intent of the poster is to "curtail" anything?

The past 18 months I've seen the Mantra "Content is king" used to bludgeon HD-DVD owners because Blu-ray had more of it.

Vudu already has 5000 titles to blu-ray's 400.

As I mentioned elsewhere, I think some HD DVD fans are probably venting. With that being said, maybe you should read today's front page AVS news and gain some perspective. Comcast to Offer 1,000 HD Choices (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=972981)
.

Sketcha, Bill Gates behind this too?

http://www.electronichouse.com/images/uploads/comcast-home.jpg
Is that Steve Balmer in the A&E window?

People in general are not ready to buy something that they cannot hold. Sure people buy MP3s. But thats very few compared to CDs. And think of how many advantages MP3s hold over CDs(you can carry thousands with you everywhere to workout, drive, travel... etc.

How many people do you think would buy MP3s... if they couldnt cherry pick the songs, could only buy full albums for $12.99 each, and were limited to playing the MP3 on one machine?

Digitally distributed movies have none of the advantages of MP3, other than instant access. Are they going to let you buy the best 10 minutes of the movie for $1.00? Who will pay for the hardware to watch these movies, what happens after a crash?

The people that embraced mp3 and digital dowloads are an entirely new group of consumers. Mostly young people and they will not adhire to our outdated opinion of how an entertainment market should look like.

Some 15 year olds have larger music collections on their iPod than audiophiles who spend over 50k on a system and are having a minute collection of music that is limited to audiophile recordings deemed worthy enough to listen to.

We are facing an entirely new generation of future consumers that are now growing up in a digital download world.

The reason a lot of people are now talking about Digital Downloads is that every other market is going that way.

First, I own both. I am neutral. But..

1) Blu-ray does not allow me to watch Disney in the car (no SD).
2) People are moving to Digital Music in large numbers ( I know the precentages are small, but it is growing fast)
3) People have shown that they could care less about audio quality compared CD's. iTunes shows that they just want convenience.
4) Apple rumored to introduce HD downloads/rentals next week?? Burn SD??
5) I have to wait on netfix, I have to drive to the store, amazon cannot ship quicker than 24hrs. Why cant I wait on a download as well?
6) Download speeds are nothing but a technical problem. It can be fixed.
7) Check out XStreamerHD. Coming soon, comparable quality. Satellite transmission. Local ownership/storage.

I have asked repeatedly in the Insiders Thread about bluray and the portable SD problem. I have yet to get a response. I do not like the fact that I will have to buy *2* disks to do what I can do now with a combo. At the very least that means bluray will only get part of the market. SD will always have to be there. I do not believe that the average person cares about the quality difference between 720 and 1080. You and I do, but I bet most do not. If you follow the music model, and I have yet to see a reason why not, people will take to 720 downloads of HD material.

These are some of the reasons why I feel that you cannot overlook the download monster in the corner. And I *do* and *will* continue to buy both HDDVD and Bluray. But I will download as well when/if Apple announces a new iTV. And then the XStreamerHD announcement intrigues me as well. It has to be as good as DTV and Dish HD and people are *demanding* more of that stuff. And we know how compressed that stuff is.


MarkS

How many audiophiles do you know who rave about iTunes and mp3s?
Don't know, but I did see program where a self professed "audiophile" was touting being able to convert his vinyl music over to an iPod - claimed it was "better" so much for that fool.

Who says wants to VoD or downloads? Maybe it's.........

high player prices & high media prices = little interest = other options take hold

$2100 BD players are killing BD.

I'm going to leave names out of this, with respect to forum rules, but it looks very clear to me that certain, consistently vocal HD DVD supporters/insiders are spreading FUD about blu-ray, even though it is clear that the tide has turned. One insider has even, overtly mentioned downloads in his more recent posts as the obvious choice going forward.

It now appears that the theories that Microsoft may have been playing Toshiba and the HD DVD Group all along, could turn out to be true.

Personally I could see myself doing some downloading, but I certainly do not want HDM to go away as Microsoft surely does.

Hopefully we will no longer be duped by the postings of these thinly-veiled, HDM Assassins!

Boy, some people are going bonkers in disappointment, while some are getting paranoid at the very mention of the word "downloads".

I can't wait for the day when the "dancin' merry men" face the reality that every single content creator and service provider is gearing up for the shift to digital downloads, and that their much fancied HDM overlords and purveyors of the optical dream are only biding time till they shaft us in the arse with the DRM stick.

Sony can't launch their PSN movie downloads soon enough. I wouldn't buy a single byte from there or any other online service, but the naivete' of some here is mind boggling for thinking only Microsoft is working and getting ready for a digital download future.

P.S.: I am the quintessential "anti-download" guy. I've never bought a single song from iTMS, and never will. I love my LPs, SACDs and DVD-As. I patronized allofmp3.com for a while to get lossless FLAC versions of some of my favorite music, but stopped since they went belly up.

The reason a lot of people are now talking about Digital Downloads is that every other market is going that way.

First, I own both. I am neutral. But..

1) Blu-ray does not allow me to watch Disney in the car (no SD).


MarkS

I'll bite. How are you going to watch your digital downloads in the car?

No, SOny is doing a fine job of killing HDM. They dont need help. Player prices will remain high and BOGO's will end stagnating market penetration without competition.

I'd argue that HD-DVD low prices had a lot to do with their downfall. In order to get business partners they need to be able to make a profit. Look at how Sony withholds profile updates for the PS3 and DTS-MA decoding. You can't tell me they do that for any reason other then to give their partners a chance to catch up with standalone players.

I'm not in the know on this, but it looks to me like Toshiba went cheap too fast and left no incentive for others to get into the market. Consumer adoption is important but seems like getting the CE industry on board is important as well.

I agree. I think the two will live side by side for years. I still know people who cannot even sign up for broadband in their homes.



This may be true, but my point is people who bother to become members of an internet community dedicated to AV shouldn't see this as a good thing for the hobby in general. Is it good that SACD and DVD-A failed along with any hope of greater than CD quality audio in the forseeable future? Being angry about the lost investment in a format is understandable, but it seems like a case of cutting off the nose to spite the face to hope that both sides now fail as soon as possible.

My understanding of AV enthusiasm is being involved and interested in AV technologies overall, not simply optical discs. With this format war, some may have lost sight of that.

There will be AV enthusiats long after the final optical disc is pressed. And the coming of that day is inevitable.

Regarding digital distribution, there were 500m CDs sold vs 800m digital tracks sold last year. Not sure how you want to differentiate between tracks and cds but it seems to me people are buying more digital content than physical media already for audio content.

Videos are a harder sell for myriad reasons but CES has turned up a few very surprising things. Vudu is new, and I saw something from xstream pop up as well, so thats 2 new download services already.

I'll bite. How are you going to watch your digital downloads in the car?

Get an ipod touch, ipod nano, ipod classic or iphone and get a digital download from itunes?

I have asked repeatedly in the Insiders Thread about bluray and the portable SD problem. I have yet to get a response. I do not like the fact that I will have to buy *2* disks to do what I can do now with a combo.
Why not just wait until portable/car BD players start showing up on the market? It's going to happen sooner or later, especially now that the format war is resolving.

Also, the Digital Downloads approach isn't going to help the dilemma you presented above any better.

I'll bite. How are you going to watch your digital downloads in the car?

Rumored mind you, but digital downloads through iTunes supposedly allow you to burn a SD version of HD for the car.

Now. I know that is rumored. But the OP is about why everyone is talking downloads. That is my *biggest* issue with Bluray. They have no solution to that problem as of yet. People are talking about iTunes giving you that ability and that would be huge.

Again, just rumor, but rumor is the same as talking. And, Bluray would have to change the spec again to fix this issue. With downloads, some things can change after the fact and not *catch* people with useless equipment or early adopters.

Now keep in mind, I hope the BDA can solve this issue. I would love it. But no single sign of anything yet.

MarkS.

I agree. I think the two will live side by side for years. I still know people who cannot even sign up for broadband in their homes.



This may be true, but my point is people who bother to become members of an internet community dedicated to AV shouldn't see this as a good thing for the hobby in general. Is it good that SACD and DVD-A failed along with any hope of greater than CD quality audio in the forseeable future? Being angry about the lost investment in a format is understandable, but it seems like a case of cutting off the nose to spite the face to hope that both sides now fail as soon as possible.

DVD A and sacd didn't die at the same time. The point is that after the demise sacd didn't took of like wildfire. Sacd just died later and only a small niche now remains.

The same will most likely happen with HDM.
Pricing must come down. It's essential.

While I think downloading or on-demand is the future, I don't think it's the immediate future. Broadband access needs to be faster and its market penetration needs to be higher. People haven't even fully embraced downloading music (as far as I know, music downloads don't represent that much of a percentage of total album sales). I think downloads are far enough in the future that HDM discs (whether BD or HD DVD) are a viable next step in evolution.

Why not just wait until portable/car BD players start showing up on the market? It's going to happen sooner or later, especially now that the format war is resolving.

Also, the Digital Downloads approach isn't going to help the dilemma you presented above any better.

Yes DD does help. My car has an aux input now. I don't have to wait 2 cars down the road to hope that portable Blu is in there. Do you not think they would have announced anything at CES?? How long will it take to replace enough cars on the road to make Blu work in 50% of Autos.

Now with my ipod and itunes I can watch anything in my car. And that is not counting if they allow me to burn to DVD.

MarkS.

I'm not trying to, but I'm not so sure about the studios. I really want HDM, and though I think HD DVD was suited, blu-ray is fine by me.

What we want and what we get may be worlds apart, you simply cannot read about HDM without the media slipping in the caveat of "but disk media is a dying medium," They aren't reflecting us, were reflecting them. When Warner made some crack about HDM as a "stepping-stone" some months ago, it made me think "Why would you even say that while your grooming HDM?"

The media picks up on that stuff, then builds on it. What we say here doesn't amount to a hill of beans as to what actually comes to pass.

If people want HDM, you better stop talking, stop renting, and now that there is a clear front-runner, START BUYING. There's really no excuse for those with a BD player to be knee-jerk anymore.

I don't there is any doubt that some viral marketers have shown up here trying to push thier agenda at a meeting place of many early adopters.

Granted some of it just sour grapes. ie. my format basically lost so screw everyone else that thought different.

I don't have a problem with downloads as long as they coexist with an optical format. The problem is that MSFT wants to controls all access so they don't what any physical media.

The fact is that downloaded content will not rival physical media quality wise in the near future if ever. MP3s have become the norm in the audio world to the horror of the audiophiles, but CDs are still available. HD downloads are overly filtered (ie. sharpness remove) and highly compressed(color and brightness is also reduced) and in the near future 720p is going to be the common resolution. I mean on another forum area someone said that PotC:AWE file size downloaded on Xbox Live was 7.7GB and the quality of the picture was crap even at 720p. I bet the SD DVD was around the same file size. MSFT wants you to believe VC1 is the best codec that is available. Sorry MSFT its decent but AVC is still better.

The fact is its a pipedream that all media will be downloaded over the internet. The internet does not have the capacity even with highly compressed files, someday maybe but not for at least ten years.

And to put it in perspective, a lot of people thought PPV and VOD were going to kill the local video stores. So far I still have several blockbusters around me.

Another thing to consider is price. Granted Comcast has some free VOD content even on HD the quality is crap and Comcast thinks HD VOD should be priced higher 5.99 for a 24-hr window. Well when I can get the same titles for no extra charge through BB Total Access and the local BlockBuster why I am going to pay a premium to someone who basically is just offering a highly compressed HD-Lite version. Some of the companies are out of line thinking people will pay a 50% to 100% markup for HD. That is not going to fly if they want mass adoption.

Interesting comments from Seagate's CEO.

http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9845372-7.html?tag=nefd.top

January 8, 2008 11:20 AM PST
Seagate CEO: Blu-ray won the battle but lost the war
Posted by Michael Kanellos
LAS VEGAS--The winner in the Blu-ray and HD DVD war is the hard drive, according to Bill Watkins, CEO of Seagate Technology.

"People are saying Blu-ray won the war but who cares? The war is over physical distribution versus electrical distribution and Blu-ray and HD lost that," he said during a breakfast meeting at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas this week. "In this, flash memory and hard drives are on the same side. The war is over and the physical guys lost."

Watkins, naturally, speaks from personal interest, but he's got a point. (A former Army grunt and a decades-long Deadhead, Watkins is also one of the more entertaining CEOs in the technology industry to interview.) Consumers haven't been buying Blu-ray or HD DVD players and by the time they do, technology companies will likely be hawking sophisticated on-demand services and Internet Protocol TV. IPTV, in fact, is the dominant theme of the show. Sharp, Samsung, and Panasonic all unfurled content alliances that will let consumers look at headlines or videos from the Net on their TVs.

That's good news for Seagate, because electronic distribution means more hard drive sales. "If (data) is in the cloud I get more storage sales because you have to back up everything," he said.

"Surveillance is a big deal," he added. "You're being filmed right now (we were in a casino) and they've got to store it somewhere."

Hard drive makers are right now living through the good old days. In the 1990s, excess manufacturing capacity and price cuts led to stagnant revenues and losses for many companies. Since then, many players dropped out. New markets such as digital video recorders opened up for drive makers. As a result, both Seagate and Rival Western Digital are seeing double-digit growth. Seagate has already upped its revenue guidance twice for the quarter that just ended.

And the future continues to look good. Hollywood, he added, will have no choice but to get into home delivery of content in a big way. People are leaving home less and less. And if the movie studios don't deliver their content to their home, people will watch whatever they can find on the Internet. At CES, XStreamHD is showing off a box that gets on-demand movies from a satellite. Actor Michael Douglas is an investor.

"They will watch lousy content if it is easy to do," he said.

Other notes from Watkins:

• Seagate doesn't have its solid state drive out yet, but it's coming.

• Flash memory, he added, will never completely take over the hard drive market. The demand for storage is too big. If a flash maker wanted to provide just 15 percent of the world's market for storage in 2012, they'd have to invest $50 billion this year alone.

"And right now, no one has made that investment," he said.

He further argued that flash memory gets too much attention from Wall Street. "I'm making 75 cents a quarter and I get half the valuation of SanDisk or Micron," he added.

• Consumers still seem buoyant in Europe and Asia, so a lengthy, full-blown global recession may not occur. Admittedly, he adds, that's his own spin.

• America has got to reform its immigration laws by letting in more immigrants. Nearly 60 percent of the companies in Silicon Valley were founded by people born outside the U.S. Last year, close to 70 percent of the students getting PhDs in engineering were from other countries.

"And none of them got a green card," he said. "Because of this, U.S. companies will have to put R&D overseas."

• Speaking of foreign lands, the government-to-university-to-private sector triumvirate (the government provides grants, universities invent stuff and the private sector sells it) that helped build the tech industry in the U.S. no longer works as well as it once did. However, they have copied it pretty well overseas

"They are following the made us successful and here it's broken," he said. "We used to say that what is good for GM is good for America. Now, what is good for the stockholders is not necessarily good for America. That drives me crazy."

Nothing beats actually owning the disc (having it in my hand). I personally would never movie to digital downloads.

People keep saying music has gone that route, but I feel music's different in comparison to HD content. Give me my Blu Ray discs.

Yes DD does help. My car has an aux input now. I don't have to wait 2 cars down the road to hope that portable Blu is in there. Do you not think they would have announced anything at CES?? How long will it take to replace enough cars on the road to make Blu work in 50% of Autos.

Now with my ipod and itunes I can watch anything in my car. And that is not counting if they allow me to burn to DVD.

MarkS.

There is at least 1 portable DVD player that will let you plug in an ipod (video ipod) and watch videos on the DVD screen from the ipod. It wouldnt take much for other in-car systems to do something similar. If the in car system has video inputs, then any portable digital player can output any video on the in-car system. The key then is getting the video there.

So do you still wake up every night in a cold sweet screaming about Netscape?
Are you still bitter that Blu-ray supports VC-1?

Will you some day ever come to the realization that digital downloads like MP3s are a viable option to physical media?

I still remember how you thought that Steve Jobs was behind Napster just so people would have MP3s to put on IPods.:D
:D

1. Yeah, I used Netscape. Now I use Firefox. :D

2. Was never, nor am I now bitter about VC-1. Though I have seen it to be slightly inferior in its abilities to those of AVC, it is a good, easy tool for engineers to use, especially when bitrates allow. :)

3. I stated in the OP that I could see doing some downloads right now. I enjoy having options vs. the potential of just the ONE, if HDM were to fail. How do you feel about this?

4. I think I'll leave that last one alone since you used a smiley AND I had never even heard that one!

:)

I can watch DD in my car now. Cannot with Blu.

