is Blu-Ray a failure?

[Chaplin]

That's why I asked if you were talking about something else, and the response was "VOD" which is what Netflix is.

If you are talking about purchasing a DVD and having it stored on a server somewhere, where you can access your purchased DVD and nobody else can, then I'm not buying that as where the industry is headed.

There is virtually no difference in that and renting streaming video from Netflix, other than the small volume connection vs. large volume connection. Unless you are a collector, there's no point in buying digital media and storing it on your own storage space (itunes model) when you can stream what you want, when you want it. At least to the mainstream consumer (who at the moment, are just fine with DVDs in the first place, and tickled by up-converting DVD players.)

Hate to disappoint you, but that's exactly where it's going to be headed. There is no way in hell that a rental system is going to take the place of dvds. If people didn't care about extras, then why did DVD take off as much as it did? Might as well try to figure out how to improve tape.

The system will be purchasing a DVD or Blu-Ray equivalent online (like Amazon) and then downloading the VIDEO_TS files (or whatever replaces it) to a storage device. Storage is getting cheaper, but it's still nowhere near it needs to be to make downloading the exclusive way of getting movies.

What you aren't understanding is what STREAMING actually means. It is the most expensive aspect of ANY online media. Period. Aside from licensing issues, streaming is one of the reasons why most networks do not put entire seasons of shows online. It's certainly why we don't where I work.

Streaming costs are extremely expensive--streaming 4 episodes of only 12 different shows can cost millions, literally. And you're talking about streaming THOUSANDS of films? Not going to happen. The point of downloading (and buying DVDs) is to have some sort of ownership. That's the difference between renting and owning. If you're happy just renting, then more power to you, but don't pretend to think the market is like that.

EDIT: And I'd love for you to compare the number of people streaming Netflix vs. the number of people buying DVDs. If Netflix had to deal with those kind of numbers, they'd be out of business. Count on that.

 

[Ryanwb]

BTW, your contention of lots of problems if there were no DVDs wouldn't actually be the case, because based on popularity, Netflix would dedicate more "copies" of the hottest movies on mirror servers, to relieve bandwidth.

The server load is not the issue here, it's the downstream bottle neck that would occur outside of their datacenter. You could have 100,000 servers, but if the bandwidth is not available you're screwed. The current demand on their infrastructure is minor, however if millions and millions of people started to request movies at any given time the system would bottle neck. The bandwidth necessary to bring an HD movie to your home is pretty intense

The issue is, you aren't just getting movies on a dedicated line from Netflix, you are going across a WAN. Therefore the entire speed of every ISP would be affected and the internet could come to a dramatic slowdown. Add this into people watching streaming videos, Youtube, streaming music, downloading porn, pirating movies, etc... The entire infrastructure is reaching critical mass

Imagine if everyone in your neighborhood decided to flush their toilets at the same time or if every home in an entire city dropped their A/C to 74 degrees on a 115 degree day. The systems would overload

 

[devilalum]

Streaming content IS the future, but what people don't realize is that it's pretty far away, definitely at least 5 years, but probably closer to 10 years down the road. And then you have to take into account it might take another few years to adopt it. Look how long digital TV has taken to actually go through. Downloading is the future, but that future could be as much as 15 years away.

Taken in context, laserdisc as a format last only about 8 years or so (with some overlap) and DVD has only been around about 12 years.

The first Blu-Ray I ever purchased was several months before I had my PS3, and that was The Road Warrior. The reason I got that movie was because there was a commentary on it that wasn't on the DVD release. When I buy Blu, I ALWAYS check to see what the Blu-Ray exclusives are. If they are good, then it's worth the purchase (or in my case, the double-dip). I mean, there was no way I was going to buy the DVD over the Blu-Ray of The Dark Knight, and there is a difference, but that difference isn't in overall picture quality, it's in the audio, the features and the quality of the blacks in the picture.

Especially with audio, there is a HUGE difference between DVD and Blu-Ray.

I'm streaming hi def movies through my Roku NOW. I can rent most of the latest movies from Amazon for less than I would pay at Blockbuster and pretty much all the good HBO and Showtime shows. It's not perfect but I bet it will be pretty close in a year or two.

Also I would like to see some research on what percentage of average viewers actually watch any of that extra stuff. I know I could care less. All I want is a good picture of the feature.

 

[devilalum]

VOD. Video On Demand. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you have to start downloading a Netflix movie in the morning if you want it at night.

