or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › News Forum › Community News & Polls › Is the End of Physical Media Inevitable?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is the End of Physical Media Inevitable? - Page 28

Poll Results: Is the End of Physical Media Inevitable?

 
  • 2% (23)
    Yes, physical media will quickly disappear altogether
  • 18% (198)
    Yes, physical media will slowly disappear altogether
  • 34% (369)
    No, new physical formats will continue to be developed
  • 44% (470)
    No, but physical media will become a niche market for enthusiasts
1060 Total Votes  
post #811 of 920
...
Edited by PobjoySpecial - 5/16/13 at 2:39pm
post #812 of 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmpage2 View Post

Y
you had said you compared the BD to a reference frame. I thought most movies now where mastered in 4K.

Not most—not yet anyhow, but more and more are going forward. I would love to see the 4K master vs. mastered for 4K Blu-ray comparison. 

post #813 of 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by PobjoySpecial View Post

...or they all collude and raise streaming prices together. smile.gif

You may be right, but that reeks of capitalism. The media industry has historically consisted of a few major conglomerates. Combine that with a trend towards further vertical integration, and I'd say we are moving away from the free market.

There will likely always be an option to "own" content, but I doubt it will be content we can legally re-sell.



How will we own content while it's stored on their servers? This is happening right now and although I bought some movies on Vudu I'm under no illusion that I'm basically doing a long term rental. If I owned it I could move it anywhere I wanted to or burn it.
post #814 of 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb View Post


How will we own content while it's stored on their servers? This is happening right now and although I bought some movies on Vudu I'm under no illusion that I'm basically doing a long term rental. If I owned it I could move it anywhere I wanted to or burn it.

I have followed your posts on this topic and I agree that I want to see movie downloads come with the same rights as Apple's music downloads, at the minimum.

 

As far as resale values go, it looks like Apple is interested in creating a used media market. If that happens I'm in good shape because I keep most of my online purchases in the Apple ecosystem. But, if I am going to online-rent a modern special-effects driven movie, I'll use Vudu HDX for that extra sliver of quality. At least Apple's media resides on my devices, so long as I have a working i-something and Apple doesn't go out of business, the files will play back. Vudu is more of a leap of faith.

 

http://techcrunch.com/2013/03/07/apple-patents-a-system-for-the-resale-and-transfer-of-used-digital-goods/


Edited by imagic - 5/12/13 at 7:19am
post #815 of 920
...
Edited by PobjoySpecial - 5/16/13 at 2:39pm
post #816 of 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

I have followed your posts on this topic and I agree that I want to see movie downloads come with the same rights as Apple's music downloads, at the minimum.

As far as resale values go, it looks like Apple is interested in creating a used media market. If that happens I'm in good shape because I keep most of my online purchases in the Apple ecosystem. But, if I am going to online-rent a modern special-effects driven movie, I'll use Vudu HDX for that extra sliver of quality. At least Apple's media resides on my devices, so long as I have a working i-something and Apple doesn't go out of business, the files will play back. Vudu is more of a leap of faith.



Now that is a great idea and if these streaming/download companies are smart that is exactly what they'll do. People love a deal, even people with money, something like this would create a huge buzz online and an instant following. Many people dog Apple but what's not to like about that idea, and the major companies will follow their model once again.
post #817 of 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by PobjoySpecial View Post

"Own" != Own

I imagine the average form of media "ownership" 10 years from now will follow the iTunes/Amazon model. You can freely stream your purchases and download them for offline viewing, with the downloads locked at the software player level. Blu Rays will probably still be a niche market. 4K will be the next LaserDisc.

A simple litmus test - If you can't sell something, you don't own it.

(You certainly own a license, even if the terms of that license are that it is non-transferable. Most people who claim to "own" their home actually have a mortgage. Semantics can be dicey, but I'd say you are mostly right.)

You make a valid point. But is it a meaningful distinction to many people? Seeing the popularity of book and music downloads, the answer is no.

I don't care that my Kindle books are non-transferable. I don't care that I can't resell my itunes downloads. When movies are available to "own" through a lifetime license, I'll be totally cool with that.