But, I do want you to know I am buying HDM. I am just playing Devil's Advocate on what the OP is talking about. DD is coming, can HDM catch on in time to stave it off? DVD had the luxury of being tons greater that VHS. It will be a lot harder to replace than some people want to believe.

I do not know (boy, here comes famous last words) if HDM will ever take over more than 50% of the market from DVD. I think (and I know nothing :) that DD will happen sooner that that.

Again, Soccer Moms are not going to buy Disney on Blu until a large number of cars are Blu as well. Ever wonder why Blu Disney releases are not leading the sales lists even though they are some of the most popular movies of all time and some of the best all time DVD sales leaders ( I could be proven wrong on that one).

MarkS

I'd argue that HD-DVD low prices had a lot to do with their downfall. In order to get business partners they need to be able to make a profit. Look at how Sony withholds profile updates for the PS3 and DTS-MA decoding. You can't tell me they do that for any reason other then to give their partners a chance to catch up with standalone players.

I'm not in the know on this, but it looks to me like Toshiba went cheap too fast and left no incentive for others to get into the market. Consumer adoption is important but seems like getting the CE industry on board is important as well.

The CE industry is stuck on old business models that consumers are moving away from. The old "introuduce a new spec/new twist" to current tech and charge through the nose for it strategy isn't working anymore.

Case in point: Vizio.

They have lead HDTV sales because they get it. Today's consumer want's in on the latest tech at a reasonable price. There's still a market for high end equipment, it's just dwarfed by the "just give it to me at a reasonable price" market.

Toshiba understood that point.

If the CE markets come down to a war between the consumer and CE manufacturers about what a device is worth, the CEMs will always lose that battle. The customer doesn't have to buy their device.

The sooner the CEMs we've known for years realize that, the better off the market and their own revenues will be.

That has all been proven as FUD. Microsoft spent more on HD DVD than anyone but Toshiba.

And there are technical reasons HD DVD drives were not/are not included in any XBox. Most importantly the requirement of 12X DVD.

You have your opinion and that's about all you have. Proven as fud? Offer your proof. They spent a lot on hd dvd? How much? And why is there a requirement for the drive to be 12x? Bluray drives on the ps3 are 2X and sorry, to break this to you, games don't load 6X times slower on the ps3.

I don't there is any doubt that some viral marketers have shown up here trying to push thier agenda at a meeting place of many early adopters.

:rolleyes:
Downloads would be bad for either, why would HD DVD supporters perpetuate it's supplanting HDM?

IMHO downloadable HD content will compliment Blu-Ray or physical media.
That would be perfect!

download? LOL...

Go online and type a movie name and download together. I"m sure you'll get tons of hits for FREE.

I'll pay 100x the amount of a download just to get the physical disc in my hand and onto my media cabinet.

I'm not trying to, but I'm not so sure about the studios. I really want HDM, and though I think HD DVD was suited, blu-ray is fine by me.

What we want and what we get may be worlds apart, you simply cannot read about HDM without the media slipping in the caveat of "but disk media is a dying medium," They aren't reflecting us, were reflecting them. When Warner made some crack about HDM as a "stepping-stone" some months ago, it made me think "Why would you even say that while your grooming HDM?"

The media picks up on that stuff, then builds on it. What we say here doesn't amount to a hill of beans as to what actually comes to pass.

If people want HDM, you better stop talking, stop renting, and now that there is a clear front-runner, START BUYING. There's really no excuse for those with a BD player to be knee-jerk anymore.
Great Post!

"Some members" don't have the power to kill a small rodent much less Blu-ray, why worry?

You have your opinion and that's about all you have. Proven as fud? Offer your proof. They spent a lot on hd dvd? How much? And why is there a requirement for the drive to be 12x? Bluray drives on the ps3 are 2X and sorry, to break this to you, games don't load 6X times slower on the ps3.

sorry, to break this to you, games don't load 6X times slower on the ps3. :rolleyes:

This is usually about the time that somebody would remind you to know your facts about the transfer rates (not spin rates) of the different media, and the mandated transfer rate specs for specific devices (Xbox360, PS3, HDO players et al).

Now who would break that to you? :rolleyes:

You have your opinion and that's about all you have. Proven as fud? Offer your proof. They spent a lot on hd dvd? How much? And why is there a requirement for the drive to be 12x? Bluray drives on the ps3 are 2X and sorry, to break this to you, games don't load 6X times slower on the ps3.

Why should he have to prove what you've seen fit not to recognize? I thought it was innocent until proven guilty.

As of late, it's been asking Microsoft to prove it's innocent.

download? LOL...

Go online and type a movie name and download together. I"m sure you'll get tons of hits for FREE.

I'll pay 100x the amount of a download just to get the physical disc in my hand and onto my media cabinet.


I am sure that some people say that about CD's as well. We see how that is going.

Another thing, this young generation of whippersnappers, they think that downloads are the only way to get things. I believe they will do the same with movies. Hey, I enjoy the media as well, but I would love a 2TB media server filled with HD goodness. That appeals as well as a media library to me.

MarkS.

For those that thing that DD will be the way to go right now. Explain the fact that the average high speed connection is only 1.9Mbps.
http://technologyexpert.blogspot.com/2007/09/us-broadband-average-abysmal-19mbps.html

So you can go here to get your figures of how long it would take ot DL a HD movie.

http://www.martindalecenter.com/AATimeCalc.html

And yes the US is well behind every other industrail nation. But let me remind you if the US was not so important than the HD DVD Blu-ray battle would have been over before it ever started. Since Blu-ray had the rest of the world. But without the US neither format could not have survived.

I can watch DD in my car now. Cannot with Blu.

But, I do want you to know I am buying HDM. I am just playing Devil's Advocate on what the OP is talking about. DD is coming, can HDM catch on in time to stave it off? DVD had the luxury of being tons greater that VHS. It will be a lot harder to replace than some people want to believe.

I do not know (boy, here comes famous last words) if HDM will ever take over more than 50% of the market from DVD. I think (and I know nothing :) that DD will happen sooner that that.

Again, Soccer Moms are not going to buy Disney on Blu until a large number of cars are Blu as well. Ever wonder why Blu Disney releases are not leading the sales lists even though they are some of the most popular movies of all time and some of the best all time DVD sales leaders ( I could be proven wrong on that one).

MarkS
Glad to hear you're pressing forward and I DO, actually appreciate your "Devil's Advocate" posts. As long as we don't get personal it can only aid in the sharing of information and further enlightenment. Not that I expect anyone is going to reach Buddha status or anything.

Also, I don't think that those guys will have too much sway, but I find it a bit disgusting that they are seizing the opportunity here, when so many are upset, to try and steer folks away from HDM altogether! And for some, it IS working.

Regarding digital distribution, there were 500m CDs sold vs 800m digital tracks sold last year. Not sure how you want to differentiate between tracks and cds but it seems to me people are buying more digital content than physical media already for audio content.
A track can be anything from a $0.99 single track on iTunes to a $2.99 ringtone.

But since the average CD has 10 tracks, sales are actually more like:

5 Billion Physical Tracks vs. 800 Million Digital Tracks

Comparing apples to apples, physical media still dominates.

I'm not trying to, but I'm not so sure about the studios. I really want HDM, and though I think HD DVD was suited, blu-ray is fine by me.

What we want and what we get may be worlds apart, you simply cannot read about HDM without the media slipping in the caveat of "but disk media is a dying medium," They aren't reflecting us, were reflecting them. When Warner made some crack about HDM as a "stepping-stone" some months ago, it made me think "Why would you even say that while your grooming HDM?"

The media picks up on that stuff, then builds on it. What we say here doesn't amount to a hill of beans as to what actually comes to pass.

If people want HDM, you better stop talking, stop renting, and now that there is a clear front-runner, START BUYING. There's really no excuse for those with a BD player to be knee-jerk anymore.

Exactly, it's time to put the format war behind us. HD DVD put up a good fight, but its days are numbered. Time to get on the Blu train if you want to guarantee that you will get true HD content over HD-Lite crap downloads.

To the diehard HD DVD Supporters: Stop it with the nonsense sour grapes arguments.

If you go with downloads over a true HDM, then the only person you are depriving is yourself.

I'm going to leave names out of this, with respect to forum rules, but it looks very clear to me that certain, consistently vocal HD DVD supporters/insiders are spreading FUD about blu-ray, even though it is clear that the tide has turned. One insider has even, overtly mentioned downloads in his more recent posts as the obvious choice going forward.

It now appears that the theories that Microsoft may have been playing Toshiba and the HD DVD Group all along, could turn out to be true.

Personally I could see myself doing some downloading, but I certainly do not want HDM to go away as Microsoft surely does.

Hopefully we will no longer be duped by the postings of these thinly-veiled, HDM Assassins!


What kind of BS is this?

You want to make an accusation . . DO IT!

None of this pussy footing around.

This OP is nothing more than a "wolf in sheep's clothing" attack on members here at AVS.

THAT is TOTALLY against the rules!

Sketcha, I am reallly surprised at you. I thought you were above this. Guess not.:(

So far this has been a reasonable discussion about a potentially, somewhat, hot topic. Let's all do our best to keep it reasonable, please

Thanks,

Sketch

Nothing beats actually owning the disc (having it in my hand). I personally would never movie to digital downloads.

People keep saying music has gone that route, but I feel music's different in comparison to HD content. Give me my Blu Ray discs.
Correct.
In most cases, music is the background to what you are doing so in most cases, the quality isn't important.
A movie has your total focus and higher the quality, the better.

Also, subscription fees for cable are getting more expensive.
By the time digital downloads and high bandwidth become the norm, the prices will be out of reach or unjustifiable for most people/families.


Physical media purchases will be around for a long time because you own something after a purchase instead of getting a service that is gone once you cancel the service/payment.

So, you spend over $3000 in 3 years on a cable/internet service to get digital downloads and what do you have when you can't afford it anymore ?
NOTHING.

Again, just rumor, but rumor is the same as talking. And, Bluray would have to change the spec again to fix this issue. With downloads, some things can change after the fact and not *catch* people with useless equipment or early adopters.

Now keep in mind, I hope the BDA can solve this issue. I would love it. But no single sign of anything yet.

MarkS.

Actually something like that is already part of the BD spec, managed copy. It is also part of the HD DVD spec. Looks like the first implementation being shown is the PS3 copying to memory stick or a PSP. When will it become ubiquitous, and for a multitude of formats? Who knows.

Sigh..

Just read the title of this thread. You don't have to answer anything else


Are some members trying to Kill blu-ray in favor of Downloads?

How are members of AVS at all capable of killing Blu-Ray?

Boggles the mind with some people.

What kind of BS is this?

You want to make an accusation . . DO IT!

None of this pussy footing around.

This OP is nothing more than a "wolf in sheep's clothing" attack on members here at AVS.

THAT is TOTALLY against the rules!

Sketcha, I am reallly surprised at you. I thought you were above this. Guess not.:(

Lee...take a hike.

What kind of BS is this?

You want to make an accusation . . DO IT!

None of this pussy footing around.

This OP is nothing more than a "wolf in sheep's clothing" attack on members here at AVS.

THAT is TOTALLY against the rules!

Sketcha, I am reallly surprised at you. I thought you were above this. Guess not.:(
You were not, actually on my mind Lee, though it appears that you thought you were. I've enjoyed some of your recent posts, as a matter of fact.

As to the people that were on my mind, I would love to come out and say who they are... BELIEVE ME!

Do you not agree that I would be pushing forum rules?


EDIT: Can't say I have not had my thoughts about your "Doom and Gloom" posts and how they pertain to this subject Lee, but your more recent posts have eased those thoughts.

People in general are not ready to buy something that they cannot hold. Sure people buy MP3s. But thats very few compared to CDs. And think of how many advantages MP3s hold over CDs(you can carry thousands with you everywhere to workout, drive, travel... etc.

How many people do you think would buy MP3s... if they couldnt cherry pick the songs, could only buy full albums for $12.99 each, and were limited to playing the MP3 on one machine?

Digitally distributed movies have none of the advantages of MP3, other than instant access. Are they going to let you buy the best 10 minutes of the movie for $1.00? Who will pay for the hardware to watch these movies, what happens after a crash?

It's not "very few" people that buy MP3s. It's a lot of people. Millions of them even. This summer Apple (http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2007/06/25/apple_now_third_largest_us_music_retailer/?rss_id=Boston+Globe+--+Technology+stories) became the 3rd largest music retailer in the US. And they're growing, very quickly. More than 3 billion songs have been purchased on iTunes since it opened.

You're correct that one of the advantages of iTunes is the cherry picking of songs. However, there is a correlation to video. A video digital distribution system could allow someone to buy one particular episode of a TV show, rather than a whole season boxed set for example.

Ultimately video will go media-less. It's more convenient - you don't have to go anywhere to get it. If you have the bandwidth then it's fast to acquire, maybe even instant. It's more portable, and takes up less storage space.

The only question are: How soon will this take over? and Is optical media in permanent decline in the video market, just as it is in the audio market?

Lee...take a hike.

I did!

And I wound up on this thread.

Sketcha Posted:

See now this is a post that I can appreciate! There is no hidden agenda here. Whereas it seems so clear to me that certain posters are trying to keep the war alive (some always have been) simply to curtail mass adoption and clear a nice, easy path for downloads.

As long as we can all see this for what it is, then little will come of it

Do ANY of you really believe that there are millions of people who are reading these threads? Come on! These forums are cyber space water cooler discussions - nothing more.

You want to discuss technology . . . fine . . . AVS is the place to do it.

You want to hint around that people are trying to put up roadblocks in the path of BD's success? Good luck with that!

Actually something like that is already part of the BD spec, managed copy. It is also part of the HD DVD spec. Looks like the first implementation being shown is the PS3 copying to memory stick or a PSP. When will it become ubiquitous, and for a multitude of formats? Who knows.

I hope that you are correct on that, but what I am reading is that that is not an example of managed copy. The ps3 rebuilds the stream for a psp. Only the PS3 can do this. And it does not allow for a burn to DVD for a portable. Do you think Sony is going to allow IPODS to do the same?

Even Amir stated his frustration with Managed Copy on HDDVD. It is non-existent on either format. (Sorry Amir if I am wrong on that).

Again, I hope you are correct. I *want* to enjoy HDM, but until that is fixed, I will have to avoid those HDM titles that I cannot get combo if I need it on DVD as well.

If Bluray can solve that issue it will help to hold off Digital Downloads a bit longer. If not, then HDM will have a major weakness.

MarkS.

I'm going to leave names out of this, with respect to forum rules, but it looks very clear to me that certain, consistently vocal HD DVD supporters/insiders are spreading FUD about blu-ray, even though it is clear that the tide has turned. One insider has even, overtly mentioned downloads in his more recent posts as the obvious choice going forward.

It now appears that the theories that Microsoft may have been playing Toshiba and the HD DVD Group all along, could turn out to be true.

Personally I could see myself doing some downloading, but I certainly do not want HDM to go away as Microsoft surely does.

Hopefully we will no longer be duped by the postings of these thinly-veiled, HDM Assassins!

Get over yourself!!!!! You're giving yourself waaaaaaaaay too much credibility.
"Some members duping others" Hahahahahahaha. The world of the AVS forum is akin to pissing in the ocean.

I did!

And I wound up on this thread.

Sketcha Posted:



Do ANY of you really believe that there are millions of people who are reading these threads? Come on! These forums are cyber space water cooler discussions - nothing more.

You want to discuss technology . . . fine . . . AVS is the place to do it.

You want to hint around that people are trying to put up roadblocks in the path of BD's success? Good luck with that!
I am certain that some are, Lee.

As I said a bit earlier, I'm also disgusted that some would choose this moment, when HD DVD fans are angry, to tout HDM as a waste and dowloads as the only future. Even YOU would be happy, I think, if HDM were, at least a niche format. In fact, I believe you would be even happier if HDM were to thrive, but just surprised. :)

The only question are: How soon will this take over? and Is optical media in permanent decline in the video market, just as it is in the audio market?
If optical media is on the same decline in the video market, then about 5 years from now, optical media will still own 90% of the video market. Just like 5 years after iTunes, optical media still owns 90% of the audio market.

Meaning 90% of studio home video revenue will still come from optical media.

Optical media will be the de facto popular format for years to come.

So far this has been a reasonable discussion about a potentially, somewhat, hot topic. Let's all do our best to keep it reasonable, please

Thanks,

Sketch

You call someone an assassin in the OP and then say it is a reasonable discussion.

You have sunk to a new low here at AVS.

Get over yourself!!!!! You're giving yourself waaaaaaaaay too much credibility.
"Some members duping others" Hahahahahahaha. The world of the AVS forum is akin to pissing in the ocean.
As I've said a few times now, steering even just any of our members away from HDM would still pi$$ me off. And many of you know that I would feel the same way if Warner had gone red.

