I don't think Sony Expects to beat Digital Download

I wonder when this thread will be locked.

Sony has always been a proponent of digital distribution and in some sense, more than most other studios. The problem they have had has been one of execution. Digital Distribution requires extensive experience in software, services and user interface development -- skills that being a CE company doesn't provide....

I don't know, but I heard that the pot in Honolulu is really great.

That wouldn't necessarily rule-out Sony as a content provider or middleman, would it?

'ju mean 'maui wowie'?

we called it that back in the day. is it still?

The would love to be the first party. But failing that, then providing content to others also works although I am sure they hate it when they have to provide it to their competitors like Apple.

Probably. It's been many a moon since I fired the ol' bong up. But I think the Oracle was putting a little in those cookies she was a baking too.

And last I can remember, wasn't there a section to discuss the video downloads? Not that it's that busy over there because that stuff isn't exactly getting on like a house on fire, but hey . . .

Oh look, here's a linky dinky to it.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?f=184

It seems everyone's racing to be the digital distribution center in our homes... Apple, Xbox 360, Netflix, Amazon, etc...

The thing I dont understand is...how do they plan on beating the cable companies? Some cable companies have on-demand channels that provide 300+ high def downloads. They own the bandwidth and they are already in our homes.... all they need to do to beat Apple and the rest is come out with a solution that's only 1/4th as good as anyone else's...hand out new boxes. With Apple, Netflix, etc, you have two devices... cable box and apple/netflix's box. With the cable company's solution, you only have one (not counting dvd/blu-ray player of course).

I think of video downloads in much the same way as I think of the paperless office. One day it will happen but I don't think it is going to be soon. Personally I am not going to invest in video downloads until there is a widespread standard (not based on a single OS, game console, or service provider) which does not charge any kind of subscription fee and that guarantees long term ownership (at least 25 years). From where I am standing I have to wonder why some people trust the current video download services when the EULA for these services make no guarantee for how long you will be able to access the content. Of course the situation is different with rental/streaming services since long term ownership isn't an issue for them.

Apple accomplished this for music with most of the limitations you say is not workable for you. They have a closed format and require that it only work with their devices. Yet, millions upon millions have bought iPods and bought music without that long term guarantee.

Why would video be different in this regard, especially considering that people want their music to be more permanent than video.


The computer you type on required some kind of EULA yet you are using it to post here . I think when something does the job, people look the other way. Look at all the fine print for BD players wrt to firmware updates, bugs, etc.

Besides, if you talk to content owners, they do not at all think that you are entitled to something for 25 years. As such, they are not going to be in favor of such long term guarantees. They support new formats precisely to get you to upgrade every decade. VHS to DVD and now HD....

Moved.

My grandma has a hard enough time starting her DVD player. Now you want her to move to PC?

Does she use computer to send email?

Amir,

What are the driving factors for how Xbox Live HD videos are encoded?

MSNtv2

Hitting the sweet spot of bandwidth/quality. They need to keep the service profitable while at the same time, being on "HD" bandwagon.

Related to above, is automatic encoding as opposed to hand tuning done for optical formats. So good workflow is required to extract the best quality. Fortunately, digital distribution means less restrictions as far as codec parameters, allowing headroom that is not there with optical.

You have the same grandma?



Reason I asked is that many older people are realizing the benefits of complex technology and are adopting them. Email is one of the key scenarios.

I don't think we give them enough credit in being able to learn new things. If something is simple enough to garner mass adoption, it is also simple enough for majority of that population to use it too. Digital video today is not there for masses and hence, is not for older people either.

I think Sony probably expects downloads to coexist with BD Media.

At least based on my experience with Cox Video on Demand, they really need to improve their user interface. By comparison, Apple TV is really slick - and addictive!

With the PS3, Sony probably has the single best integrated media player on the market today. They can really exploit the platform with digital downloadable software of all kinds. In fact, the most recent statements from Howard Stringer clearly seem to indicate that Sony will take a more proactive role in network centric content.

Download and hard media are gonna co exist. I don't know why people are still thinking this is gonna beat this or that.

If download had ruled, we wouldn't have any CDs as of this writing.

And that sig by the OP is like saying mp3 download is gonna eliminate CD itself.

The oracle can't see this anymore for smoking too much.