Selling used media is a low-return hassle that I have no affection for. After shipping costs, it's barely worth the trouble.
post #818 of 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Burger View Post

Has the publishing business lost money on e-books, where the owner has a license? I suspect publishers' profit margins are higher on e-books than physical books.

OF course the movie producers will allow you to own content, just like you own a disc today. Once it becomes conveniently available, people will flock towards a service that allows them to keep all their content archived for them. You won't have to worry about damaging, losing or organizing boxes of unnecessary stuff. You'll be able to keep a local copy of your movies on a home media server. The digital information will be identical to that saved on a disc.

Do you think Kindle users care that they don't have each of their books on an individual optical disc, saved in plastic cases on some dusty shelf at home?

Why would the content owners want the end-user to also own a copy when there is a viable alternative to it?

I would suggest that not only is streaming the model that content providers will push extremely hard, but the vast majority of end users regard streaming as a completely adequate solution.

There is no difference at all - to the average end user - in streaming a copy they rent or streaming a copy they own on a remote server. It is, to all intents and purposes, the same thing. You pay a subscription for either, the only difference is that you personally own the data in one, whereas in the other you buy rights to view it.

It also makes no sense whatever to have millions of people all storing multi-gigabytes of data that are all copies of the same thing. I'd suggest even in your concept, the archive service would actually work out that lots of people all wanted to archive the same thing, and just have one actual copy of it, shared between them.

There is just no chance at all that content owners are going to let end users download and store local copies - not without massively DRM'ing it.

To take your example of Kindles and books. The only reason you can download a local copy to your Kindle is because it is, essentially, in a format Amazon control and stored on devices that Amazon control - because even "other applications" have to be registered with Amazon.

Your Kindle users might, one day, wish they did have their books on paper or on an optical disc. Because one day, their Kindles might break and there'll be no Amazon to redownload them from - or even, no Amazon that authorises any device or application to read the books they bought.

With DVD, it's an open format. The only thing I need is a player. That player can play a disc issued by any content owner, in an unlimited way. My DVD player doesn;t have to be registered with Fox, Disney or anyone else. The DVD disc and player are completely standalone. Although, admittedly, BluRay is a bit more restricted, becaus eit has dynamic copy protections so you have to keep updating BluRay players to be able to play back the latest disc issues.
post #819 of 920
...
Edited by PobjoySpecial - 5/16/13 at 2:38pm
post #820 of 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebiroth View Post

There is no difference at all - to the average end user - in streaming a copy they rent or streaming a copy they own on a remote server. It is, to all intents and purposes, the same thing. You pay a subscription for either, the only difference is that you personally own the data in one, whereas in the other you buy rights to view it.
There is a big difference that all users will appreciate: you won't need to stream a movie you own, you can download to local storage. For a very long time, streaming is going to be a problem, our country is not close to providing reliable, high bandwidth internet service. Peak hour streaming will probably get worse, and stay that way for a long time. Having a license model is a way to get around the shortcomings of streaming, and in particular facilitate higher quality video.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebiroth View Post

It also makes no sense whatever to have millions of people all storing multi-gigabytes of data that are all copies of the same thing. I'd suggest even in your concept, the archive service would actually work out that lots of people all wanted to archive the same thing, and just have one actual copy of it, shared between them.
Amazon or whatever archive service will only keep one physical copy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebiroth View Post

There is just no chance at all that content owners are going to let end users download and store local copies - not without massively DRM'ing it.

To take your example of Kindles and books. The only reason you can download a local copy to your Kindle is because it is, essentially, in a format Amazon control and stored on devices that Amazon control - because even "other applications" have to be registered with Amazon.

Your Kindle users might, one day, wish they did have their books on paper or on an optical disc. Because one day, their Kindles might break and there'll be no Amazon to redownload them from - or even, no Amazon that authorises any device or application to read the books they bought.