You call someone an assassin in the OP and then say it is a reasonable discussion.

You have sunk to a new low here at AVS.
Well, at least the discussion, itself was reasonable.

I admit that I am a bit heated at a few people... but just a very few.


EDIT: I'll get over it.

:)

Cheers

...and the flamebait starts

Exactly, it's time to put the format war behind us. HD DVD put up a good fight, but its days are numbered. Time to get on the Blu train if you want to guarantee that you will get true HD content over HD-Lite crap downloads.

To the diehard HD DVD Supporters: Stop it with the nonsense sour grapes arguments.

If you go with downloads over a true HDM, then the only person you are depriving is yourself.
Well, not so fast, people aren't making this stuff up, they may be drawing attention to what the media is saying, to rub the winning formats nose in it, but that's a pretty popular sport around here (diplomacy people).

I feel people aren't just renters do want physical media, probably don't want downloads much, but could be scared into thinking they are wasting money on HD disks of any sort.

The fact is that disks are super-cheap and there is no real-world advantage into their disappearance, other than that studios would like to sell movies without creating product, and like the idea of you having them trapped on some hard-drive. Studios don't want you to share movie with family and friends, sell them at half-price on ebay, and love the idea of your collections life-span being tied to one fallible device. They are saying consumers want this when it's they who truly do. Sidestep the bullshit and buy disks.

I think people who are excited by downloads should have just bought DIVX ten years back, it's prospects and restrictions are just as dismal.

I hope that you are correct on that, but what I am reading is that that is not an example of managed copy. The ps3 rebuilds the stream for a psp. Only the PS3 can do this. And it does not allow for a burn to DVD for a portable. Do you think Sony is going to allow IPODS to do the same?



Do you have any links to something detailed about the PS3 copying? All I've been able to find is overview stuff, which is what caused me to surmise that it might be an example of managed copy.

Well, not so fast, people aren't making this stuff up, they may be drawing attention to what the media is saying, to rub the winning formats nose in it, but that's a pretty popular sport around here (diplomacy people).

I feel people aren't just renters do want physical media, probably don't want downloads much, but could be scared into thinking they are wasting money on HD disks of any sort.

The fact is that disks are super-cheap and there is no real-world advantage into their disappearance, other than that studios would like to sell movies without creating product, and like the idea of you having them trapped on some hard-drive. Studios don't want you to share movie with family and friends, sell them at half-price on ebay, and love the idea of your collections life-span being tied to one fallible device. They are saying consumers want this when it's they who truly do. Sidestep the bullshit and buy disks.

I think people who are excited by downloads should have just bought DIVX ten years back, it's prospects and restrictions are just as dismal.
Strange bedfellows.

:)

What are you afraid off?

That (HD) VOD becomes a real alternative for J6P?

What you should be afraid off is that according to Warner the HDM market essentially stalled.

Right now HDM is too expensive to become the dominant format.

Right now HDM is too expensive to become the dominant format.
As is any fledgling format in the early adopter stage.

Time for a history lesson?

If optical media is on the same decline in the video market, then about 5 years from now, optical media will still own 90% of the video market. Just like 5 years after iTunes, optical media still owns 90% of the audio market.

Meaning 90% of studio home video revenue will still come from optical media.

Optical media will be the de facto popular format for years to come.

Not a fair comparison. Let's change the wording. ITunes store was introduced in April 28, 2003, not quite 5 years. It is trying to replace a format that was introduced in 1982. It sold 500 million tracks in ~100 days this summer alone.

Now iTunes itself announced in April that 2 million movies have been sold since December. How many Blu and HD titles have sold in that same time frame? We are not talking about replacing DVD's. We are talking about Bluray and HDDVD. What I am saying, they are starting at the same time, and are doing rather well in comparison.

If Blu or HD wants to be the de facto standard, they will have to beat DD. And right now, DD (yes alot of SD material) has taken well more than 10% market share.

What are you afraid off?

That (HD) VOD becomes a real alternative for J6P?

What you should be afraid off is that according to Warner the HDM market essentially stalled.

Right now HDM is too expensive to become the dominant format.

Well, I heard somewhere that a major tie-breaking studio just chose one of the two formats last Friday, maybe it will have some impact.;)

I'm going to leave names out of this, with respect to forum rules, but it looks very clear to me that certain, consistently vocal HD DVD supporters/insiders are spreading FUD about blu-ray, even though it is clear that the tide has turned. One insider has even, overtly mentioned downloads in his more recent posts as the obvious choice going forward.

It now appears that the theories that Microsoft may have been playing Toshiba and the HD DVD Group all along, could turn out to be true.

Personally I could see myself doing some downloading, but I certainly do not want HDM to go away as Microsoft surely does.

Hopefully we will no longer be duped by the postings of these thinly-veiled, HDM Assassins!So because you don't approve of a content delivery method, it has no place here?

Everyone here is supposed to agree on BD, and proclaim their love for all things Sony going forward, otherwise they are pawns of Microsoft? Wow, blu-ray.com really does a job on some people.

That's the kind of arrogance and self adulation that made many embrace HD DVD instead of BD in the first place.

It remains to be seen whether BD will ever evolve to anything but a PS3 format, much less tackle DVD. Until then I suggest you kindly let us talk about anything we'd like, thanks.

If Blu or HD wants to be the de facto standard, they will have to beat DD. And right now, DD (yes alot of SD material) has taken well more than 10% market share.

That presumes HD enthusiasts will prefer them. Also, you said tracks and not albums in reference to music downloads, are people buying $9-11 album downloads or just cherry-picking $2 songs?

Comparing music to movies isn't a fair comparison. The ipod created a device that enabled people to take their entire music collection with them everywhere they went...the library, bus, driving, working out, whatever. Even if you buy a CD you just rip it to your ipod.

There's no similar situation with digital movies, it's a different animal.

Do you have any links to something detailed about the PS3 copying? All I've been able to find is overview stuff, which is what caused me to surmise that it might be an example of managed copy.

I will see if I can find where I read this.

MarkS.

Comparing music to movies isn't a fair comparison. The ipod created a device that enabled people to take their entire music collection with them everywhere they went...the library, bus, driving, working out, whatever. Even if you buy a CD you just rip it to your ipod.

There's no similar situation with digital movies, it's a different animal.

I have several movies and TV shows on my Pocket PC and now Sony is touting that you can copy movies from your PS3 to your PSP.

Then there is those Zune and IPod video things. Disney charges over 10 bucks for movies on the Ipod...some that you can't get on Blu-ray!:eek:

If Blu or HD wants to be the de facto standard, they will have to beat DD. And right now, DD (yes alot of SD material) has taken well more than 10% market share.
Well, strictly speaking of HD video downloads, iTunes has none of that market.

Second, all your sales examples use iTunes, which is an iPod store. When you limit your growth to iPod owners, HD video downloads will not take off. AppleTV is a flop. If iTunes will ever take off in the HD video downloads market, they need a popular set-top device to sell like hot cakes.

Yes, iTunes is doing well with SD video downloads. That's not the same market; we're in an HD software forum, discussing HD software.

Lastly, you cannot compare track sales vs. album sales. Most physical CDs sold were full length albums, with 10 or more tracks. With 500 million CDs sold each year, that is the equivalent of 5 billion physical tracks. That is billion with a "B".

The fact is that disks are super-cheap and there is no real-world advantage into their disappearance, other than that studios would like to sell movies without creating product, and like the idea of you having them trapped on some hard-drive.

It's also more environmentally friendly. Optical media isn't biodegradable, or reusable for data. Many local recyclers can't process them.

Studios don't want you to share movie with family and friends, sell them at half-price on ebay, and love the idea of your collections life-span being tied to one fallible device. They are saying consumers want this when it's they who truly do. Sidestep the bullshit and buy disks.

Those are the pros of physical media. There are also cons - such as physical damage. You can back up your HTPC with your digital downloads on it, but studios go to great lengths to make sure you can't back up your DVDs. Physical media also takes up a lot more space.

I think people who are excited by downloads should have just bought DIVX ten years back, it's prospects and restrictions are just as dismal.

DIVX was horrible. It combined the worst aspects of physical media with the worst of digital downloads. You had to make a trip to the store to buy it, it wasn't portable, etc. Digital downloads done right are like iTunes, they are much more flexible & powerful.

If the home theater becomes business-card sized IPods and PSP I'm going to take up reading.

That presumes HD enthusiasts will prefer them. Also, you said tracks and not albums in reference to music downloads, are people buying $9-11 album downloads or just cherry-picking $2 songs?

If only HD enthusiasts matter, then it is lost already.

Plus, I am not talking about the amount of money, I am talking growth. No one can say that the growth is not there (itunes). Why do you think Warner would make such a decision? They see what is happening to the audio side and made this choice to help fight it off on the video side.

Which makes me start a fight with myself. Why would Warner care if HDM stalls? If DD, they get their money either way. Unless it is of course about control. With iTunes, they want to control the price. Why did NBC/Universal leave iTunes? They wanted to set the price *and* have a piece of the hardware pie. Now, does that ring bells for anyone on why Sony is the leader on Blu?

Really, being scared of MS is crazy. They will have a while to catch Apple.

As is any fledgling format in the early adopter stage.

Time for a history lesson?

You convienient left out the stalled comment.

You forget that new history is being written.
HDM is facing different odds than CD and later DVD.
Those were revolutions in the music and later the home video market.
CD did replace LP and expanded the music market 5 fold after the LP's demise in it's heydays.

So did DVD.
With the digital disc based formats Music and home video markets became truly mass market.

HD can only hope to replace the current market. Nothing more. DVD is slightly over the top of the bell curve.
And studio's look for new and higher revenues.
Guess where that is going to come from.
Higher pricing levels for HDM and/or new revenue streams and those are download on demands.

Consumers now expect more quality for the same price. Consumers are conditioned to expect that now for several years already by buying new cars with extra's, Lcd screens, Personal computers and game stations.

As is any fledgling format in the early adopter stage.

Time for a history lesson?

Not always. iTunes songs were 99 cents at launch, as they are today. That's one of the advantages of not needing physical media.

Blu-Ray's success over HD-DVD may may be a pyrrhic victory. Sony may make some profits off games and royalties, but the other CE manufacturers and the studios will find BD players and discs to be losing propositions, IMO. The reason is the public loves DVD and especially their low cost (players under $50 and discs $5-10). No way BD can compete with that with players costing $300 and discs costing $25-30. And all of you who think player and movie prices will come down - dream on! It aint gonna happen, not without competition from HD-DVD.

So because you don't approve of a content delivery method, it has no place here?

Everyone here is supposed to agree on BD, and proclaim their love for all things Sony going forward, otherwise they are pawns of Microsoft? Wow, blu-ray.com really does a job on some people.

That's the kind of arrogance and self adulation that made many embrace HD DVD instead of BD in the first place.

It remains to be seen whether BD will ever evolve to anything but a PS3 format, much less tackle DVD. Until then I suggest you kindly let us talk about anything we'd like, thanks.
1. I don't know that I've ever been to blu-ray.com. I'm certainly not a member.

2. Please read both the OP and some of my other posts. I, myself plan to dabble in downloads. I also prefer to have the choice to buy HDM as well.

Comparing music to movies isn't a fair comparison. The ipod created a device that enabled people to take their entire music collection with them everywhere they went...the library, bus, driving, working out, whatever. Even if you buy a CD you just rip it to your ipod.

There's no similar situation with digital movies, it's a different animal.

[Added emphasis in bold mine]

Eric, with all due respect, please stop perpetuating the attempt to rewrite history saying "[the] iPod created the portable music device revolution", when in reality, MP3 players [much better ones for that matter] have been thriving much before "El Steve" spawned the iPod upon us.

I know I am picking nits, but it riles me up when I see these kinds of references.

Hope the day never comes when we read someone say "The iPhone invented a device that allowed people to access the internet everywhere, and take their music, photos and email on the go!". Smartphones and PDAs thrived well before the iPhone [great as it is] reinvented the genre.

Like it or not, straight digital content (not tied to storage media) is the way it's going to go sooner or later. You won't have a choice. Look what's happening with CDs.

But, the limiting factors here are bandwidth and access to the living room. Most people in the world (including the US, which is way behind in terms of bandwidth) simply don't have the bandwidth to be able to download HD content. This will change over time, of course, but it'll be a few years.

And the whole 'lossless audio' argument is moot. 99.99% of consumers don't care about lossless audio.

Not always. iTunes songs were 99 cents at launch, as they are today. That's one of the advantages of not needing physical media.
99 cents plus the cost of an iPod and a computer.

Bill Gates would agree:
http://www.news.com/Its-all-about-software%2C-says-Gates---page-2/2008-7353_3-6224924-2.html?tag=st.next

Does Warner's move to support Blu-ray exclusively mean that HD DVD is dead? If so, what does it mean for Microsoft? Obviously, you've been a big supporter of HD DVD

Gates: The last studio announcement was Paramount going exclusively to HD DVD, so there's been some back-and-forth. It's kind of a classic format war. You have to think of what we are doing with our HD-interactive software as being actually neutral to any of these platforms.

The third platform, which I don't think anybody would dispute will win in the long run, is directly downloading over the Internet. That's the way Mediaroom TV works. That's the way Xbox Live works.

We've got more content with Disney and MGM coming onto that. It's been very, very successful. The convenience of not using media--we've seen that in music. iPod, Zune, your phone--that's how you are going to carry your music.

Your collection, it's up in the cloud. Any new device you get, it's there. That will happen for video too. The actual physical-format battle here isn't really, in some sense, that important. But getting the movies so you can access it through any broadband device--that's the future.

Would you do a Blu-ray add-on for Xbox?

Gates: Third parties can do peripherals for Xbox. Obviously, all of the different optical-drive technologies are supported in Windows. At the core, we are about software and making sure the HD activities get to critical mass.

Frankly I don't care about downloads ; I still want something physical in my hands, you know, the feeling of "owning" something:)

+1:D

And the whole 'lossless audio' argument is moot. 99.99% of consumers don't care about lossless audio.

True but 99.99% of people just use music as a background noise. Almost no one sits down and just listens to music.

Lots of people sit down and watch a movie. Lots of people I know are jumping into home theater now, average people. It's getting more mainstream and much more affordable.

99 cents plus the cost of an iPod and a computer.

Who doesn't have a computer?

As far as the ipod, that's optional. You can burn CDs of the music too.

Since you're nitpicking, why no mention of the cost of the internet connection? Or electricity? :rolleyes:

Well, strictly speaking of HD video downloads, iTunes has none of that market.

Second, all your sales examples use iTunes, which is an iPod store. When you limit your growth to iPod owners, HD video downloads will not take off. AppleTV is a flop. If iTunes will ever take off in the HD video downloads market, they need a popular set-top device to sell like hot cakes.

Yes, iTunes is doing well with SD video downloads. That's not the same market; we're in an HD software forum, discussing HD software.

Lastly, you cannot compare track sales vs. album sales. Most physical CDs sold were full length albums, with 10 or more tracks. With 500 million CDs sold each year, that is the equivalent of 5 billion physical tracks. That is billion with a "B".


I use iTunes because they are doing DD to change the market. Which is what this discussion is about. Do you think that it would be difficult to add HD to iTunes? See you are walking right into my main point. In hours time, iTunes can become a HD download service. Bluray cannot add SD for portables. The DD market can change instantly (in industry time) Bluray cannot.

Back to the album vs track stuff again. I have already addressed this. It is the growth that scares music studios. Do this. Show me one article from the last 6 months that shows that CD's are not declining and that CD's are still the "wave of the future".

It compares because it shows that audio quality does not matter as much as convenience or choice. It compares because a whole generation is raised to believe that the physical media does not mean much. And if studios can earn the same amount of money on a digital sale, then they do not have to worry about leaving 1 million customers blind sided by a business decision.

You are right, HDM is it at the moment. To think that DD is not the 100lb gorilla in the corner, and to think that this format change will happen like DVD's 10 years ago is a little short sided. DVD did not have to fight DD. Blu and HD will. And in today's Ipod generation, I would not bet against DD.

And again as a disclaimer, I am buying HDM. I am playing Devil's Advocate. I am not preaching DD to spite Sony. I was neutral before Warner. I want to watch what I want, when I want. The ipod generation does as well.

Don't underestimate them.

MarkS.

Like it or not, straight digital content (not tied to storage media) is the way it's going to go sooner or later. You won't have a choice. Look what's happening with CDs.

But, the limiting factors here are bandwidth and access to the living room. Most people in the world (including the US, which is way behind in terms of bandwidth) simply don't have the bandwidth to be able to download HD content. This will change over time, of course, but it'll be a few years.

And the whole 'lossless audio' argument is moot. 99.99% of consumers don't care about lossless audio.