Until such time that we are allowed unlimited bandwidth at reasonable prices then digital high definition movie downloads stand no chance of being a major success.....I pay £25 a month ( $50 ) for a reliable great internet service...I am capped at 25gigabytes a month download allowance although unlimited at uploads.

How many high definition movies can i download with a 25 gigabyte cap....Not that many i would bet so i do not think digital downloads are going to take off anytime soon.

I also like owning my movies with boxes and great artwork.

All that matters is that we have choice. I want that choice.

I have messed around with having dvd in digital file form to view in windows media center and the like, and I've come to the conclusion that managing all these video files is not worth the hassle sometimes.

If you run out of space, you need a new hard drive. It takes time to encode new movies you keep adding. And yes, making sure its all backed up so you wont have to do it all over again if your hdd crashes, is a hassle. Heck, getting the disc out of the case is not that big deal in the end.

Nothing beats owing the actual disc.

Now, I consider streaming totally different, but the bandwidth for hd content is a fairy tale dream.

I am watching HD rental from Apple TV. Movie starts within 30 seconds.

Managing your movies digitally is like managing your contacts. You can always use an address book. As long as the number is small, it does not matter what format you use. I would rather catalog a large collection digitally. I don't like to display movies and media in general.

It's like evolving from film to digital photography.

In the future, as in now, we will have many ways to get digital media in either SD or HD. There will be no dominant disc format again. Unless you call dominant the only HD disc format. I enjoyed watching Michael Clayton in hd on my dish 622. I watched it day and date with the release of the BD. Look at it like this....BD costs $20.00 and I can rent it for $5.99....is this a movie i will watch more than 4 times?

I think owning the actual disk AND being able to store a bunch of them on a media server would beat it. I believe that was idea behind "Managed Copy" for HD media.

I have hundreds of HD movies on disk now. I'd definitely value the convenience of being able to pull them up interactively, search the list, play them or play part of them and instantly browse to another one without going to a shelf and loading and unloading.

Isn't that in fact the idea behind Multi-disk changers? A media server is better. Agreed though that the convenience and ease of use is badly lacking.

On the other hand...http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...-internet.html

iTunes allows you to burn your music to audio CDs.



Amir, even if that was completely accurate, and it isn't because of audio CD burning, that would not make my concerns about long term ownership any less valid.



What evidence do you have that people are less concerned about long term ownership for video than for audio?



So does that mean that the EULA of Windows XP says that at any time Microsoft can permanently disable the operating system ? I am kidding of course but that would be closer to an equivalent comparison since that is what can happen with video that you buy from current video download services.



I understand that the studios main goal is to maximize their profits and I am simply saying what I would consider necessary to invest in video downloads.

That doesn't make the format a "standard"/interoperable. No Sony or Panasonic player can play iTunes content. Saying that they can by having your music first copied to a CD makes for good Apple talking point but nothing more.

Would you think of BD as a standard if only Sony PS3 could play it and others could only play the content if you first copied them to D-VHS?



It is the nature of the content. With movies, many people are happy with a single viewing. That is why rentals for video works, but not for music. For music, people like to have long term access to them.

Think of this test: Buy a DVD and a CD. Assume you like them both the same. Watch the DVD and then have it get scratched. Now listen to the CD once and then have it stop playing. Which one will you miss more? I know for me is the CD as I already know the story behind the DVD so not being able to watch it again, is not nearly as important as the CD.

As an interesting aside, a lot of people buy DVD not to own it, but not have the hassle of returning it. This is backed by studio research by the way. They figured if they priced the content low enough, that would drive the consumer behavior this way and it worked!


You lose your digital content if the service stops being in business. If I buy a car and the car company goes out of business, then I can’t get warranty work done. Similarly, if you buy a BD disc and the content owner who created it, its interactivity bits are bound to stop working. So this is not a fundamental issue to digital distribution. It is rather a symptom of the lack of good execution/profitability in the business.

To the extent there is a well executed service, as we have with iTunes and music, then consumers show no concern for such things.

Amir,

If a hypothetical BD disc interactively downloads additional video content, does that video content have to conform to the optical video limitations?

For example, you buy a $50 BD first episode of xyz tv show, and that grants you access to the entire season in HD download for play on your BD player. Do those HD downloads have to conform to VC-1/H.264 optical parameters?