The streaming of the future is all about "right now," with no nasty buffering issues, no lossi from bandwidth, the full digital experience.

I watch hi def movies from Amazon on my TV through my Roku box and they start within a few seconds. I think all you need is 1.5 mbps to stream hi def.

 

[Chaplin]

I'm streaming hi def movies through my Roku NOW. I can rent most of the latest movies from Amazon for less than I would pay at Blockbuster and pretty much all the good HBO and Showtime shows. It's not perfect but I bet it will be pretty close in a year or two.

Also I would like to see some research on what percentage of average viewers actually watch any of that extra stuff. I know I could care less. All I want is a good picture of the feature.

Geez, and you even use the word "rent" in your post! We're not talking about renting at all. Blu-Ray has never been a rental medium and it probably will never be. Do you guys not understand that people that rent streaming movies from Amazon and Netflix represent a TINY portion of the movie-watching public?

DVDs sell millions a MONTH, if Amazon or Netflix had that kind of traffic/business, the site and servers would crash. Guaranteed.

 

[82CardsGrad]

FWIW, I'm with Chaplin on this one...

 

[Gaddabout]

Bandwidth is the issue at the end of the line, like Chaplin said. SO MANY people now have high bandwidth connections, it's had the Costco affect on bandwidth: People tend to end up using what they have. So instead of a free flow, many places are having bottlenecks, and ISPs are now discussing going back to charging for bandwidth.

Back when AOL was the model, ISPs charged per minute. I once had a $200 monthly bill from neta.com because I stayed connected continuously -- and that was before I was downloading music and movies. We are at the point where many of the biggest ISPs are starting to lose money on bandwidth, so they may have no choice to charge for it. Bandwidth is no longer a seemingly infinite resource. It's finite and we can see where the end of that world is.

There are solutions, but they require:

- ISPs opening up ports on their routers they do not want to open up
- Governments laying yet more cable
- Governments opening up more satellite time/sending up more satellites
- Any or all of the above

This is why the original vision of Internet 2.0 -- a true global, high-speed network that could replace our phones, televisions, and computers -- become hyperbole and empty rhetoric (i.e. a catch-phrase for marketers pushing media-rich services0.

 

[SuperSpck]

This is why the original vision of Internet 2.0 -- a true global, high-speed network that could replace our phones, televisions, and computers -- become hyperbole and empty rhetoric (i.e. a catch-phrase for marketers pushing media-rich services0.

Enter the net-neutrality discussion.

 

[azsouthendzone]

Easy way to push blu ray would be to stop manufacturing DVDs and to only produce blu rays or blu ray combos. Once VHS wasn't available, DVD became the only option. Am I crazy or isn't this the quickest way the movie and electronics industry could cram it down the public's throat?

 

[Gaddabout]

Easy way to push blu ray would be to stop manufacturing DVDs and to only produce blu rays or blu ray combos. Once VHS wasn't available, DVD became the only option. Am I crazy or isn't this the quickest way the movie and electronics industry could cram it down the public's throat?

You can't do that in this economy. There are two business models in the tech industry:

- Go after 80 percent of the most affluent 20 percent (Blue-Ray audience, Apple, Sony, etc.)

- Go after 20 percent of the of the remaining 80 percent (the rest of the crowd).

Too many companies have a game plan for the latter, not the former.

 

[azsouthendzone]

You can't do that in this economy. There are two business models in the tech industry:

- Go after 80 percent of the most affluent 20 percent (Blue-Ray audience, Apple, Sony, etc.)

- Go after 20 percent of the of the remaining 80 percent (the rest of the crowd).

Too many companies have a game plan for the latter, not the former.

If you went after the latter, which would include the former, and increased sales, couldn't you also decrease pricing to help grab J6P?

 

[Dan H]

http://formatwarcentral.com/2009/07...player-only-98-after-wal-mart-price-rollback/

Hardware price is coming down. Disks have been creeping down. Next year or two hopefully they'll be under $20 bucks for a new release. That's the tipping point, IMO.

 

[Chaplin]

If you went after the latter, which would include the former, and increased sales, couldn't you also decrease pricing to help grab J6P?

Regular DVD is cheaper to produce and blu-ray players can play them. Why should anyone stop producing them?

 

[conraddobler]

The whole bandwidth issue cause Comcast here to charge for it again, I think at 100 gigs or more a month.

People were like who the heck would use that much?

An on demand user could easily hit that and that's about it.

So yeah it's an issue for sure and it's another reason I don't have Comcast, I have DSL.