You forget that there is already a large infrastructure available to stream 100+ television channels into people homes.

And the analog switch of will make a ton of bandwidth available for all kind off services.

Like it or not, straight digital content (not tied to storage media) is the way it's going to go sooner or later. You won't have a choice. Look what's happening with CDs.

But, the limiting factors here are bandwidth and access to the living room. Most people in the world (including the US, which is way behind in terms of bandwidth) simply don't have the bandwidth to be able to download HD content. This will change over time, of course, but it'll be a few years.

And the whole 'lossless audio' argument is moot. 99.99% of consumers don't care about lossless audio.
The irony of all the attacks that I've been taking is that I'm actually looking forward to the day when I can just pick up the remote, search for any movie I want and download it! Certain content I would certainly want to own, but a vast majority of it I would rather pay 5 bucks for, without leaving my chair, watch 'em on a whim and never watch them again.

For example: A friend or family member comes over and we decide to watch a movie in glorious HD. We can't find anything we agree on in my collection so we order one up. Now that kind of dowload speed is not going to be here tomorrow, but it will come.

But I digress. My point is that I want us all to have the choice to buy physical, HD media if we want to. Though this may be in dispute to some, I am not arrogant enough to think that I can play any part (other than a small one, with my wallet) in the survival of HDM. I just wanted to discuss it. Looks like I'm not, completely alone in that.

Cheers

If the home theater becomes business-card sized IPods and PSP I'm going to take up reading.

So you are saying, that if I can sell you a file, that is burnable by an internal Blu/HD drive, that you can watch on your HT with whatever audio codec you pick and max blu bit rate video, you will boycott it because you could not buy it at the store?

I think that is what people are accusing HDDVD supporters of doing now.

(Mind you, I am not picking on you. All apologies if you think so. I am just pushing a healthy debate)

Those are the pros of physical media. There are also cons - such as physical damage. You can back up your HTPC with your digital downloads on it, but studios go to great lengths to make sure you can't back up your DVDs. Physical media also takes up a lot more space.

It's no harder to rip a DVD than CD now.

With movies on disk there is safety in numbers I have maybe 1400 DVDs, only 2 have ever gone south, on the other had I've dumped many corrupt hard-drives. Disks have physical data-pits, hard-drives use magnetized storage and are easily corruptible. I don't want to loose half-a-dozen movies over "damaged sectors." Also I have CDs that are over twenty years old that I still listen to, and DVDs that are ten, I change drive-based storage every four years (assuming they live so long).

I'll pass.

...

I, myself plan to dabble in downloads. I also prefer to have the choice to buy HDM as well.

Sketcha plans to undermine HD Optical Media by considering downloads as a "possible" choice !! :eek: Oh the horror !! :eek: Burrrn HDM assassin !!



j/k ;) :p :D

See how selectively reading into sound bites without taking the bigger picture into account could attribute wrong motives? ;) I feel that your OP [while benign in intention] was a case of selectively reading into people's posts based on your prejudices.

Time for a HD movie and some quality time with your newborn, perhaps?

Who doesn't have a computer?

As far as the ipod, that's optional. You can burn CDs of the music too.

Since you're nitpicking, why no mention of the cost of the internet connection? Or electricity? :rolleyes:
Exactly, add another $40/month for high-speed broadband.

You forget that there is already a large infrastructure available to stream 100+ television channels into people homes.

And the analog switch of will make a ton of bandwidth available for all kind off services.
You betcha!!! Stoked on that! I'm pissed that my Charter doesn't have any HDOD now! Well, at least nothing other than some crazy, $50 Hockey expeditions! Thank God I can get regular, HD Hockey games for free (almost) with HDNET now!

DVD did not have to fight DD. Blu and HD will. And in today's Ipod generation, I would not bet against DD.
Actually, DVD has more to lose from DD than Blu-Ray. People who buy Blu-Ray want the best in picture and sound. People who buy DVD can download DVD quality video right now.

Bottom line: all talk about HD video downloads controlling the HDM market are best guesses and have no basis in reality. Every single talking point promoting HD video downloads is based on technology that has yet to hit the market, hit mass market price points, and gain a lick of market share.

I don't live in the future; I live in the present.

Exactly, add another $40/month for high-speed broadband.

That is a straw-man argument.

A) you probably have access already and it is used for other things. Doubt you will add access just for DD.
B) That is assuming that it has to come across the internet. One service (XStreamerHD) has come up with another idea. (Mind you we do not know what it will cost yet).

So you are saying, that if I can sell you a file, that is burnable by an internal Blu/HD drive, that you can watch on your HT with whatever audio codec you pick and max blu bit rate video, you will boycott it because you could not buy it at the store?

I think that is what people are accusing HDDVD supporters of doing now.

(Mind you, I am not picking on you. All apologies if you think so. I am just pushing a healthy debate)

Well, for one I use a front projector for movie watching and don't have a net connection attached to it, so downloads won't be convenient. As I already mentioned I find drive storage infinitely more corruptible that pressed media and burned optical media.

I also think studios are pushing this for all the wrong reasons.

Sketcha plans to undermine HD Optical Media by considering downloads as a "possible" choice !! :eek: Oh the horror !! :eek: Burrrn HDM assassin !!



j/k ;) :p :D

See how selectively reading into sound bites without taking the bigger picture into account could attribute wrong motives? ;) I feel that your OP [while benign in intention] was a case of selectively reading into people's posts based on your prejudices.

Time for a HD movie and some quality time with your newborn, perhaps?
I appreciate the good humored criticism, raaj. But believe me, the posters I am talking about do not require any "selective reading."

Enjoy your flick! I've gotta' get back to work... at the office... where I can check back in on AVS! :D

a microsoft hd download is less than 6 gigs. Smaller than a dvd. This is the future. I hope not.

Actually, DVD has more to lose from DD than Blu-Ray. People who buy Blu-Ray want the best in picture and sound. People who buy DVD can download DVD quality video right now.

How soon till I can match Blu then? What if I can make it to where only HD Enthusiasts with Calibrated TV's (not sold by Walmart) can tell the difference? What if that happens this year? What if it is announced next week?

Again, we are discussing the future of HDM. By the end of the year, I feel that HD downloads will be able to pass the 'Wal-mart' test.

MarkS.

Well, for one I use a front projector for movie watching and don't have a net connection attached to it, so downloads won't be convenient. As I already mentioned I find drive storage infinitely more corruptible that pressed media and burned optical media.

I also think studios are pushing this for all the wrong reasons.

But I said you will be able to press your own Bluray. At that point, you are only missing the 'art'. That is the future I see, and I do not see it taking that long.

Hey, right now I am with you. I don't care who wins as long as I *love* the picture I am seeing. And right now I am in Heaven. I just cannot overlook the DD future.

Oh, and I am in a rural area with very extremely limited rental/purchase options. DD will be a valid alternative for me.

MarkS.

Ditto... I don't want any insiders that work for Microsoft trying to convince me that low bitrate, low bandwidth x-box 360 downloads are the wave of the future.. Already, Comcast has HD video on demand that look like crap in comparison to actual real 1080p24 content found on Blu-ray and current HD-DVD... I like owning my movies and I like being able to do with them what I please as well...

Nobody has done what you describe... do you also accuse Apple of convincing you that 128kbps AAC is the wave of the future? Someone offers you an option and you hate on them... real clever fellow you are.

Exactly, add another $40/month for high-speed broadband.


He that's the retail price of a single br release.

And new movies show up on movie channels before the get released on disc.

HDM was always facing a steep mountain to climbed.

I fear the choice for blu ray just because some extra space and bandwidth (that proved hardly an advantage quality wise) killed the less expensive format that had a better chance for mass market adoption.

Now HDM is facing a mountain with 20kg of rocks in the backpack.

I took that climb back then when DVD emerged. It wasn't snowing and the wind wasn't doing 60mph head on back then.

I don't have a problem with downloads as long as they coexist with an optical format. The problem is that MSFT wants to controls all access so they don't what any physical media.

Take a look at your sig...

MSFT sells games on Xbox360 via DVD... they don't own any movie studios so they can't do anything the content supplier does not agree to. If they were so kee to get rid of all physical media, why not start with game discs which they can control... they would really love that because that would force all owners onto xbox live subscriptions thus giving them a guaranteed cash flow... I've not heard of this being planned. Quit with the paranoia.

The only company that can control access to your movie viewing is Sony who both make hardware and own content... guess what? Sony aint gonna kill BD when they set up their PSN download service. Sony is offering you a choice... nobody so far has put a gun to your head and forced you to download a thing. You don't think Sony has learnt a lesson from it's loss to Apple in the portable music arena? You think they might be anticipating the possibility of DD popularity and at the same time make some money on it ?

The people that embraced mp3 and digital dowloads are an entirely new group of consumers. Mostly young people and they will not adhire to our outdated opinion of how an entertainment market should look like.

Some 15 year olds have larger music collections on their iPod than audiophiles who spend over 50k on a system and are having a minute collection of music that is limited to audiophile recordings deemed worthy enough to listen to.

We are facing an entirely new generation of future consumers that are now growing up in a digital download world.

And how much did these 15 year olds pay for their downloaded Music collection which is bigger than audiophiles who have 50K to burn? Oh, they are 15... probably they paid $0.00 per song. Or they cherry picked 3 songs out of an album for $3.00.

Do you think these people would really be willing to pay $20 for a downloaded movie? Do you think MP3s would be as successful as CDs, if MP3s could only bought as full albums for $13.00, and you could only play it on one machine?

Hell no it wouldnt. MP3s have a lot of advantages over their CD counterparts, and the only sacrifice is quality. Even with all its advantages, CDs bring in more money than MP3s. And MP3s are killing the industry. Is that what movie studios want for their industry?

VOD, does not have any advantages over Physical media, other than instant access. VOD has plenty of disadvantages over Physical media.

You have your opinion and that's about all you have. Proven as fud? Offer your proof. They spent a lot on hd dvd? How much? And why is there a requirement for the drive to be 12x? Bluray drives on the ps3 are 2X and sorry, to break this to you, games don't load 6X times slower on the ps3.

Funny nobody has corrected you so far.

By your logic, CDs are faster than DVD as they had 52X speed burners and DVD is still at 18X. You really need to get up to speed on read rates of the various media.

Exactly, add another $40/month for high-speed broadband.

So in a year, that is paying $480. ;) For those complaining they cannot get a br player for $99, I certainly don't see them justifying recurring annual payments of $480 to download movies w/o coming off as severely hypocritical.

A track can be anything from a $0.99 single track on iTunes to a $2.99 ringtone.

But since the average CD has 10 tracks, sales are actually more like:

5 Billion Physical Tracks vs. 800 Million Digital Tracks

Comparing apples to apples, physical media still dominates.

How many of those CDs are singles? Nobody is trying to paint the picture that physical media doesn't dominate, merely that they are losing their dominance.

99 cents plus the cost of an iPod and a computer.

What about the cost of HDM? Players/displays/speakers/amplification grow on trees do they? And even if they did grow on trees, what about the cost of water and fertilizer and labor to grow and harvest those goodies?

And new movies show up on movie channels before the get released on disc.
Proof?

Comparing music to movies isn't a fair comparison. The ipod created a device that enabled people to take their entire music collection with them everywhere they went...the library, bus, driving, working out, whatever. Even if you buy a CD you just rip it to your ipod.

There's no similar situation with digital movies, it's a different animal.

People can't rip DVDs to their iPODs and Zunes? Let me tell you about this bridge I'm selling....:D

True but 99.99% of people just use music as a background noise. Almost no one sits down and just listens to music.

Lots of people sit down and watch a movie. Lots of people I know are jumping into home theater now, average people. It's getting more mainstream and much more affordable.

You're missing the point. 99.99% of people can not tell the difference between a VBR MP3 encoded at an average bit rate of 256 and a CD (which uses 7 times the data). There's simply no need for lossless audio. It's a bullet point that techies like to argue about. High quality compressed audio is all that's needed.

We're talking about lossless audio vs high quality compressed audio (which I've never seen anyone able to distinguish between in a double blind volume matched test).

And how much did these 15 year olds pay for their downloaded Music collection which is bigger than audiophiles who have 50K to burn? Oh, they are 15... probably they paid $0.00 per song. Or they cherry picked 3 songs out of an album for $3.00.

Do you think these people would really be willing to pay $20 for a downloaded movie? Do you think MP3s would be as successful as CDs, if MP3s could only bought as full albums for $13.00, and you could only play it on one machine?

Hell no it wouldnt. MP3s have a lot of advantages over their CD counterparts, and the only sacrifice is quality. Even with all its advantages, CDs bring in more money than MP3s. And MP3s are killing the industry. Is that what movie studios want for their industry?

VOD, does not have any advantages over Physical media, other than instant access. VOD has plenty of disadvantages over Physical media.

Do you expect this future generation to start buying $30..40 blu ray discs?

Those are another group of customers lost to sustain a viable HDM market.

So in a year, that is paying $480. ;) For those complaining they cannot get a br player for $99, I certainly don't see them justifying recurring annual payments of $480 to download movies w/o coming off as severely hypocritical.

Judging by just how many mass consumers have cable/satellite/fiber subscriptions, wireless phone subscriptions, newspaper subscriptions and the like, I think the consensus is recurring costs in small quantities is less troublesome than one time costs in large quantities.

Given the way most consumers use credit cards, I don't see that trend vanishing in the night.

Proof?

look into your movie channel program guide.

It's no harder to rip a DVD than CD now.

With movies on disk there is safety in numbers I have maybe 1400 DVDs, only 2 have ever gone south, on the other had I've dumped many corrupt hard-drives. Disks have physical data-pits, hard-drives use magnetized storage and are easily corruptible. I don't want to loose half-a-dozen movies over "damaged sectors." Also I have CDs that are over twenty years old that I still listen to, and DVDs that are ten, I change drive-based storage every four years (assuming they live so long).

I'll pass.

It's not hard to rip a DVD in many cases, but not always. (try a recent Sony release like Casino Royale for a challenge) The point is studios don't want you ripping one at all, under any circumstances! BD furthers that cause. The trend in DD is actually going the other direction. iTunes sells many DRM free songs now, for example.

As far as drive failures... it's called raid 5. You should check into it. Hard drives are a wear item, like brakes on your car. Eventually they die. But there's absolutely no reason you should lose data because of it.

Do you expect this future generation to start buying $30..40 blu ray discs?

Those are another group of customers lost to sustain a viable HDM market.

Yes

1) People are used to paying for Movies on disc. And BD discs will come down in price if it cannot sustain its price.

2) People who download music are used to paying Free or $2-$3 for all the hit songs on an album. Why would they pay $20-$30 per movie download? Or are movie studios going to sell Movies in 5 minute chunks for $1... so these people can get the best parts for the movie for $5.00.

...I think the consensus is recurring costs in small quantities is less troublesome than one time costs in large quantities.

So it seems a poll is in order (if people really want to weigh the pros/cons). What would you rather pay? $300 once for a br player or $2400 over the course of 5 yrs ($480 annually) to pay for the service that would make movie downloads practical.

Seems like you would just be better off putting the $300 on a CC, imo.

And how much did these 15 year olds pay for their downloaded Music collection which is bigger than audiophiles who have 50K to burn? Oh, they are 15... probably they paid $0.00 per song. Or they cherry picked 3 songs out of an album for $3.00.

Do you think these people would really be willing to pay $20 for a downloaded movie? Do you think MP3s would be as successful as CDs, if MP3s could only bought as full albums for $13.00, and you could only play it on one machine?

Hell no it wouldnt. MP3s have a lot of advantages over their CD counterparts, and the only sacrifice is quality. Even with all its advantages, CDs bring in more money than MP3s. And MP3s are killing the industry. Is that what movie studios want for their industry?

VOD, does not have any advantages over Physical media, other than instant access. VOD has plenty of disadvantages over Physical media.


According to the attention they've been paying to digital downloads, yes they do.

It cuts replication plants, royalties on optical discs, distribution costs and printing costs right out of the equation.

Originally Posted by moretothepoint
You have your opinion and that's about all you have. Proven as fud? Offer your proof. They spent a lot on hd dvd? How much? And why is there a requirement for the drive to be 12x? Bluray drives on the ps3 are 2X and sorry, to break this to you, games don't load 6X times slower on the ps3.

Sorry, I won't recap the entire insider thread to offer you proof. Do it yourself.

As a game designer, I'm sorry, but you don't know what you are talking about. The 360 was designed with a 12x DVD drive (which is why it can be loud) to improve load times. That means games were designed, before the 360 was even released, to depend on that load time. That's why now, information is placed specifically in certain places on a disc depending on how fast it will load at max spin. When you have games that stream content while playing, on the fly, you design a game to depend on that very specific speed or it breaks your game.