With DVD, it's an open format. The only thing I need is a player. That player can play a disc issued by any content owner, in an unlimited way. My DVD player doesn;t have to be registered with Fox, Disney or anyone else. The DVD disc and player are completely standalone. Although, admittedly, BluRay is a bit more restricted, becaus eit has dynamic copy protections so you have to keep updating BluRay players to be able to play back the latest disc issues.
The technical details will be easily worked out. Some device, perhaps in the media player but not necessarily, will have a registered address that can be used to authenticate the license. Though I walk in the valley of technology, I fear no evil.
post #821 of 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by PobjoySpecial View Post

...or they all collude and raise streaming prices together. smile.gif

You may be right, but that reeks of capitalism. The media industry has historically consisted of a few major conglomerates. Combine that with a trend towards further vertical integration, and I'd say we are moving away from the free market.

There will likely always be an option to "own" content, but I doubt it will be content we can legally re-sell.

Well ultimately those industries are still subject to the actual money and will people have, people have shown that they are willing to dump $30 on BRs etc... I don't expect that to ever change, for the highest quality media we can expect price point around $25 ish. My proposal works even in an complete monopoly. Its actually the company proding the consumer,we don't need movies and music and whatever, its not food or water.. Dispite what some people really into movies think there is not some massive used market driving the intro price of movies down. Movies compete with piracy now, they raise the price to offset used media and piracy not lower it. Second you don't even need a monopoly because each movie is itself a piece of art, an individual unique product. Tell me honestly do you ever say oh well I was going to see this move produced by studio X but they want more money for it so instead I will go see this other one? Nope sooner or later people want to see the movie based on its reviews etc. And they make a decision to buy, rent or go to a theater based on their perceived value and financial situation... So each movie has a monopoly already and always has. The same arguments went on for years in the video game industry with steam, ultimately most games came down in price not went up when people could not resell much. And then amazingly valve started introducing new features like trading and gifting games, something they had lost to physical media. But even to this day some incredibly popular games like COD, BF, and lots of blizzard titles never see big price drops even though they have competition in the form of similar games which are much cheaper.

So the way I see it is simple, nothing will change the same few movie players will always be trying to get the most money out of you they can and resell you the same movie over and over, first in theater, then rental, then a purchase and ultimately only the consumer being willing to not see a movie at all will do anything to the price.
post #822 of 920
I took my first foray into streaming over the weekend as my wife wanted to catch up on previous seasons of Downton Abbey so we signed up for Amazon Prime.

I can see the appeal to a certain degree if you want to catch up on some TV shows that are included but the prices for mainstream movies $4-$6 is silly. Also to test the quality I streamed Transformers 3 in HD and had the Blu-ray in the player and switched back and forth. The video quality was better than expected but still not as good as the Blu-ray and the audio was pathetic. It said it was 5.1 but there was no umph, no clarity and practically no LFE.

No way would I pay for a streamed movie when I can go to Redbox and rent a Blu-Ray movie for $1.60 and get the full effect.
post #823 of 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by PobjoySpecial View Post

"Own" != Own

I imagine the average form of media "ownership" 10 years from now will follow the iTunes/Amazon model. You can freely stream your purchases and download them for offline viewing, with the downloads locked at the software player level. Blu Rays will probably still be a niche market. 4K will be the next LaserDisc.

A simple litmus test - If you can't sell something, you don't own it.




I agree although I think the new model will follow more what Ultraviolet is doing so that your not tied to any 1 service. Just makes sense!
post #824 of 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin Focazio View Post

Quality rarely wins out over convenience.
Media collections are waning. I really think that physical media sales will gradually fade to be a "special order" sort of thing.
Sales of media are up this past reported quarter. Waning?.....Hardly.
post #825 of 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by PobjoySpecial View Post

"Own" != Own

I imagine the average form of media "ownership" 10 years from now will follow the iTunes/Amazon model. You can freely stream your purchases and download them for offline viewing, with the downloads locked at the software player level. Blu Rays will probably still be a niche market. 4K will be the next LaserDisc.

A simple litmus test - If you can't sell something, you don't own it.
services like Ultraviolet and the upcoming CFF allow for off internet storage of your purchases not just theplayer level but home server as well
post #826 of 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin Focazio View Post

Quality rarely wins out over convenience.
Media collections are waning.