Eventually they are going to have to fatten up the bandwidth by orders of magnitude because that is where all this is going to go, it's simply too easy.

 

[UncleChris]

Are you guys shopping around at all??? I got a panasonic bd35 blu ray player on ebay for $179 and there's a crap load of BluRay movies for $19.99 and less.

I'm only upgrading and buying bluray movies that are very visual (lotr, star trek, 2001/2010, Twister, etc.). The rest look very good on my 50' Panasonic plasma with the upscaling DVD player.

The cost difference isn't all that bad and is getting better.

 

[UncleChris]

From CPU Magazine:

"Considering the recession, Blu-ray Disc is doing fine, thank you. According to Adams Media Research, U.S. consumers bought roughly 9 million BDs in Q1 2009, nearly double the Q1 2008 total. The research also revealed that there are now 10.5 million U.S. BD households (standalone players and PS3s included). Sales should only increase if a Blu-ray.com report that the average price for entry-level players will sink to sub-$100 levels possibly by Christmas are true. A major factor in the price cut is the notion that Chinese makers are preparing to flood the market with inexpensive players. Warner Bros., meanwhile, recently announced it will support the competing China Blue HD format with titles priced between $7.30 and $10.22. The studio also recently launched a Red2Blu Web site (www.red2blu.com) where unfortunate HD DVD buyers can exchange a maximum of 25 disks per home for the same titles on BD (one copy per flick) for $4.95 plus shipping. Only 125 movies are now available, however. Finally, clues within the upcoming iTunes upgrade already in developers' hands hint that Apple may finally be adding integrated Blu-ray support in Mac systems, though Apple hasn't confirmed those rumors."

 

[Dan H]

Red2Blu is overrated IMO. I've got an HTPC, so it plays everything I can throw at it. The disks I have work fine, why spend 7-8 bucks to replace them?

 

[Covert Rain]

Red2Blu is overrated IMO. I've got an HTPC, so it plays everything I can throw at it. The disks I have work fine, why spend 7-8 bucks to replace them?

Maybe on your PC there really is not that much of a difference. However, I have a 65inch HDTV and OMG does Blu-ray look better. In fact, I have a hard time watching DVD's at all now.

We always rent movies and sometimes they don't have the one we want in Blu-ray so we rent some in standard. My wife was one that said, I don't see much of a difference when we would see the displays in the store. Now when we rent in Blu-ray then watch a movie in standard...she is the one saying that DVD looks fuzzy or grainy. Even she sees the difference which amazes me.

I have also re-purchased some of my favorites in Blu-ray and I am amazed at the improvement in details. I have switched back and forth and I will tell you the difference is obvious when you have both versions to compare. Also, anybody that says the uncompressed sound doesn't make a difference is crazy. Things are more clear. You hear better separation in your surround channels.

Here is the one bad thing for me. Price. The price of Blu-Ray movies is ridiculous. That is the real barrier for me. I will not pay $29.99 for a movie. I refuse. I wait for movies to go on sale before I buy. I usually pay around $20 for all of my movies. If it's a must own I will go $24.99. That's it. All movies eventually go on sale. I just picked up 3 movies I have been wanting for $11.99 at Target. So, I am picky at this point where DVD I really didn't have to because of the price.

 

[Dan H]

I mean replacing my HD-DVDs with Blu Rays. You are correct that here is a visible difference between HD and SD media, even when upscaled.

 

[UncleChris]

Agree with you both.... but upscaled is better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick, at least on my 50" Panasonic.

 

[Chaplin]

There's definitely a difference, but there really is no conceivable reason to upgrade a movie like 40-Year-Old Virgin to Blu-Ray. Upconverting non-special effects DVDs are just fine. It's the movies like Speed Racer and The Matrix where you can see big differences.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

As Chaplin says, there is a difference in video between DVD and Bluray. However, (provided you have the audio equipment) the audio difference is even greater.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

I mean replacing my HD-DVDs with Blu Rays. You are correct that here is a visible difference between HD and SD media, even when upscaled.

I'll take whatever you don't want anymore. (assuming I don't already have the movie anyway)

Red case, blu case, doesn't matter.

 

[Mulli]

I'll take whatever you don't want anymore. (assuming I don't already have the movie anyway)

Red case, blu case, doesn't matter.

I will take whatever you don't want anymore.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

I will take whatever you don't want anymore.

Actually, I have around 20 DVDs that I need to find a home for. I'll see what I can do.