The PS3 is 2x, and actually does load stuff much slower, off the drive, than the 360. There are many examples of this on released games. It compensates for this by allowing games to install data to the hard drive.

Now if you want to argue that Microsoft should have added an HD DVD drive to the launch 360, then you need to realize if they had, they would have waited a year (ps3) launch to put it out, and wouldn't have half the momentum against Sony right now in the game world. Releasing the 360 when they did was the best decision Microsoft has done since it entered games.

And how much did these 15 year olds pay for their downloaded Music collection which is bigger than audiophiles who have 50K to burn? Oh, they are 15... probably they paid $0.00 per song. Or they cherry picked 3 songs out of an album for $3.00.

15 year olds aren't allowed to have allowances? Parents aren't allowed to buy music for their children? Ever heard of iTunes gift cards? Ever heard of ripping CDs onto your iPod? You do know there exists legit free music on the net don't you? So many questions to ask yourself. Fact is, iTunes is making a lot of money in the DD arena.

Do you think these people would really be willing to pay $20 for a downloaded movie? Do you think MP3s would be as successful as CDs, if MP3s could only bought as full albums for $13.00, and you could only play it on one machine?

Do you think these people would be willing to pay $10 for a movie ticket... per person GASP! ? Do you think MP3s whose inherent advantage is that it can be spliced into individual files for each track would throw away that ability when it is available from their competitor in the form of CD singles? Ditto for CDs advantage of being able to played on many machines. I really don't understand the logic behind your points... it's like saying "do you really think Cars would be a popular form of transport if it wasn't for the ability to use up a tank of fuel at your own pace?"

MP3s have a lot of advantages over their CD counterparts, and the only sacrifice is quality. Even with all its advantages, CDs bring in more money than MP3s. And MP3s are killing the industry. Is that what movie studios want for their industry?

How are MP3s killing the industry? MP3s (in the generic term) are a new tech, people require time to make transitions. As each day passes and more and more HT receivers and automobiles have inputs for people to hook up their portable media players, people who aren't concerned with 128kbps vs PCM will consider it viable. You speak as though all MP3s are pirated.

VOD, does not have any advantages over Physical media, other than instant access. VOD has plenty of disadvantages over Physical media.

Who says people have room for only 1 component in their HT rack? Having VOD does not mean you have to burn your HDM collection. Also, to say something has no advantages over something else and then throw in an "except" clause kind of defeats your point.

Cinema tickets have disadvantages as well, maybe we should get rid of them as well... after all they don't have any advantages over Physical media, other than having movies screened earlier (not always but usually), no investment in a dedicated room and equipment, ability to accommodate large groups, eat popcorn and snacks and have drinks and then get up and leave because someone else will clean up after you, possibility of meeting a smoking hot lady friend etc. etc.

BTW what is it exactly that you fear?

The 360 was designed with a 12x DVD drive (which is why it can be loud) to improve load times. That means games were designed, before the 360 was even released, to depend on that load time.



The "12x dvd" theory is pretty well debunked since it is a CAV design. It may be "fastest", but only for material stored at the outer edge of the disc. Anywhere else, it will quite easily end up slower than even a "mere" 2x CLV br drive. For a "large" game a dvd-based game will have access speeds all over the map, while a br-based game of the same size would essentially occupy only a small strip on the disc, which will stream equally fast regardless of where it is on the disc. So quite easily it will beat the dvd drive scenario in sheer bitrate AND access time (...and w/o all of the noise, to boot).

So it seems a poll is in order (if people really want to weigh the pros/cons). What would you rather pay? $300 once for a br player or $2400 over the course of 5 yrs ($480 annually) to pay for the service that would make movie downloads practical.

Seems like you would just be better off putting the $300 on a CC, imo.

Which would be essentially the same exact thing.

I've purchased MP3s for years and have a rather large library of songs I can listen to anywhere in my home thanks to my media extenders, I can carry on either the iPOD or Zune we have or burn to CD or DVD and play on any supporting player. It's not as restrictive as some want to suggest it is.

One of the best things about it is, I don't have to buy a full album with 4 or more songs I don't care to hear if 1 or 2 tracks is all that I like. Do I still buy full albums or CDs? Both, from time to time, when the craftsmanship of the artist justifies it. However, when artists treat their albums as disposable and put out 1 or 2 hits amongst a whole album of junk, I buy the 1 or 2 hits.

Video Digital downloads wouldn't just be rentals. Purchases and copy will be available for people to burn their own discs if they choose to do so, as well as renting on demand as opposed to a subscription plan.

Digitally distributed movies wouldn't need new storage platforms and players every 10 years or so to increase the quality, the file will always be the same size you bought it as, and you can add storage capacity as you build your library. All you need is a computer, and most people have and will continue to have computers.

Like I've said before, I like having physical media myself and always will. I love the artwork for one (art graduate - graphic design). And I'm not trying to scare anyone into thinking that money spent on HD discs would be wasted, I still spend money on them after all and plan to continue.

But digital distribution is coming and the forces behind it are doing everything in their power to get us there sooner rather than later.

The way I look at it, the physical media isn't going away, the way in which we get it and play it back is.

It's pretty much inevitable, and it isn't all bad.

But I said you will be able to press your own Bluray. At that point, you are only missing the 'art'. That is the future I see, and I do not see it taking that long.

Hey, right now I am with you. I don't care who wins as long as I *love* the picture I am seeing. And right now I am in Heaven. I just cannot overlook the DD future.

Oh, and I am in a rural area with very extremely limited rental/purchase options. DD will be a valid alternative for me.

MarkS.

The fail-rate of burned media is much greater than pressed media. Pressed media utilizes actual data-pits, burned media just simulates groves like a photocopy. They don't last, and I've dumped a buttload of DVD-Rs that were fine when first burned, then in a couple years pfft. I'd rather have the professionally produced disk than be playing musical hard-drive and waste a lot of time burning platters when a Blu-ray costs $19 for which you get the disk, the art, case, and the peace of mind that you don't have to be constantly backing up your movie.

When I buy a DVD or HDM that's flawed, I send it back, when I buy a spindle of buggy DVDs, I'm SOL, particularly if I don't find out immediately.

Frankly I don't think I should have to be my own movie-media factory to own movies when the studios do a much better job. I can see why they'd like to get me to do the heavy-lifting, but I'm not if I can help it.

The "12x dvd" theory is pretty well debunked since it is a CAV design. It may be "fastest", but only for material stored at the outer edge of the disc. Anywhere else, it will quite easily end up slower than even a "mere" 2x CLV br drive. For a "large" game a dvd-based game will have access speeds all over the map, while a br-based game of the same size would essentially occupy only a small strip on the disc, which will stream equally fast regardless of where it is on the disc. So quite easily it will beat the dvd drive scenario in sheer bitrate AND access time (...and w/o all of the noise, to boot).

As I understand it PS3 games rely on downloading some information off the disc to the hard drive to speed along load times, similar to PC games.

Has that changed?

...spreading FUD about blu-ray, even though it is clear that the tide has turned. One insider has even, overtly mentioned downloads in his more recent posts as the obvious choice going forward.

It now appears that the theories that Microsoft may have been playing Toshiba and the HD DVD Group all along, could turn out to be true.

Personally I could see myself doing some downloading, but I certainly do not want HDM to go away as Microsoft surely does.

Hopefully we will no longer be duped by the postings of these thinly-veiled, HDM Assassins!Interesting.

I would only add that a bullet point on a slide ("2008 Pivotal Year for High Definition Disc Uptake") presented at a recent BDA meeting stated:

Start planning to use high def discs as a stepping stone to digital delivery

;)

I don't think anyone ever tried to argue that Xbox Live Movie downloads are a viable replacement for current HDM. They serve their purpose. People forget that most HDTV owners can't do/can't notice 1080p.

But Xbox movies do look damn good. Far better than DVD. And I will be using it until VuDu or xtremeHD or any of the other announced DD services just recently start ramping up.

What I find hilarious is that somehow you guys always assume DD must inherently mean low bitrate. There is nothing to say that is true. Someone could easily offer a 100 mb/s movie download service. You would just have to have a long buffer time and fast connection.

And will DD have all the extras like Directors Commentaries, The Making Of, Deleted Scenes, PiP, Web Enabled Content, Lossless audio, DTS HD MA, 7.1 surround, etc that so many have said so much about for so long in regards to what format gives you more? That’s why most people don’t understand the DD comments when there is a better option available NOW and not years down the road.

Sure, for xboxers with a 32 inch screen @720 from 11 feet they will be better that non-up scaled DVD, but that still fails to acknowledge the OP comments since some HD-DVD or former HD-DVD proponents seem to be saying that all the above just doesn’t mater anymore. That leaves the rest of us to wonder how you could back HD-DVD and now none of the reasons people adopted HD-DVD over BD like PiP and Web Enabled Content mattered in the first place.

If you look at it like this it seems to be sour grapes. Like the RED plane has been grounded, but I’m not riding in a BLU plane, I’m taking the BUS.

Boggle..

So it seems a poll is in order (if people really want to weigh the pros/cons). What would you rather pay? $300 once for a br player or $2400 over the course of 5 yrs ($480 annually) to pay for the service that would make movie downloads practical.

Seems like you would just be better off putting the $300 on a CC, imo.

And don't forget an option to include a monthly HDM budget.

5 HDM releases each month can cost as much as $200

I'm not going to watch the 5 freebees that came in the deal over and over again the next 5 years.

Which would be essentially the same exact thing.

I don't know about you, but $300 and $2400 does not seem to be the same thing. Certainly, different people will have different needs which would justify both kinds of formats existing.

However, downloading movies isn't as "cheap" as some are suggesting. That was the point I was making. It's not going to come out as a budget option even against a traditional br player. So if $99 is all you can justify for movie playback, then clearly those people should just stick with dvd. They would not be able to make a significant contribution to getting a new format off the ground in the first place, at that rate.

But digital distribution is coming and the forces behind it are doing everything in their power to get us there sooner rather than later.

The way I look at it, the physical media isn't going away, the way in which we get it and play it back is.

It's pretty much inevitable, and it isn't all bad.

What if not enough people buy it to offset the cash flow that optical media was/is bringing in? Studios may prefer the idea, but do you really think they will dry-up the profits of pressed media as long as it remains profitable?

I think a lot of people are going on the presumption that because optical media profits are down, that they are no longer profitable. It's still a huge, valuable industry.

And don't forget an option to include a monthly HDM budget.

5 HDM releases each month can cost as much as $200

I'm not going to watch the 5 freebees that came in the deal over and over again the next 5 years.

You'll be paying for new titles, either way. Downloading movies won't be "free", unless you are proposing a pirated content philosophy. ;)

The Microsoft hate on this site is so tired and lame.

One could go into all the reasons that it's really stupid to suggest MS is trying to assasinate HDM, but it's all been said before.

There can be no doubt that DD HD media is the the way forward but until,

a) the quality of said dl's can match or outdo BD/HD DVD(including extra's and interactivity)
b) I can watch what I want at a whim. Which I can do with physical media.

and

c) I dont have to pay and re-download a movie every time I want to watch it.

I'm not interested.

And thats before we get into the reliability of hard-drives/static memory and the fatness of my available internet connection.

As a gadget freak, I'm dying for the day that DD can give me all of the above but, lets not kid ourselves, none of this happening in the next 2-5 years.

I dont know how it is in the US but here in the UK no-one's willing to stump up the cost of laying down the fibre-optic infrastructure, nationwide, required to make this a reality. Power companies have been experimenting with broadband over power lines for at least the last 10 years with no cost effective breakthrough so far.

So until then, if, pq and aq are your thing - which I believe this forum is all about - then physical media is how it will have to be for the foreseeable future.

I also believe comparing music downloads to video downloads is a fallacy. The ears are much more forgiving than the eyes.

Thats my tuppence worth.

I have been laughing at all the sour grapes HD DVD folks that all of a sudden start spinning this BS download thing.... WHat a huge load of crap. Funny how this all gained popularity thanks to Warner nailing shut the coffin on HD DVD.

Just embrace the 'other' format that beat out yours, enjoy the HD video and more discs with lossless sound and forget about how to dream up new, mind-bogglingarguments designed to do nothing but cause trouble.

I see some folks that throw around terms like digital distribution, economics of such, etc, etc when it clear they have no idea or experience in what they are even talking about.... Just complete puffery. Just accept HD DVD lost and accept things as they are.... lets taper down the crap.

Downloads instead of BD discs.....what a laugh.

As I understand it PS3 games rely on downloading some information off the disc to the hard drive to speed along load times, similar to PC games.

Has that changed?

The degree that this occurs varies depending on the game. It is not really a cut and dried thing- some games install a big chunk to hdd, some don't use it at all, and then there are all the matter of stages in between). Agreed though, that hdd use has potential benefits that exceed either kind of disc format, anyway. ;)

The point behind my comments is that comparing disc format to disc format, the "12x dvd" isn't as almighty as some suggest.

I have been laughing at all the sour grapes HD DVD folks that all of a sudden start spinning this BS download thing.... WHat a huge load of crap. Funny how this all gained popularity thanks to Warner nailing shut the coffin on HD DVD.

Just embrace the 'other' format thar beat out yours, enjoy the HD video and more discs with lossless sound and forget about how to dream up new, mind-numbing arguments designed to do nothing but cause trouble.

Downloads instead of BD discs.....what a laugh.

Why do you even care?

if they can tell me when i can get 1080p24 downloads with lossless audio i'll be happy to listen. not interested in anything less. we have all that now with HDM.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=973209

With bitrates in excess of 80 Mbps! ... in 1080p (MPEG-2 and x.264) with 7.1 channels of lossless DTS-HD Master Audio (96kHz/24bits) to your home via satellite

$2100 BD players are killing BD.I don't think 300-350 dollar Funai players are going to help either.

Normal consumer like to have the disk that play in their car, bedroom, living room even bathroom. or bring it to their friend's house. Can a download do that? There are so many issue HD download need to overcome.
Can you do any of those things with a Blu-ray or non-combo HD DVD? Nope, unless you have HD players in all those rooms, at your friends house and in your car. Good luck on that. ;)

Perhaps we will have it by 2012.
It's just picking up speed now, and I've been saying all along that it will be 3 or 4 years before it's mainstream.
How many audiophiles do you know who rave about iTunes and mp3s?
I'm not big on the lossy downloads either, but the recent changes to eliminating the DRM was a great first step. If sales pick up, maybe more than a few small distributors will start to offer DRM-free, uncompressed WAV files. I would love that!

Regardless, what percentage of the US market would be classified as "audiophiles"? It's has to be a pretty darn tiny percentage. That's why DVD-A and SACD are a niche product, but I definitely think Blu-ray and HD DVD will be more popular than the HD audio formats.
The rise of DD for movies will be just like the rise of music downloads, a tradeoff of convenience for quality.
The last few years of market performance has clearly demonstrated that today's consumers are willing to make that trade. Like it or not, it's the way it is. The niche customers simply do not drive the marketplace. Right, wrong, or indifferent, that's the way it is.

I agree some of this download talk is clogging up the optical disc forums, it's probably more appropriate in the HDTV section.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=973209

$399 set-top box and $50-100/month svc...care to guess how that will factor amongst the fugitives from a product targeting $99 for a player? Will they resist the temptation to compress/strip the piss out their programming on an 80 Mb/s feed, anyway? C'mon, this is satellite, we're talking about here. ;)

I have been laughing at all the sour grapes HD DVD folks that all of a sudden start spinning this BS download thing.... WHat a huge load of crap. Funny how this all gained popularity thanks to Warner nailing shut the coffin on HD DVD.

Just embrace the 'other' format that beat out yours, enjoy the HD video and more discs with lossless sound and forget about how to dream up new, mind-bogglingarguments designed to do nothing but cause trouble.

I see some folks that throw around terms like digital distribution, economics of such, etc, etc when it clear they have no idea or experience in what they are even talking about.... Just complete puffery. Just accept HD DVD lost and accept things as they are.... lets taper down the crap.

Downloads instead of BD discs.....what a laugh.

Making friends as usual I see.:rolleyes:

I have no issue with HD DVD losing at this point, the best thing for it to do now is die fast, but I think downloads are DIVX all over again. What surprises and alarms me is the people who seem all revved up to support it.

'skogan,' et al: the thing that I think bothers people about Microsoft/HD-DVD/downloads is that it has all been spun by the proselytizers of Redmond around the forums as "about the consumer." If it were--you wouldn't get much complaining from folks. But some folks are smart enough to know better. As in, "Hey, this from the company that is trying to turn everything from a 'you buy it-you own it' model to subscriptions and big-brother style monitoring/data mining."