Um... I don't agree. If that's the case then we don't need all the microbreweries, wholefoods and other specialty items and stores. We should all be living in apartments so we don't have to take care of our yards etc. Convenience wins when one doesn't understand or appreciate quality or just there isn't a difference.
post #827 of 920
I have not yet read all of the posts so please forgive me if my issue has been addressed.

I rely on physical media for one very important reason. It is the only practical way for me to watch movies in the comfort of my own home. I live in a rather remote area of the Ocala National Forest on the St. Johns River in Florida. No one provides any type of cable service or broadband internet to my particular area. Consequently the only option I have for internet service (please don't even suggest dial-up) is satellite. I pay 50 dollars a month for ten gig of bandwidth and the speed is nothing to write home about although acceptable for routine web surfing. Therefore streaming HD content is out of the question because of the bandwidth cap and latency issues. I enjoy both the video and audio quality of Blu Ray movies and watch them on an above average dedicated home theater set up.

I realize I am in the minority here but I'm sure there are quite a few people in the U.S. that have the same problem as I and without physical media they would be stuck with paying exorbitant admission fees to try and watch a movie amongst rude people talking, babies crying and cell phones ringing. With a disk I can watch at my leisure any time I wish. So it seems I would fall into what I have seen described as a "niche" market. I guess we would be considered "less than tech savvy" although not by choice. I wish I could stream video but not at reduced quality nor at the cost of using up my limited bandwidth.

I hope physical media is around a long, long time because that's the time frame AT&T has given me for when I can expect true broadband internet in my home.
post #828 of 920
If previous history is any indication, the larger industry will not pause to worry about the disruption of a small # of users.
post #829 of 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by ropd View Post

I have not yet read all of the posts so please forgive me if my issue has been addressed.

I rely on physical media for one very important reason. It is the only practical way for me to watch movies in the comfort of my own home. I live in a rather remote area of the Ocala National Forest on the St. Johns River in Florida. No one provides any type of cable service or broadband internet to my particular area. Consequently the only option I have for internet service (please don't even suggest dial-up) is satellite. I pay 50 dollars a month for ten gig of bandwidth and the speed is nothing to write home about although acceptable for routine web surfing. Therefore streaming HD content is out of the question because of the bandwidth cap and latency issues. I enjoy both the video and audio quality of Blu Ray movies and watch them on an above average dedicated home theater set up.

I realize I am in the minority here but I'm sure there are quite a few people in the U.S. that have the same problem as I and without physical media they would be stuck with paying exorbitant admission fees to try and watch a movie amongst rude people talking, babies crying and cell phones ringing. With a disk I can watch at my leisure any time I wish. So it seems I would fall into what I have seen described as a "niche" market. I guess we would be considered "less than tech savvy" although not by choice. I wish I could stream video but not at reduced quality nor at the cost of using up my limited bandwidth.

I hope physical media is around a long, long time because that's the time frame AT&T has given me for when I can expect true broadband internet in my home.

The worst case scenario I can imagine for somebody like you is that you have to take some sort of device to an Internet café on occasion. More likely, a company like Red Box will put Wi-Fi terminals in the same spots where they currently have disk kiosks. You'll probably be able to rent movies, or buy them, as Wi-Fi downloads.

A limited Internet connection would probably still be needed to verify the account, or authorize playback. That's my guess as to how it will work in rural locations when it's no longer cost-effective for disk-based kiosks to exist and Netflix has given up on mailing disks out.
post #830 of 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

The worst case scenario I can imagine for somebody like you is that you have to take some sort of device to an Internet café on occasion. More likely, a company like Red Box will put Wi-Fi terminals in the same spots where they currently have disk kiosks. You'll probably be able to rent movies, or buy them, as Wi-Fi downloads.

A limited Internet connection would probably still be needed to verify the account, or authorize playback. That's my guess as to how it will work in rural locations when it's no longer cost-effective for disk-based kiosks to exist and Netflix has given up on mailing disks out.