I use the Xbox Live HD movie download service...its great. But there's no way in hell I want a megalithic corp keeping its hooks in MY movies and watching my viewing habits so they can throw ads up on my screen and sell my info to their 'partners'. Microsoft wrote/patented code to manipulate the commercial-skip function of DVRs and turn it into forced commercial feeds. They are looking to sell ads as their next big business venture ala Google. They only offered their services and codec expertise as a way to sugar-coat that what they're REALLY interested in is moving us from a movie collector culture and fair use to a subscription model where they are the gateway and can force more marketing down our throats when we want to watch a commercial-free film.

If Microsoft were the 'power to the people' software company of yore (if that was ever anything but a myth), you'd have no argument from many of us...but look at their overall business strategies and you have to admit, it smells fishy.

And no I don't like the closed system of AAC on iTunes, either. But who's dictating that--Apple or the music industry? Most people who are getting alarmed at Apple's anti-consumer protectionism of late are doing so by pointing out how 'Microsoft' they've become.

And will DD have all the extras like Directors Commentaries, The Making Of, Deleted Scenes, PiP, Web Enabled Content, Lossless audio, DTS HD MA, 7.1 surround, etc that so many have said so much about for so long in regards to what format gives you more? That’s why most people don’t understand the DD comments when there is a better option available NOW and not years down the road.

Sure, for xboxers with a 32 inch screen @720 from 11 feet they will be better that non-up scaled DVD, but that still fails to acknowledge the OP comments since some HD-DVD or former HD-DVD proponents seem to be saying that all the above just doesn’t mater anymore. That leaves the rest of us to wonder how you could back HD-DVD and now none of the reasons people adopted HD-DVD over BD like PiP and Web Enabled Content mattered in the first place.

If you look at it like this it seems to be sour grapes. Like the RED plane has been grounded, but I’m not riding in a BLU plane, I’m taking the BUS.

Boggle..

As all that stuff is only software on a disc in the first, yes it would be absolutely possible via digital distribution. PiP may require dual tuners, but depending on the playback device it would be possible.

Not everyone is a former HD DVD proponent either, quite a few still believe that HD DVD was the better format and the standard it set is relevant, but the end of the format war has naturally opened up conversations among all parties surrounding home video about DD as the future.

For most discussing this it isn't about sour grapes, it's considering what the future may bring.

As this is the HDTV software forum, and DD would undoubtedly be software and encompass HD this should be the place for that kind of talk. However, because of recent events and their effects on people, the time might not be the best.

And will DD have all the extras like Directors Commentaries, The Making Of, Deleted Scenes, PiP, Web Enabled Content, Lossless audio, DTS HD MA, 7.1 surround, etc that so many have said so much about for so long in regards to what format gives you more? That’s why most people don’t understand the DD comments when there is a better option available NOW and not years down the road.





Eventually it will have all that stuff, yes. On demand. You add it to your shopping cart and design your own purchase. That's the goal. You will also likely be able to choose your resolution and bitrate, depending on download speeds.

However, because of recent events and their effects on people, the time might not be the best.

The timing is certainly suspect.

The "12x dvd" theory is pretty well debunked since it is a CAV design. It may be "fastest", but only for material stored at the outer edge of the disc. Anywhere else, it will quite easily end up slower than even a "mere" 2x CLV br drive. For a "large" game a dvd-based game will have access speeds all over the map, while a br-based game of the same size would essentially occupy only a small strip on the disc, which will stream equally fast regardless of where it is on the disc. So quite easily it will beat the dvd drive scenario in sheer bitrate AND access time (...and w/o all of the noise, to boot).

I am not sure what you are getting at. You just repeated everything I said in a different way.

The bottom line is that 12x DVD, for the most part, streams data much faster, when needed, than first gen HD DVD/BD drives. 12x DVD has always been the major reason hd dvd was not used for games, but there are many others, including cost. They can most likely make 12x DVD HD DVD drives now, but what's the point.

The timing is certainly suspect.

Tell that to companies doing there announcments about possible future HD VOD services at CES.

$399 set-top box and $50-100/month svc...care to guess how that will factor amongst the fugitives from a product targeting $99 for a player? Will they resist the temptation to compress/strip the piss out their programming on an 80 Mb/s feed, anyway? C'mon, this is satellite, we're talking about here. ;)

I don't think you understand how sat works. Most DBS sat have 15 transmitters and leasing one cost about $4 mil annually. One transmitter can push 36Mbps. That's 11TB per month. Obviously there is not enough content but 11TB per month of bandwidth is more than enough to loop put every HD DVD & BD title on a weekly loop with 0% drop in quality.

Why would they compress it? The feed goes out no matter what. The problem with DirecTV is they are trying a realtime system. So they take a sat with about 500Mbps of bandwidth and try to crap 700+ realtime channels on it. Obviosuly they are now using 4 sats but still 700+ channels. They have 114 markets and put 3-4 locals on each plus another 260 nationwide channels and HD on demand, etc.

This system has nothing to do with a direcTV/Dish type model. Instead it is simply a pipe pushing a constant stream of content (11Terabytes). Obviously you can't grab it all so your box just grabs what you like from the stream.

As far as price the company has said they are pursuing a PURCHASE, RENTAL, AND SUBSCRIPTION model. 3 choices. For me I see it is a replacement for netflix so would love a subscription model. Other may like to just have access to a constantly rotating stream of hundreds of HD movies of which 25-100 are available instantly anywhere in your house. Others still may want to just buy the movies with no trips to the store and use the media server to push them to any HD set in their house.

Nowhere in the press conference did they say $50-$100 monthly. Netflix offers me about 20 movies a month for $24.95 with much higher overhead (snail mail, 12 warehouses, broken discs, theft, hundreds of employees). Why couldn't they offer me a similar system? Setup a queue and watch 20 movies a month for $24.95.

'skogan,' the thing that I think bothers people about Microsoft/HD-DVD/downloads is that it has all been spun by the proselytizers of Redmond around the forums as "about the consumer." If it were--you wouldn't get much complaining from folks. But some folks are smart enough to know better. As in, "Hey, this from the company that is trying to turn everything from a 'you buy it-you own it' model to subscriptions and big-brother style monitoring/data mining."

I use the Xbox Live HD movie download service...its great. But there's no way in hell I want a megalithic corp keeping its hooks in MY movies and watching my viewing habits so they can throw ads up on my screen and sell my info to their 'partners'. Microsoft wrote/patented code to manipulate the commercial-skip function of DVRs and turn it into forced commercial feeds. They are looking to sell ads as their next big business venture ala Google. They only offered their services and codec expertise as a way to sugar-coat that what they're REALLY interested in is moving us from a movie collector culture and fair use to a subscription model where they are the gateway and can force more marketing down our throats when we want to watch a commercial-free film.

If Microsoft were the 'power to the people' software company of yore (if that was ever anything but a myth), you'd have no argument from many of us...but look at their overall business strategies and you have to admit, it smells fishy.

Do some reading up on digital distribution and the parties investing into making it happen and you might be surprised to see who's involved.

Microsoft for better or worse has been being used as a straw man for all the anti-download/DD propaganda. But they're presence in DD would be as a software solution provider (codecs and the like) and distributor/vendor (video store).

The parties you should really be concerned about are those who create and control the actual content: Hollywood studios. They want a new delivery model to drive profit and many are already investing in DD. If HD discs don't move quick enough for them, they'll move on.

Consumers are pretty much in the proverbial pickle until Hollywood as a whole figures out just what they want to do and hold to it.

After reading several threads and CES news reports concerning the WB annoucement and the pending demise of HD-DVD here are my thoughts:

1) I think WB realize the hard disc HD movie market will never reach the scale of SD-DVD without a clear choice for consumers. A 100% Studio backing of Blu-Ray is their best hope of a expanding revenue stream for a hard disc HD market. I think BluRay will peak at 5 million players within a couple years, but will never overtake SD-DVD as a mass market player....unless: a) Fully capable (1.1) Blu-Ray Players are priced below $150 and b) Movies priced less than $15. BTW, the rentals of Blu-Ray movies will be fairly healthy market for awhile. Bottomline, Blu-Ray will be a niche option for those who want to own the best in HD video/audio quality.

2) HD Movie Downloads will always be hinder by download speeds, video/audio quality, price, etc. ....until a majority homes are hardwired for Fiber Optics, which will take aleast a decade or two to happen.

I placed my $600+ bet on HD-DVD based on quality and value. I was hoping the studios would come around to the same conclusion :( I own 4 HD-DVD players (2 XBox 360 HD-DVD drives, 1 AX1 and 1 HD-A2) which I purchased via open box, secret sales, etc. I plan to keep all my players, rent HD-DVD movies via Netflix and buy desireable HD-DVD movies when they become available on clearance. I may on a very rare occasion PayPerView a HD movie via DirecTV or download HD movie thru XBox live. I will not buy PS3 or Blu-Ray player anytime soon (cannot stomach Sony products right now), because my HT Theater room display is a 65" RP CRT Mitsubushi which only accept 1080i via component inputs (no DVI, HDMI).

I think in the end, we all want the best quality video/audio that we can afford. For me until my Mitsubushi dies (at least not until another 5-years), I will accept what I have availavable for HD.

Interesting.

I would only add that a bullet point on a slide ("2008 Pivotal Year for High Definition Disc Uptake") presented at a recent BDA meeting stated:

Start planning to use high def discs as a stepping stone to digital delivery

;)

Oh noes !! They are all out to gets us !! :eek:

;) Thanks, Alex. Always to the point.

I have been laughing at all the sour grapes HD DVD folks that all of a sudden start spinning this BS download thing.... WHat a huge load of crap. Funny how this all gained popularity thanks to Warner nailing shut the coffin on HD DVD.

Just embrace the 'other' format that beat out yours, enjoy the HD video and more discs with lossless sound and forget about how to dream up new, mind-bogglingarguments designed to do nothing but cause trouble.

I see some folks that throw around terms like digital distribution, economics of such, etc, etc when it clear they have no idea or experience in what they are even talking about.... Just complete puffery. Just accept HD DVD lost and accept things as they are.... lets taper down the crap.

Downloads instead of BD discs.....what a laugh.

Sketcha is pro BD, he started this thread, others are just participating. Is that not what this forum was designed for? And hey, you got a laugh out of it, free entertainment is good in my books.

I have yet to see anyone in this specific thread argue DD is the way ONLY because BD is dominant. It is being argued that it "COULD" be "A" way moving forward, thinking into the future.

Funny how you accuse HD DVD of being so shortsighted in not providing consumers with 50GB discs and higher bandwidth yet somehow people who are not being shortsighted by the possibility of DD (which does exist) coexisting with HDM are foolish for wanting choice.

iPods instead of discmans... what a laugh.

I have been laughing at all the sour grapes HD DVD folks that all of a sudden start spinning this BS download thing.... WHat a huge load of crap. Funny how this all gained popularity thanks to Warner nailing shut the coffin on HD DVD.

Just embrace the 'other' format that beat out yours, enjoy the HD video and more discs with lossless sound and forget about how to dream up new, mind-bogglingarguments designed to do nothing but cause trouble.

I see some folks that throw around terms like digital distribution, economics of such, etc, etc when it clear they have no idea or experience in what they are even talking about.... Just complete puffery. Just accept HD DVD lost and accept things as they are.... lets taper down the crap.

Downloads instead of BD discs.....what a laugh.
I'm now beginning to realize where some of the flack is coming from. According to you, this has been said by more than the select few I had in mind. I was unaware of that. It's a little easier now for me to see why some considered this a bait thread.

Glad to see some good debate has still come of it.

There's no way people will buy a box just for movie downloads. Also no way we will see the required bandwidth any time in the next 10 years. Don't think about your 5Mbps on your end, think about millions of people all calling up for that 5Mbps at once. Think about the server level of these operations. What setup is some company going to have that allows for several hundred thousand consant HD streams? It won't happen for a long time.

Now encrypted memory cards, I could see that happening. No moving parts, re-usable, smaller, and they're getting bigger and cheaper at an exponential rate.

Until then though, I'll enjoy my Blu-ray and/or HD-DVD.

Considering the average Internet connection speed in America is 1.9 Mbps (source (http://www.cwa-union.org/news/page.jsp?itemID=28663094)) it would take that person 33 hours to download a 28 GB movie like 300. You can only get FIOS if you live in a house, mostly. Pretty stupid move for big companies to invest in downloads considering. Now there's not even a argument if they decide to cut the video/audio bitrates.

What setup is some company going to have that allows for several hundred thousand consant HD streams? It won't happen for a long time.
They'd have to use some form of proprietary broadcast system, or a system like multicasting. The server side really isn't the problem it's the POTS.

I am not sure what you are getting at. You just repeated everything I said in a different way.

Just providing clarification to your generalized explanation.

The bottom line is that 12x DVD, for the most part, streams data much faster, when needed, than first gen HD DVD/BD drives.

...and there's where the accuracy drops off. It's not even "for the most part", and not even by much. It's more like for 10% of the time, assuming the developer optimizes file location on the disc. The other 90%, the br drive will be as fast or much faster, and much quieter on top of that.

So "for the most part" the 12x dvd will be slower, with only small incidence of exception (pending optimized scenarios).

do people not understand the side effect of the analog switch off?

Tons and tons of bandwith becomes available. Through cable, Digital broadcasting through the air.
The freed up bandwidth will be carved up for all kinds of consumer applications.

There is enough bandwidth on the doorstep to address a very large user base.
The raw infrastructure is already in place. They just need to fill in the details.

Why would they compress it? The feed goes out no matter what.

The same reason it always is with digital broadcasting- to serve more people, to serve more services, to shove more and more stuff down the same pipe to maximize advertising revenue. Unless you think they will be investing in custom digital remasterings of various movies on a regular basis, who's to say they won't just feed you the "standard" digital stream that any of the classic movie cable networks will be using? Is it still worth the money?

Nowhere in the press conference did they say $50-$100 monthly.

They are going to serve you 80 Mb/s movies on the cheap out of the kindness of their hearts! :o Good luck on that. :) Honestly.


Why couldn't they offer me a similar system? Setup a queue and watch 20 movies a month for $24.95.

They "could", but then they "could" also bill you accordingly to what will maximize profit for the business, the maximum you are willing to bear for the service you are receiving. Something tells me it won't be $24.95/month, but I could be wrong. :D

do people not understand the side effect of the analog switch off?
Why don't you provide some specific documentation so we can all understand? :cool:

Bah, Digital Distribution's place where they can do real damage is DVD.

Money on it you start seeing moves to this, taking special features off of DVDs and placing Collector's Editions on HDM Optical.

I'm going to leave names out of this, with respect to forum rules, but it looks very clear to me that certain, consistently vocal HD DVD supporters/insiders are spreading FUD about blu-ray, even though it is clear that the tide has turned. One insider has even, overtly mentioned downloads in his more recent posts as the obvious choice going forward.

It now appears that the theories that Microsoft may have been playing Toshiba and the HD DVD Group all along, could turn out to be true.

Personally I could see myself doing some downloading, but I certainly do not want HDM to go away as Microsoft surely does.

Hopefully we will no longer be duped by the postings of these thinly-veiled, HDM Assassins!

Your conspiracy theories are nice and all, but let's be clear about one thing : whatever a few people say or do will not matter.

As for me, I have both formats but despise having Sony as the new ruler of the whole a/v distribution chain. I don't want one huge corporation in control of movie studios (and music labels), replication plants, electronics that are needed to play their format, etc.

Yes I know, Sony is not BR, blah blah blah...

Look at how Apple was telling the music labels what the conditions are, and if you don't like it, it's the same thing. That is only Apple, who in all grand scheme of things is a minor player compared to Sony and the BDA. With Sony owning so much of the cards, they will have even more power over the retailers and the information media than they already had. Warner went for the money, no matter what they say, but to me, they made a pact with the devil : having a vertical monopoly will not be good in the long run for neither the consumer nor the competing studios.

Of course, because few people can see any further than their nose, I'll have a bunch of rabid fanboys and coat switchers flame me, but that is never going to sway my decision : I'm skipping HDM altogether and will patiently wait for the next big thing.

I only know one thing : this is going to save me tons of money, and for that I'm thankful. A blessing in disguise is what they call it.

15 year olds aren't allowed to have allowances? Parents aren't allowed to buy music for their children? Ever heard of iTunes gift cards? Ever heard of ripping CDs onto your iPod? You do know there exists legit free music on the net don't you? So many questions to ask yourself. Fact is, iTunes is making a lot of money in the DD arena.



Do you think these people would be willing to pay $10 for a movie ticket... per person GASP! ? Do you think MP3s whose inherent advantage is that it can be spliced into individual files for each track would throw away that ability when it is available from their competitor in the form of CD singles? Ditto for CDs advantage of being able to played on many machines. I really don't understand the logic behind your points... it's like saying "do you really think Cars would be a popular form of transport if it wasn't for the ability to use up a tank of fuel at your own pace?"



How are MP3s killing the industry? MP3s (in the generic term) are a new tech, people require time to make transitions. As each day passes and more and more HT receivers and automobiles have inputs for people to hook up their portable media players, people who aren't concerned with 128kbps vs PCM will consider it viable. You speak as though all MP3s are pirated.

Who says people have room for only 1 component in their HT rack? Having VOD does not mean you have to burn your HDM collection. Also, to say something has no advantages over something else and then throw in an "except" clause kind of defeats your point.

Cinema tickets have disadvantages as well, maybe we should get rid of them as well... after all they don't have any advantages over Physical media, other than having movies screened earlier (not always but usually), no investment in a dedicated room and equipment, ability to accommodate large groups, eat popcorn and snacks and have drinks and then get up and leave because someone else will clean up after you, possibility of meeting a smoking hot lady friend etc. etc.

BTW what is it exactly that you fear?

All I see is Denial denial denial, with evasion mixed in your answer.
1) It clearly states that 15 year olds have more songs than audiophiles who have 50K worth of audio equipment. So they have thousands of songs. Yeah... of course they paid for those songs... And if they got them free... how does that help the movie industry? a generation of people who are used to getting downloads for Free? Thats what the industry wants? Can I hear some more denial.

2) Uh if you didnt know the music industry is getting killed by downloading. Lets see, an ipod user buys 2-3 popular songs of an album for $2-$3(if they actually paid for it)... yeah thats a lot better for the industry than a person buying a full album for $13. Even CD singles are $5.00 to encourage sales of full albums

3) So what itunes makes $.10 centers per song. Do you really think the industry is happy making $0.69 cents per song, when most people only buy 1-3 songs of an album. And most songs are downloaded free... IE NOT paid for.

4) Are you denying that MP3s are more portable than CDs? Are you serious. Come on. Really? Denial isnt just a river in egypt. Kids download songs because it has a lot of advantages over CD, and costs them almost nothing. Those advantages... are not there for High Definition Video downloads

The same reason it always is with digital broadcasting- to serve more people, to serve more services, to shove more and more stuff down the same pipe to maximize advertising revenue. Unless you think they will be investing in custom digital remasterings of various movies on a regular basis, who's to say they won't just feed you the "standard" digital stream that any of the classic movie cable networks will be using? Is it still worth the money?

Hanky you are a smart guy so I have to believe you pretending to be stupid of purpose.

Once they lease the transmitter they have 11.7Terabytes of bandwidth beaming out over the USA. If they only use 100MB they still pay the full price. Why would they compress movies to save space? It is use it or lose it. 11.7TB is 233 BD movies per month. Obviously there will never be 233 movies released each month so they can stream every new release plus couple hundred TV show episodes, plus rotating feed of hundreds of older movies. Why would they compress stuff? So they can push out 20,000 movies nobody wants each month?



They are going to serve you 80 Mb/s movies on the cheap out of the kindness of their hearts! :o Good luck on that. :) Honestly.
No they are doing it to make $$$$. Hopefully lots of $$$$. Why doesn't Sony sell BD movies at $100 each? Why don't they sell the PS3 for $5,000. Why doesn't KIA start selling cars 2 for $100,000? Because if it cost too much people won't buy then they get $0.

They "could", but then they "could" also bill you accordingly to what will maximize profit for the business, the maximum you are willing to bear for the service you are receiving. Something tells me it won't be $24.95/month, but I could be wrong. :D

So let me get this straight. Netflix could charge me $100 a month also. but they don't. they know $24.95 is the most I am willing to pay. If they charge more say $39/month I would quit and they get nothing. Netflix is smart enough to price their service at a price that will maximize profits but this company is going to spend billions then price it at $20,000 a month and go bankrupt.

Obviously they will need to price it to what the market can bear. One sat beam covering the United States scales very well (140TB or 2800 full res BD movies pushed out to an unlimited number of subscribers for $4 million in lease costs). Scales far better than snail mailing discs and incurring warehouse costs, mail costs, broken disc costs. Somehow this company is going to screw up what Netlfix got right?

Got it. Thank goodness you saved me. I might have paid $99 a month without knowing then I would have paid $74 more than I am paying now. I owe you a beer man.

Why would they compress stuff? So they can push out 20,000 movies nobody wants each month?

NOW YOU ARE GETTING IT!!! :D Do you think you will be paying "manufacturer" cost for that premium bandwidth, or do you think there will be myraid levels of service providers involved, each in there to get their "cut" and to allocate bandwidth per the needs of the particular service they intend to provide, which in turn will be the backbone for other tiers for service providers, and so on? How many people/corporations/service providers do you think will need to get involved to keep such a high-bandwidth satellite infrastructure viable? It's not going to be "Charter Cable" launching their own uber satellite and direct billing you $24.95/month for terabytes of bandwidth, I assure you. ;)

...and you still haven't addressed where these custom 80 Mb/s remasterings of the movie will be coming from. If the 30 Mb/s was "enough" for hdvd, who's going to bother to make an 80 Mb/s version? Do you no longer believe "30" is the correct magic number? Is that version going to translate to serious pq for catalog titles w/o a serious clean-up/remaster/tweaking project? How high is the temptation to simply stream the already existing (low bitrate) movies that are used on the hd services of various digital sat/cable services?

The numbers look great!...but then so do the numbers for that Chinese red laser disc format. It doesn't mean much unless you have all the studios coordinated to launch such a format with content, right?

NOW YOU ARE GETTING IT!!! :DDo you think you will be paying "manufacturer" cost for that premium bandwidth, or do you think there will be myraid levels of service providers involved, each in there to get their "cut" and to allocate bandwidth per the needs of the particular service they intend to provide, which in turn will be the backbone for other tiers for service providers, and so on?

Um you do understand that sattellite bandwidth is currently available around the globe right now? DBS broadcast generally runs about 4 million annually for one 30MHz transmitter (which using 20" eliptical dish generally nets you about 36Mbps. Why wouldn't someone lease them the bandwidth again? Oh they don't like to make money. $4 million isn't the wholesale cost (that's closer to 1.5 Million annually) it is the retail cost. Tomorrow if you wanted to get a 1-36Mbps dedicated sat connection you could. No middle man. Now it is going to cost you a substantial amount of money but it is available. We aren't talking about shared DirectWay crap.

I might be wrong but I don't think that once they get the lease they will use the 11.7TB of bandwidth just to push 20,000 sub DVD movies out because (drum roll) nobody will buy it. If they wanted to do that no sat is needed (Amazon unbox anyone). If nobody buys it they get $0.

You haven't answered the question of why they intentionally would screw up their own product just so they can go bankrupt by either charging an amount nobody would pay or by offering a service nobody wants. When the more logical conclusion is that they would provide the service consumers want at a price they are willing to pay. Not sure if you have gone to business school but trust me that is generally the best way to make $$$.

Everything about their press release indicates they are going for a quality comparable to HDM. If they don't I am not interested and I don't think anyone else is either. The company goes bankrupt and someday someone gets it right.

...and you still haven't addressed where these custom 80 Mb/s remasterings of the movie will be coming from. If the 30 Mb/s was "enough" for hdvd, who's going to bother to make an 80 Mb/s version? Do you no longer believe "30" is the correct magic number? Is that version going to translate to serious pq for catalog titles w/o a serious clean-up/remaster/tweaking project? How high is the temptation to simply stream the already existing (low bitrate) movies that are used on the hd services of various digital sat/cable services?First thing we agree on. I am 100% positive they will simply use the exact same master as BD. I don't think they will push 80mbps either but it does show they can hold a BD quality stream (unlike virtually every service out there).

The numbers look great!...but then so do the numbers for that Chinese red laser disc format. It doesn't mean much unless you have all the studios coordinated to launch such a format with content, right?Agreed again. I am just tired of hearing the same two rebuttals:
Nobody watches movies on a computer.
People don't have enough bandwidth for digital downloads of HD movies.

Obviously without studio support they will not have a product. Of course for that to be true that would mean the studios will support HDM, DVD, HD On Demand, Netflix, Amazon Unbox, Premium channel networks (HBO, Showtime, Cinemax), Vudu, xbox live BUT WILL NOT SUPPORT THIS. They suddenly stopped liking $$$?

I'm going to leave names out of this, with respect to forum rules, but it looks very clear to me that certain, consistently vocal HD DVD supporters/insiders are spreading FUD about blu-ray, even though it is clear that the tide has turned. One insider has even, overtly mentioned downloads in his more recent posts as the obvious choice going forward.

It now appears that the theories that Microsoft may have been playing Toshiba and the HD DVD Group all along, could turn out to be true.

Personally I could see myself doing some downloading, but I certainly do not want HDM to go away as Microsoft surely does.

Hopefully we will no longer be duped by the postings of these thinly-veiled, HDM Assassins!


Much of this OP is speculation. Sorry Sketch, but it is. Certainly, some are crying over spilled milk, but the concerns about a complete format flop are not overrated given the history of DVD-A and SACD. But I would like to point out some important things that this post and discussion are bringing to light.
#1 - Change is constant.
#2 - Too much change can scare away the mass market consumer.
#3 - Media content providers are willing to try anything to keep making money.
#4 - Software and hardware companies want in on some of that action.

The above statements are all fact.

First, let's face it. Change is good, but it is also bad. The announcement by Paramount at CES has the potential to pick up additional business for BD. At the same time, it can also serve to reenforce consumer fears that things are changing too fast.

Second, the markets for audio and video are not a corollary on all fronts, but there are many areas of comparison. The greatest of these being that the media content providers are seeing that consumers are shifting their consumption habits. What we know is that the vast majority of consumers prefer to purchase music and rent/pay monthly subscriptions for video. We also know that the trend for Blockbuster Stores, Wal-Mart movie sections and Best Buy cd sections is to get smaller and smaller in size and floor-space. Think back 3 years ago before the MP3 player. Remember how big your Best Buy media section was then. Go back today and look at it. This is dictated in part by a shift in consumer habit, a shift in media content providers, and a desire to remove the middlemen. The recent NBC deal to remove shows from ITunes indicates that media content providers are continuously seeking ways to sustain or make more money. As the costs for media go up or the prices are held low, the best option is to shoot the delivery boy and find a way to do it yourself.

Third, if HDM is to get beyond niche stage, it must be transparent to the average user. That is, it won't sell because of 1080P or 7.1 lossless audio via a DTS MA HD feed. Listen to how ludicrous that sounds. The average user doesn't care. Can you imagine a guy at Best Buy spouting out all that stuff?
As fabulous as the spec is for BD (or HD-DVD), there is a huge technical implementation gap. The situation is currently that there exists a technology of uselessness. (http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=59) Pay particular attention to the paragraph on VCRs. And why does this matter, because despite the fact that some HD'ers are unhappy, the truth is that both sides are concerned that neither will exist or that superior video / audio tech will not be used despite its availability because folks don't appreciate its brilliance. This folks, is a legitimate concern. It is here in the discussion of formats, because we are discussing the death of HDM.

Finally, and I could go on, but I am not writing a dissertation, the format war is way more complicated and uncertain than many of us would like to believe. Further, many of us have also over complicated it as well. Currently, we have a sort of struggle taking place between the tech purist and the tech of just good enough. In past times, the differences between tech LP/tape to CD - 8mm/Videocassette to DVD were leaps. These leaps were also easily made. They didn't require alterations to the house (Be Honest, how many people have put that 6th and 7th channel into their HT system even amoung the tech gurus here?) nor did they require physical limitations for which there was no adaptation. 1080P has no place on a TV less than 42 inches in size. If you're sitting that close, you're not enjoying the experience...you're just trying to count pixels. Further, if you're sitting that close there is no way to appreciate the proper separation of channels for 7.1. How many people will go out and buy a BD player because of lossless audio? How many people would consider downloading a just good enough 720P or 1080i that upscales on their 1080P set? How many people would say its okay to download or those NBC shows in HD online look great? How many folks will refuse to upgrade or just not care about 7.1? These are your enemies folks....not the other HD-DVD guy or MS or Sony or any content provider. It is the mass market consumer.

You see, the difficult part about this move to HD and thusly, HDM has always been to set a standard (720P, 1080i or 1080P), to find a way to allow Flexibility and Profitability in playback and distribution for content providers, and get the majority of the buying public to eat what they were being fed. Digital downloading is in many ways the only way to get there. DVD sales are stagnating. It is a no growth industry. And we all know what happens to industries that don't grow.

So time for a realization of what is happening. BD supporters and the consortium are trying to move folks over to a slightly more expensive disc with intact DRM. The only reason that BDs should ever match DVDs in price is because BDs won't sell at a premium to DVDs. Given that what we know about content providers trying to re-establish growth, content providers would be forced to cannabilize the HDM market for digital downloading if/when that became necessary to keep good business practice. The current momentum from the expanding blackhole of the internet is that (albeit slowly, but not necessarily always - way too much uncertainty to know how fast this will happen) direct to viewer access is the desired model. That can be accomplished through a host of compression techniques, buffering, faster transmission speeds and lossy technologies. Ultimately, it will be a DD world.

We dont know when, but it is safe to say that this trend is present. In the meantime, DVD, HDM and DD will all trade off the available market and give/take the growth in the market. That much, we know for a fact. Anything more is just speculation.

You haven't answered the question of why they intentionally would screw up their own product just so they can go bankrupt.

...because to "them" compressing the piss out of things doesn't seem like screwing up the product. They are simply portioning out the finite bandwidth as thin as is tolerable to sell a product that is still marketable, amongst a number of revenue-generating services (who's to say the whole shebang will be used exclusively for VOD content?). Got tons of bandwidth? They'll simply figure out more ways to slice it up to each in turn produce more revenue... I'm simply skeptical that premium pq/aq (the way you and I know it) will be a priority, this time, unlike any other precedence before it. You may not have the same skepticism, I grant.

...because to "them" compressing the piss out of things doesn't seem like screwing up the product. They are simply portioning out the finite bandwidth as thin as is tolerable to sell a product that is still marketable, amongst a number of revenue-generating services (who's to say the whole shebang will be used exclusively for VOD content?).


Further, compression may be the only way that we can truly get the majority of consumers on board to HDTV. Fact is that despite being out for quite a few years (first hdtvs went on sale in 1998!!), many consumers have been on the sidelines waiting for prices just as cheap as SDTVs. Because there was a lack of content, many saw no need to upgrade. Bear in mind that most people generally watch live TV. The vast majority watch much more live or broadcast than time spent watching movies. Right now, we're approaching the present DTV period as a predominately 1080i and Dolby Digital (sometimes) nation. 1080P and 7.1 lossless be damned for the vast majority of folks.

...because to "them" compressing the piss out of things doesn't seem like screwing up the product. They are simply portioning out the finite bandwidth as thin as is tolerable to sell a product that is still marketable, amongst a number of revenue-generating services (who's to say the whole shebang will be used exclusively for VOD content?). Got tons of bandwidth? They'll simply figure out more ways to slice it up in more ways...

You still don't (or won't) get it.
VOD is heavily compressed because each user has a dedicated stream. To scale it you need to compress it. 100 simultaneous users using a unique 20.0Mbps takes 200Mbps. Just the number of users to 1000 and you need 10x the bandwidth. Don't have 10x the bandwidth only get 5x the bandwidth then compress each stream in half.

This service isn't a 1:1 like internet or VOD. It is a single high bandwidth stream. Unless the studios start releasing 20000+ new releases each month there is enough bandwidth all the content. Compressing the stream would simply result in more dead air. It doesn't take 1byte more bandwidth to send the same stream to 10 million subscribers as it does to send it to 10 dozen.

The analogy would be me saying "yeah BD are 50GB NOW but once the market gets bigger they are going to start compressing them because the total bandwidth requirements will go up". Doesn't make any sense. Neither does your argument. The same 50GB movie takes 50GB of bandwidth. It doesn't matter if you sell it to 1 person or 100 million people. The same 11.7TB stream takes 11.7TB stream. It doesn't matter if one person pulls content from it or 100 million.

Now come on Hanky. I know you can understand it. Drop the act. Your not very good at it.

Titles available in 1080p and 7.1 lossless audio?
Number of people with systems capable of using these to their full capability?
Number of 50 gig titles?
Evidence that a disc necessarily can do a better job than a hard drive of some sort?

A lot of assumptions made here about the near future.

All this "ideal" HD video download technology is vaporware.

Broken analogy. This service is a push technology. Your STB downloads the movies ahead of time. You aren't watching a number of "channels" in realtime like on cable or sat. The movie you watch today in 1080p24 with 7.1 lossless might have been "pulled" from the continuous stream an hour ago or maybe a week ago. The box simply pulls content from the stream. If you can't get the "channel" concept out of your head. There is only 1 channel and it broadcasts 24/7. The box records things you might from that channel. What you currently are watching has no relation to what is currently in the stream.