If this were to happen wouldn't the caps on our mobile Internet service be used up quickly? I'm a lucky one and grandfathered in for unlimited data before AT&T started charging by the gig. I honestly think many many people do not want to stream or can't like the guy in the Ocala forest, and because of this physical discs will be much more than a niche market like vinyl. For some it's not a matter of preference it's a matter of that's the only way they can view movies or listen to music. I was talking to a young girl that worked at the FYE today and she was telling me that she wanted to own the disc over downloads. This is not as cut and dry as many think.
post #831 of 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by TowerGrove View Post

Sales of media are up this past reported quarter. Waning?.....Hardly.

Compact discs are waning to be sure. It will take a few more years, but DVDs and Blu-Ray will follow.
post #832 of 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Burger View Post

Compact discs are waning to be sure. It will take a few more years, but DVDs and Blu-Ray will follow.

It is already the case that gains in Blu-ray sales come at the expense of DVD sales.
post #833 of 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb View Post

If this were to happen wouldn't the caps on our mobile Internet service be used up quickly? I'm a lucky one and grandfathered in for unlimited data before AT&T started charging by the gig. I honestly think many many people do not want to stream or can't like the guy in the Ocala forest, and because of this physical discs will be much more than a niche market like vinyl. For some it's not a matter of preference it's a matter of that's the only way they can view movies or listen to music. I was talking to a young girl that worked at the FYE today and she was telling me that she wanted to own the disc over downloads. This is not as cut and dry as many think.
The choice is not between physical media and streaming. A third option of downloading would fix the shortcomings of both physical media and streaming. In ten years movies will be purchased much like Kindle books.
post #834 of 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Burger View Post

The choice is not between physical media and streaming. A third option of downloading would fix the shortcomings of both physical media and streaming. In ten years movies will be purchased much like Kindle books.



If the future is 4K downloads then the ISP caps and the lack of speed will be the stick in the mud. I'm not saying it won't happen because it will, but it has a long way to go.
post #835 of 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb View Post

If the future is 4K downloads then the ISP caps and the lack of speed will be the stick in the mud.

I think you make a valid point that ISP Caps could work against very high video quality for a long time, even with a download model.

But speed? Nah. Download tasks could occur during hours or milliseconds when network traffic is low. Or while you go to the kitchen for a jelly doughnut. I suspect we have plenty of gross throughput even with today's internet, the problem is the stupidity of doing real-time streaming across a giant network, especially during peak hours.
post #836 of 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb View Post

If the future is 4K downloads then the ISP caps and the lack of speed will be the stick in the mud. I'm not saying it won't happen because it will, but it has a long way to go.

There will be a divide. FIOS subscribers and others with business class or unlimited plans will be downloading many 4k movies, while many others won't be able to.
post #837 of 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiggAW View Post

There will be a divide. FIOS subscribers and others with business class or unlimited plans will be downloading many 4k movies, while many others won't be able to.

That sounds about right. In general, I expect the internet is going to become more tiered. The U.S. really hasn't done a great job with digital infrastructure. But that's a big political fight.
post #838 of 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Burger View Post

I think you make a valid point that ISP Caps could work against very high video quality for a long time, even with a download model.

But speed? Nah. Download tasks could occur during hours or milliseconds when network traffic is low. Or while you go to the kitchen for a jelly doughnut. I suspect we have plenty of gross throughput even with today's internet, the problem is the stupidity of doing real-time streaming across a giant network, especially during peak hours.



Do you realize how long it's going to take to download a 4K movie? So someone's Internet speed is going to come into play quite a bit. Your not going to be done downloading one by the time you get back with your jelly doughnut biggrin.gif
post #839 of 920
dude what caps?
we are talking about IP downloading and streaming not mobile cellular networks. no one is going to stream movies over a cellular interface.
post #840 of 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by nrc2112 View Post

dude what caps?
we are talking about IP downloading and streaming not mobile cellular networks. no one is going to stream movies over a cellular interface.



Dude get in the ball game I've been here since this thread first started. Why would I be talking about cellular networks in a physical media thread?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Community News & Polls
AVS › AVS Forum › News Forum › Community News & Polls › Is the End of Physical Media Inevitable?