I should have clarified. I was just pointing out that currently cable guys do stream so that until DTV is fully turned on and more bandwith is opened up they can get content out. You are no doubt correct about the 11.7Tb push. Once you get it out there, it's there. HDMs with 50 Gb of data don't suddenly expand just because they are placed on a thousand discs...it is the same info. Hank, I've got to agree with Name on this. ;)

Compressing the stream would simply result in more dead air.

There is no dead air. That bandwidth will simply be in dynamic contention with other services. If compressing the stream enables them to put it in a smaller "allocated" slot, which creates room for more/additional revenue-generating services in their own slots, they will do it. What makes you think that satellite won't be sharing bandwidth with 1000's of channels of live broadcast? Telecom? Internet backbone?

A LOT of fingers will be dipping into this, the more attractive the bandwidth is. Ultimately, we end up with the same thing we ended up with every time- more stuff squeezed into a finite pipe, in order to pay for the pipe and generate maximum profit for the owner of the pipe. Your stuff may inhabit only a single "slot" in that pipe (and certainly that "slot" can provide digital movies for 100 or 1 mil set top boxes, alike), but your stuff won't be the only services going through there.

Titles available in 1080p and 7.1 lossless audio?
Number of people with systems capable of using these to their full capability?
Number of 50 gig titles?
Evidence that a disc necessarily can do a better job than a hard drive of some sort?

A lot of assumptions made here about the near future.

There is simply way too much speculation and assuming for this to be a high-end forum. How about let's all start asking the smart questions? Let's start citing to sources and the like. I can pontificate until I am blue in the face, but I still have no place in the Vatican. :-)

My worry, and I would love to find statistics on this is that the tech is out beyond what people are willing to adopt. You could have taken those clocks off of most VCRs in the 80s and most people would not have known the difference. I suspect that the same is true for current AQ / PQ. Does anyone know of any studies? What are the numbers for adoption of HDM? What is the attach rate if a consumer has an HDM player? The questions here are far more important than the answer to me at this point in the game.

There is no dead air. That bandwidth will simply be in dynamic contention with other services. If compressing the stream enables them to put it in a smaller "allocated" slot, which creates room for more/additional revenue-generating services in their own slots, they will do it. What makes you think that satellite won't be sharing bandwidth with 1000's of channels of live broadcast? Telecom? Internet backbone? A LOT of fingers will be dipping into this, the more attractive the bandwidth is.

I don't understand how we will have internet backbones and 1000s of channels of live broadcast....don't we essentially have this already even for cable modem. I can dial up any of 10s of thousands of live broadcasts and recorded feeds. Some compressed and some not so compressed. What other fingers are you talking about that would be dipping into this beyond those 1000 channels, internet and telecom backbones?? Not being fascious, I am just trying to get a better understanding.

There is no dead air. That bandwidth will simply be in dynamic contention with other services. If compressing the stream enables them to put it in a smaller "allocated" slot, which creates room for more/additional revenue-generating services in their own slots, they will do it.

You are kidding yourself. What extra services. 11.7TB a month is enough bandwidth to stream 388 BD movies every month. It is enough bandwidth to stream EVERY SINGLE HD DVD & BD movie released every 2 months. What consumer is planning on renting more than 388 movies each month?

Why build a service around HD content. then lease sat bandwidth instead of pushing it through the internet for the sole reason that it is the only pipe currently big enough to push that amount of data nationwide. Once up and running kill your own product by pushing 20,000 SD movies each month (that people WONT buy) instead of pushing 300+ high bandwidth/lossless audio HD movies each month (that people WILL buy)? Is your argument based on the fact that you think their CEO is a retard?

A LOT of fingers will be dipping into this, the more attractive the bandwidth is. Ultimately, we end up with the same thing we ended up with every time- more stuff squeezed into a finite pipe, in order to pay for the pipe and generate maximum profit for the owner of the pipe. Your stuff may inhabit only a single "slot" in that pipe (and certainly that "slot" can provide digital movies for 100 or 1 mil set top boxes, alike), but your stuff won't be the only services going through there.

Guess you don't understand how dedicated DBS bandwidth works. I do because I have worked with companies that use it. You lease bandwidth from the sat owner. 1Mbps-36Mbps. That bandwidth isn't shared. It is 100% yours. If you want to leave it dead air fine but it is yours. We are not talking about a sharing contention system like directway. All over the world you can lease DBS bandwidth. It cost a substantial amount of money. When you pay $4 million dollars you are leasing a 30MHz block. It is your block. Say you lease 2460Mhz - 2490MHz. Anywhere under the sat footprint a dish with right polarization looking for a signal in the 2460-2490Mhz range will see your data. Obviously the stream is encrypted so only you have access. It doesn't matter if your orginization aims one dish, one million dishes, or one billion dishes at the bird. It is a one way push.

Companies have used this all over the globe to push scientific data, research data, and financial data to remote locations. Have you ever seen a dish on top of a 7-11 and wondered why? DBS has been used for decades to wire up hundreds of remote locations so they can all access the same stream.

Now imagine instead of 7-11s you have home users and instead of financial data it is movie data. The sat network doesn't care it is all 1 & 0 s modulated on a carrier wave. The number of users is irrelevant on the downstream bandwidth. A 30Mhz block will ALWAYS deliver exactly 36Mbps (11.7TB each month) regardless of if one dish or a billion dishes are aimed at the sat & pulling the signal.

Talking about at the satellite level, not your set top box.

Is your argument based on the fact that you think their CEO is a retard?

The CEO thinks like a business man, not a home theater fan. He is also not (or will not be) the sole customer to this satellite infrastructure. He pays for a slot on that satellite feed, and if he can pay less for a smaller slot, he will. If he has the option to buy a number of smaller slots to facilitate a number of services instead of just one service for one big slot, he will do that, too. More services will generate more revenue than one service...

Finally, and I could go on, but I am not writing a dissertation
Then what do you call it; a Master's Thesis? A novel perhaps?

:)

BTW, I disagree. Much of my OP was not speculation. Some? Maybe conjecture.

;)

Then what do you call it; a Master's Thesis? A novel perhaps?

:)

BTW, I disagree. Much of my OP was not speculation. Some? Maybe conjecture.

;)


What's the real difference? It is a distinction without a difference. And my point was that...I could write all day on the subject of why this period of introspection among HDM supporters, non-supporters and sideliners is occurring. It is a complicated marketplace with no clear signals of what will take place in the future. The collapse of one side without the uptick in adoption of the other brings this argument home. What I am getting at ultimately is that an HDM supporter can legitimately be worried about the future of HDM even in the face of a single format given the focus one sees at CES, the level of consumer adoption levels and by making a reasonable expansion and application of the technology of uselessness doctrine.

And pardon me for being somewhat wordy, but lawyers tend to be that way.

As a quick exercise, please inform me of the distinction between speculation and conjecture? :-)

I'm going to leave names out of this, with respect to forum rules, but it looks very clear to me that certain, consistently vocal HD DVD supporters/insiders are spreading FUD about blu-ray, even though it is clear that the tide has turned. One insider has even, overtly mentioned downloads in his more recent posts as the obvious choice going forward.

It now appears that the theories that Microsoft may have been playing Toshiba and the HD DVD Group all along, could turn out to be true.

Personally I could see myself doing some downloading, but I certainly do not want HDM to go away as Microsoft surely does.

Hopefully we will no longer be duped by the postings of these thinly-veiled, HDM Assassins!

What can forum members do to kill blu-ray? Who are these members who are so *important* that they can do it? These would be the same *experts* who were wrong about HD-DVD? I think their credibility is in question.

What you are referring to are a few of the Sony hating lunatics who aren't of any value to the AV Science of this forum. The group of "I'll go back to DVD before I'll buy a Sony product" folks aren't hard to pick out in their posts, and the silent, sensible majority sees right through this.

Paid downloads a thing of the past

After years in which paid downloads saw little traction, Hollywood is focused on ad-supported streaming in '08.Top showbiz execs at the Consumer Electronics Show largely agreed on that point both in a panel sponsored by Variety and as reflected in the new initiatives they unveiled on Monday, the first official day of the Vegas tech confab.

Execs overseeing digital distribution for ABC Disney TV, Fox, Warner Bros. and Paramount joined Variety prexy-publisher Charlie Koones for the panel. Most of the talk about 2008 focused on high-quality on-demand streaming, from Paramount's "Jackass 2.5" to Fox and NBC's Hulu.com to ABC's media player.

"People online want to watch for free, because they can get content for free via piracy," said Fox digital media prexy Dan Fawcett. "Downloading to own and keep on a PC seems to be losing out. People like to watch on an impulse."
http://www.variety.com/article/VR111...goryid=18&cs=1

Looks like VOD is where the money is going and rightly so - works great today - no need to wait for an increase in the speed of the Internet.

As much as some people hate downloaded media...it's the future as the studios see it.
The studios would rather you buy a song or movie every time you want to enjoy it.

What's the real difference?
There isn't one. It was a joke.

Speaking of which; why don't shark's bite lawyers?

(Now you GOTTA' know THAT one!)
I could write all day on the subject...
No doubt.

:)

As to the conjecture, technically, legally you could be correct. In a court of law it could be hard to prove the members I am speaking of are trying to sabotage blu-ray. But if it looks like a duck...

Bill gates OTOH...

I'm not alone. Not too many HD DVD fans are thrilled with that guy right now.

And it sure looks like a duck to me!

Looks like VOD is where the money is going
Not my money. I've spent $0 on VOD in my lifetime; a few thousand on DVDs and a few thousand on Blu-Ray/HD-DVD.

Paid downloads a thing of the past


http://www.variety.com/article/VR111...goryid=18&cs=1

Looks like VOD is where the money is going and rightly so - works great today - no need to wait for an increase in the speed of the Internet.lol, like this?
http://dynamic.abc.go.com/streaming/landing?lid=ABCCOMGlobalMenu&lpos=FEP

Streaming media was never intended for people who planned on owning the episodes or movie. TV Networks did it to cash on the people who may have missed it on tv or planned on illegally downloading it. Movie companies are gonna do it to cash in on the people who never plan on owning the movie and just maybe renting it.

lol, like this?
http://dynamic.abc.go.com/streaming/landing?lid=ABCCOMGlobalMenu&lpos=FEP

Streaming media was never intended for people who planned on owning the episodes or movie. TV Networks did it to cash on the people who may have missed it on tv or planned on illegally downloading it. Movie companies are gonna do it to cash in on the people who never plan on owning the movie and just maybe renting it.

Based on DVD revenue - 1/3 was generated by rentals - people not interested in owning the movie - just seeing it and as sales have decreased - rental stayed the same for 2007. I predict that rentals will increase for 2008 and sales will drop again.

Just like cars. At one time everyone owned theirs. Now leasing is VERY popular.

Based on DVD revenue - 1/3 was generated by rentals - people not interested in owning the movie
Maybe you should start a renting vs. buying thread, with a poll.

Based on DVD revenue - 1/3 was generated by rentals - people not interested in owning the movie - just seeing it and as sales have decreased - rental stayed the same for 2007. I predict that rentals will increase for 2008 and sales will drop again.

Just like cars. At one time everyone owned theirs. Now leasing is VERY popular.Ok so the format war really isnt about HDM vs SD-DVD
Its DVD and HDM vs Rentals.

I think we need a new forum for that war.

If all I'm going to get is a movie and no extras, I'll stick with cable.

If all I'm going to get is a movie and no extras, I'll stick with cable.Great, I'll help you out.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?f=34
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?f=42

Bye:)

If all I'm going to get is a movie and no extras, I'll stick with cable.

Please do. Then this forum could be used to talk about HDM, which is what it was designed for.

Another BD.com flamer...
His post has nothing to do with medical supplies. (http://www.bd.com/)

Please do. Then this forum could be used to talk about HDM, which is what it was designed for.

There are plenty of cable, sat and download threads here.

Please do. Then this forum could be used to talk about HDM, which is what it was designed for.

Or it could be used to talk about things like the OP...HDM Assassins hellbent on destroying all things HDM and more realistic things like alien abductions.:eek:

Do you guys with you tin-foil hats really believe the OP? How low can you go?

There are plenty of cable, sat and download threads here.

And there are dedicated forums within AVS to discuss them. I love how downloadable content is the new HD DVD zealot rallying cry. I thought Michael Bay was a little off base with his Microsoft downloadable content accusations, but you guys around here are definitely proving him right.

Making friends as usual I see.:rolleyes:

I have no issue with HD DVD losing at this point, the best thing for it to do now is die fast, but I think downloads are DIVX all over again. What surprises and alarms me is the people who seem all revved up to support it.

I think some people may be confusing support for being prepared for it (and I dont mean you are confused, I mean the hd-dvd supporters may be confusing what it means to be prepared for the coming of something new & actually wanting it to happen). If HD-DVD supporters had embraced blu-ray from the beginning, we'd probably not be feeling the way we feel right now- our choice lost, the choice we'd come to oppose (even dislike?) won and our options are now limited. But I think the HD-DVD fans may now come to realize that HDM, even in a blu-ray 'verse, isn't necessarily going to last very long because of digital downloads. So why fight digital downloads if it's just going to kill off blu-ray, just as blu-ray killed off HD-DVD? And if it means watching people who are gloating now eat a little crow in a few years, that would explain an awful lot of this sentiment we're seeing.

DD is going to evolve... there isnt even 1 single format of how it works yet. And until studios start doing exclusive deals with specific providers, there's going to be a fair amount of experimentation, a lot of different set top boxes sold, and alot of services forming & going out of buisness & a lot of money wasted.

And until studios start doing exclusive deals with specific providers, there's going to be a fair amount of experimentation, a lot of different set top boxes sold, and alot of services forming & going out of buisness & a lot of money wasted.
Bingo. There seems to be a lot of talk among AVS members, but zero people actually buying any HD download solutions.

Nobody wants to get bit by the early adopter bug again.

Or it could be used to talk about things like the OP...HDM Assassins hellbent on destroying all things HDM and more realistic things like alien abductions.:eek:

Do you guys with you tin-foil hats really believe the OP? How low can you go?Believe? lol maybe you missed some of the reactions last week.. posters boycotting warner, vowing never to buy HDM, convincing other people not to buy HDM. This kind of behaviour isnt at all off from the op's accusations.

If all I'm going to get is a movie and no extras, I'll stick with cable.

Isn't that exactly what BR supporters want ? Only the movie, no extras ?

Look guys, there's really only two ways this can go now that there's really only 1 format :

1) Blu-Ray becomes the new DVD, and almost all HDM supporters are happy
2) Blu-Ray does NOT become the successor, only a niche, kind of like LD

I know everybody that is a BR afficionado believes in 1), I choose to believe in 2).

Why ? Because unless the BDA makes a complete change of reason why they are even in this to start with (higher margins on both software and hardware), BR is only a mid-term stop on the way to another distribution format. BR is only here to compensate for the slowing sales of DVD, not to replace it.

And if you think about it, that is why the cost of building completely new replication lines in the millions of dollars that can only do one thing, replicate BR, doesn't matter : they won't even need more than a few lines, by the time a new distribution format is here, that investment will not be needed. I've always wondered why they would want to trash DVD/HD DVD replication lines to replace them with brand new BR-only lines. The answer is because BR is a temporary format on the way to what they really have in mind, their dream come true : people not owning anything and paying for repeated viewings, just the way they had hoped it would go with DIVX. And that, I don't care which side of the fence you are or were, we will see it happen in our lifetime, I have no doubt.

There isn't one. It was a joke.

Speaking of which; why don't shark's bite lawyers?

(Now you GOTTA' know THAT one!)

No doubt.

:)

As to the conjecture, technically, legally you could be correct. In a court of law it could be hard to prove the members I am speaking of are trying to sabotage blu-ray. But if it looks like a duck...

Bill gates OTOH...

I'm not alone. Not too many HD DVD fans are thrilled with that guy right now.

And it sure looks like a duck to me!

The Bill Gates/Microsoft strawman atttack is getting old and it actually makes you look bad.

What exactly did Bill Gates have to do with HD DVD losing? Not a single thing. Warner cast the stone that ended HD DVDs chances of continuing, not Microsoft.

The claims that Microsoft was never really on board for HD DVD and was sabotaging HDM for it's own purposes is not only unfounded, but uninformed and borderline paranoia.

Sort of like the paranoia it takes to believe that some pissed off HDM owners whose chosen format lost out would come together as part of a conspired plot to bring down Blu-ray right from inside an internet discussion forum...

I'm guessing they're also demanding 1 million dollars and asking for sharks with laser beams.:rolleyes: