Oh noes teh sky is falling!

[brettallica]

Originally Posted by robinandtami

I think I see what you are saying. It wouldn't be an issue for a player with an onboard HDD. A player without one would need a USB stick or memory card to cache the data between the rip and transmission to the storage drive; but as long as you had a way to cache as you go, corruption should not be an issue.

OK. I've got you now. So your Blu-ray player would have a hard drive built into it...ideally anyway. That's more like what I was saying earlier, about having an all-encompassing computer (with tons of storage space) that will do the rip and play the Blus. I wouldn't be comfortable passing that kind of volume over a network connection, even at gigabit speed.

Time to collaborate and build a prototype.

[robinandtami]

Originally Posted by brettallica

OK. I've got you now. So your Blu-ray player would have a hard drive built into it...ideally anyway. That's more like what I was saying earlier, about having an all-encompassing computer (with tons of storage space) that will do the rip and play the Blus. I wouldn't be comfortable passing that kind of volume over a network connection, even at gigabit speed.

Time to collaborate and build a prototype.

Well technically you'd only need to have enough storage space to cache a little ahead of yourself as you go... not cache the entire movie's worth of data. Also... a true movie collector would need a dedicated multi-drive media server to hold a good sized collection. For the casual collector, an external USB drive could fit the bill if they really didn't want to pass it over the network. But looking ahead to the bigger picture, if you sent the data to a networked media server, you could then watch your movies on any licensed player in the house assuming the DRM could be worked out of course.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Marquoz

2a) $200 for a 1TB external drive which will hold around about 200 movies. So storage on an external drive for ease of portability is about $1 per movie. That's not too much of an added cost. Not much point in having it on a 50GB flash drive, that seems a very inefficient way to store movies.

you missed the point, he said you would go to the store, and buy "boxed" movies with covers and stuff (just like disks now) but on flash media. You can't go to a store and buy 200 movies (or to any one that can calculate 20) on one drive.

[Marquoz]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

you missed the point, he said you would go to the store, and buy "boxed" movies with covers and stuff (just like disks now) but on flash media. You can't go to a store and buy 200 movies (or to any one that can calculate 20) on one drive.

Oh crap, I don't know why I added the extra 0. I did 2 for 100 gig, 20 for 1000 gig, and 200 for 1 TB. I wish hard drives worked like that!

I don't see why an external drive wouldn't be able to work in the place of a flash drive though, if it's a USB input it should be able to work the same, unless the device stores a bunch of flash drives internally it spits out? Ideally it would have USB and maybe SD slots for differing types of storage media.

[Marquoz]

Originally Posted by brettallica

I'm just saying...writing all that data. So you'd be copying from the Blu-ray player, to your media server, over the network. That would freak me out. I would fear data loss/corruption/etc, especially when dealing with files of such a large size, like 50GB. Do you follow what I'm saying? It could be that I misunderstood the way your system is going to work, too.

I don't think there would be that much of a problems sending that over a wireless network. I've uploaded and downloaded multiple gig programs before and never had an issue. There is error checking during the download process and if there's an error that packet is resent. Same thing with dropped packets. If the network has a strong enough signal, there won't be any issues. Of course if somebody was going to be doing that on a regular basis, chances are good they would have a hardwired network running to the system for the transfers.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by krazeyeyez

your correct my comparison of views of tech from a few years ago or less are exactly like your predictions taken from 1950 sci-fi fiction LMAO. I would think you could do better

not at all, like them you refuse to take a realistic look at how tech evolves and what people want.

based on what may i ask? digital downloads of music is becoming much wider spread with the amount of services offering content as well as varying degree's of cost and features. Now most piracy is not gunning for entire albums, but those money maker hits, ready to be uploaded at the push of a button, YET they do it. If you don't see room for studios to make a profitable model you are looking at this as RIGHT NOW when the discussion is a few years down the road or more.

and yet even though there are many benefits to DL music (buy a single instead of an album, you will move it to your portable, so why add an extra step, files are extremely small, you want your music to be portable....) CD still owns more then 50% of the market after 10 years. While movies don't have any benefits from going digital (I want the whole movie, a movie is 1.5+ hours, you don't need your whole library at a time, unless you are a kid portability is not needed- you can't jog or rive and watch at the same time....)


but yet people bring music as an example of the death of hard media. Now don't get me wrong, if we add pirating then DL most likely wins but pirated content does not put money in the content owners pocket and so they won't be influenced by it.

When a new format comes out you transfer, after all these are digital files, your argument here is faulty because you ask as if suddenly all your movies won't play anymore, hmmmm, hard media anyone?

not at all, you miss the point. Maybe you don't buy movies, but I have several hundreds VHS, several thousands DVDs and several hundreds BDs. I don't care about obsolete formats, my VHS tapes have long been in a box and I started boxing my DVDs. Yes when one says "just transfer them" it sounds easy. But let's take a simple example, I most likely have way more 20-25 TB of content on BD right now and many have much more. How long will it take if this content was on my HDDs to transfer it to an other HDD on an other device? What if it is not a new player/format/profile, but a dead HDD and you can and need to DL it from the “provider” again? Yes if someone does not buy movies then just transfer it makes sense but for anyone with a collection, any one that upgrades often…. it would be a real chore.

But let's also look at the other side, if copying from one device to an other is easy, what is to stop someone from making a copy from their device to the device of their friends?

How long will backwards compatibility last mr. 60's sci-fi, we gonna have 32 different laser lens in one massive unit.

I don't know, as long as it is disks for ever, if it is something else then I doubt they will make them backwards compatible, then again there where DVD/VHS combos and there is a BD/VHS combo so who knows. The point is not something more then one generation, but for instance when my nieces and nephews are visiting sometimes they want to see something they saw before on DVD which is not yet available on BD. Why do you think DVD combos came out, people that bought them could have bought a VHS and a separate DVD player, but people don't like to have more devices then they really need (that is why they also build TVs with DVD players built in). If the guy buys a new digital player either because his old one broke, or he wants something better or features his old one did not have, why would he keep two connected to his TV and not want to "use" his old movies with the new one?

As for how long it would take to download, yeah i got 300+blu's now and damn near a 1000 dvd's with all the tv series i bought into. But you are also looking at this as a right now thing. My internet service has jumped from less the 8mbps to 20mbps in less then a year. How fast will it be two years from now?

if you are talking about your whole collection 300*50= 15TB (and I guess your collection is still growing)
@ 20mbps that would be 70 days at top speed,
@ 100mbps that would be 15 days at top speed,
@ 200mbps that would be a week

on the other hand if you mean a movie, for a BD50
@ 20mbps that would be 6h at top speed,
@ 100mbps over an hour


the question is not when the guy that now pays a fortune for internet and has 20 or 50 or 100 mbps or 200mbps (as soon available in Japan) but when will most people have that? do you know that less then 25% of the world population has access to the internet and it is a (many believe impossible) dream that by 2015 we would be at 50%? do you know that the latest US stats (2008) ~20% of housholds did not have access to the internet? did you know of the people with "high speed" (as defined by the US government) many 45% had the lowest tier defined as between 200kbps and 2.5mbps? Do you think none of these people watch/have movies or that all of these people will have much more the 20 or 100mbps in a time frame that does not make your comments seem like someone in the 0’s talking about the end of the last century?

As someone who is obviously an adopter of new tech you seem mighty hard pressed to notice how fast tech is advancing these days.

no, I worked in the field for many years and have good contacts to people in the field I am just looking at what is realistic instead of saying stupid things just because I have higher tier internet BW and wondering what can I do with it and thinking everyone else is in the same boat.

New forms of lossless compression could make transferring blu-ray size files no problem at all.

obviously you know nothing about compression

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Marquoz

Oh crap, I don't know why I added the extra 0. I did 2 for 100 gig, 20 for 1000 gig, and 200 for 1 TB. I wish hard drives worked like that!

no problem, it happens.

I don't see why an external drive wouldn't be able to work in the place of a flash drive though, if it's a USB input it should be able to work the same, unless the device stores a bunch of flash drives internally it spits out? Ideally it would have USB and maybe SD slots for differing types of storage media.

because most movies are sold as singles, some are also available in box sets like Planet of the apes which had 5 or ST:TOS collection which had 6. But very few are sold in more then 10 so talking about TB drives is a bit useless for shopping. Like most people trying to shove DL on everyone what is said does not make much sence because it tends to be reactionary, but if I understand him correctly, his model is that you can either buy the DL direct to home or you buy it on a stick and use it (like a BD) or copy to server(like DC). My guess he was going with Toshibas insane plan that did not work, where at the store they have blank flash drives and the store copies the data to it as well as prints a label and packaging, so that it looks like packaged media but is made on the fly. It was DVD quality, but it did not work (flash is much much much more expensive then disks, people in the test markets did not like being forced to wait for the transfer when they could just pick up the DVD and walk out in a minute)

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Marquoz

I don't think there would be that much of a problems sending that over a wireless network. I've uploaded and downloaded multiple gig programs before and never had an issue. There is error checking during the download process and if there's an error that packet is resent. Same thing with dropped packets. If the network has a strong enough signal, there won't be any issues. Of course if somebody was going to be doing that on a regular basis, chances are good they would have a hardwired network running to the system for the transfers.

I think his point was that if you are streaming it needs to be real time. All that error correction and resending missing packets has a heavy overhead. That is why he did not have an issue with none live transfer or Ethernet.

[krazeyeyez]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

I think his point was that if you are streaming it needs to be real time. All that error correction and resending missing packets has a heavy overhead. That is why he did not have an issue with none live transfer or Ethernet.

If you are refering to me, my real point was that people who quickly dismiss downloads/streaming as no where in sight are misguided. I can fully see this taking a strong market share in the world and not taking 20 years to develop into a viable option. This also does not mean hard media disappears entirely but that it coexists with a market share of potential people that are quite a bit larger then i think you are willing to admit.

Just for the record since i saw you say it again, i in no way said you would go to a BM store like best buy and buy flash drives instead of discs lol as that would be stupid, what i meant was that tech advances and price falls at a fast pace these days, and it is not to hard to in vision downloads as simply a distribution service and from their the choices are up to you, so that those who do want something tangible on a shelf could still have flashsticks or data holders of some kind or even a disc itself, if keeping that collection on the shelf is so important. Hell i am sure customizable options for printable inserts would go over pretty well with the crowd on this site.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by krazeyeyez

If you are refering to me, my real point was that people who quickly dismiss downloads/streaming as no where in sight are misguided. I can fully see this taking a strong market share in the world and not taking 20 years to develop into a viable option. This also does not mean hard media disappears entirely but that it coexists with a market share of potential people that are quite a bit larger then i think you are willing to admit.

NO, the world does not revolve around you
R&T talked about streaming a BD while watching it to a home server over wi-fi. brettallica he would be nervous doing that over wi-fi, Marquoz who I quoted said there is no issue DL large files because there is error correction and tools to help with such matters. That is why I quoted Marquoz and I said that the issue was not the filke size but the tasks at hand (i.e. copying the data to the server while streaming to a device and watching the movie at the same time.

Just for the record since i saw you say it again, i in no way said you would go to a BM store like best buy and buy flash drives instead of discs lol as that would be stupid, what i meant was that tech advances and price falls at a fast pace these days, and it is not to hard to in vision downloads as simply a distribution service and from their the choices are up to you, so that those who do want something tangible on a shelf could still have flashsticks or data holders of some kind or even a disc itself, if keeping that collection on the shelf is so important. Hell i am sure customizable options for printable inserts would go over pretty well with the crowd on this site.

it might be what you meant, but not what you said,

Originally Posted by krazeyeyez

Only instead of a DISC you have a flash stick.

on the other hand your new post shows a total lack of understanding, do you think any collector buys for the sake of having useless trinkets taking up space? It is the benefits of ownership that we like (and if you have 300+ BDs then you should understand). It is the fact that unless my house burns down, chances are my collection is safe (let’s face it, even if someone brakes in they might steel equipment but they won’t spend hours putting my movies in a box to take them with them), it is the fact that I can see what I want when I want. How many times did you go to the rental place and “there is no more copies of that movie because it is old and no one rents it and shelf space is needed” or you wish a movie would be made available (like song of the south which is not PC enough for Disney to release it on DVD or BD) it is about my nephew coming over and asking “can I borrow Scooby Doo: the mystery begins” and being able to say yes. It is all about having complete control and watching what you want when you want and making sure it is safe when you are not watching it. Now I know you will say when you DL to own how is it different? Tell me what legal service that exists now lets me legally back up my movies, lets me lend them out, what guaranty do I have films won’t be “dropped” and could be ported as tech evolves so I can keep all the movies I bought even if I don't ever watch them again?

[krazeyeyez]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

NO, the world does not revolve around you
R&T talked about streaming a BD while watching it to a home server over wi-fi. brettallica he would be nervous doing that over wi-fi, Marquoz who I quoted said there is no issue DL large files because there is error correction and tools to help with such matters. That is why I quoted Marquoz and I said that the issue was not the filke size but the tasks at hand (i.e. copying the data to the server while streaming to a device and watching the movie at the same time.



it might be what you meant, but not what you said,


on the other hand your new post shows a total lack of understanding, do you think any collector buys for the sake of having useless trinkets taking up space? It is the benefits of ownership that we like (and if you have 300+ BDs then you should understand). It is the fact that unless my house burns down, chances are my collection is safe (let’s face it, even if someone brakes in they might steel equipment but they won’t spend hours putting my movies in a box to take them with them), it is the fact that I can see what I want when I want. How many times did you go to the rental place and “there is no more copies of that movie because it is old and no one rents it and shelf space is needed” or you wish a movie would be made available (like song of the south which is not PC enough for Disney to release it on DVD or BD) it is about my nephew coming over and asking “can I borrow Scooby Doo: the mystery begins” and being able to say yes. It is all about having complete control and watching what you want when you want and making sure it is safe when you are not watching it. Now I know you will say when you DL to own how is it different? Tell me what legal service that exists now lets me legally back up my movies, lets me lend them out, what guaranty do I have films won’t be “dropped” and could be ported as tech evolves so I can keep all the movies I bought even if I don't ever watch them again?

no need to be an ass lol, last time you said "he meant, or he said" it WAS in regards to me and you were wrong, so just clarifying.

Actually my buddy just lost over 100 blu-rays in his last break in BECAUSE they were easy to grab and easy to sell at a high price, $7-8 a title adds up quick. It happens, although RIGHT NOW it is far more likely to have a HDD fail. But then again i am talking future development.

NOW! At this moment none exist, but i thought the discussion was titled the FUTURE! Thats what i don't get about your arguments, i am not saying discs will disappear, just that downloads are not the big evil screwed up crazy idea you think, they may be now, but limitations don't last forever.

You adopted Blu-Ray even though HDTV is a fraction of the market, now how many people own computers today as opposed to HDTV, i would say far more. What does it matter what the physical container is? thats is all i am saying.

I do understand the collectors impulse, but in my case i collect the movie, i am not big on which insert is used, or omg my slip cover is creased, i care about the content, nothing more, nothing less. As was said look at all the companies pursuing this line of technology and ask yourself who is crazy, me and all those companies for thinking that this is not to far around the corner and could offer every thing a physical disc offers and more, or you who says not possible EVER lol.

To me you sound like HDDVDers did saying Blu-Ray would fail out of spite for all the money you invested in BLU just like me. However i see downloads as an addition to not a replacement for BLU-Ray

[Grumpz]

I still find it hard to believe that people actually assume that movie collectors "require" or "need" something physical.


Of course it doesn't exist, but I'll bet both of my thumbs that if starting Dec 1st 2009, you were able to download new release blu's for $15 bucks and catalogues for $7.50, in under an hr, you'd all scrap your physical collection. Of course it would have to include some sort of gaurantee of the data, but since there's is no physical item to replace, a lifetime license wouldn't even be unreasonable.

The only reason you may not like it now, is because it doesn't offer any benefit.

[Afrobean]

Originally Posted by ouflak

despite the fact that many here have lived through and even led the way through the most recent paradigm shift in media; the change to optical disks.

Shifting to discs wasn't THAT big of a change. They were still individual units inserted into a player, and optical discs weren't without precedent in the form of CD-ROM, audio CDs, and laserdiscs.

Even shifting to Blu-ray is a minor shift.

Changing to a download-only form for purchased media is an unrealistic hurdle any time soon, not just for technological reasons, but also for market support reasons. Most people just won't like getting behind that kind of thing. I'd say it'll take around a generation at least before downloads could become a dominant force on the market, assuming they can get around the technological limitations by then (not to mention establishing a standard design for distribution and playback).

Originally Posted by ouflak

What percentage of junior high school kids in American today have ever even played a music CD? 50%? 30%? 10%? Less?

Actually, it's probably close to, if not, 100%. I'm only a few years out of high school myself. My little sister is herself a senior.

I know people that age use CDs. Maybe not as much anymore, but they did in the recent past, and FURTHERMORE:

music's direction in the digital market is not indicative of anything relating to movies.

You can't say "look at music" when talking about movies, because movies are NOT music. The reasons that music caught on in the digital-only arena have little bearing on things people demand from movies. People accept poor quality because their cheap headphones mask the difference, yet at the same time, they spend major money on screens which are growing in average size all of the time. People also enjoy being able to play all of their music on a portable device that they keep with them all of the time, but how many people would buy a poor quality digital copy of a movie just so they have something to watch on their iPod in addition to their TV at home? Most would just buy the better edition of it, then use less-than-legal methods to get the digital copy if they want it that bad.

Originally Posted by binarymelon

I don't know about that. People are fine with their music being distributed digitally.

Not all of them. They still produce plenty of CDs and vinyl! And look at books. Completely technologically obsolete, but people still prefer them. They've been obsolete technologically for DECADES, but people still buy them.

And again, MUSIC IS NOT MOVIES!

Originally Posted by robinandtami

Nope.... and I don't think he's going to get a blu-ray player either

The industry will force it in the future. I'd say that within a few years, it'll be impossible to find a DVD player in Best Buy. They'll all be Blu-ray players.

Originally Posted by Anthony P

it is about my nephew coming over and asking “can I borrow Scooby Doo: the mystery begins” and being able to say yes.

ew... you own that?

How is it? My morbid curiosity wasn't enough to overcome the pricetag on this one.

Originally Posted by krazeyeyez

Actually my buddy just lost over 100 blu-rays in his last break in BECAUSE they were easy to grab and easy to sell at a high price, $7-8 a title adds up quick.

Had them all in a book or something? Most burglars wouldn't bother to box up hundreds of CASES and leave with boxes full.

Maybe a dude with 10 BDs would get them stolen, but I have confidence that a thief breaking into my place wouldn't be walking out of here with my 500+ collection. It'd be worth quite a bit of money to him, but he'd be better off stealing any number of other things in my house that would be of similar value, but far easier to steal.

And maybe you guys live in a worse neighborhood than me, but I've never once in my life worried about a break-in, I've never known anyone who's house was burglarized. And you guys know 8 Mile, the titular road in that Eminem picture? I live a half mile north of it.

Originally Posted by krazeyeyez

As was said look at all the companies pursuing this line of technology and ask yourself who is crazy, me and all those companies for thinking that this is not to far around the corner and could offer every thing a physical disc offers and more, or you who says not possible EVER lol.

Not many companies are backing downloads as a serious means of distribution. What is there, iTunes and Amazon? Fully digital distribution has a future in the rental game as seen in Netflix's success in the area, but people buying movies don't seem as interested.

Originally Posted by krazeyeyez

However i see downloads as an addition to not a replacement for BLU-Ray

How about see digital copies as an EXTENSION then? The movie on disc is ALREADY digital. It just so happens that a high capacity optical disc is the BEST way to deliver the content, as current technology limits other digital methods. But even without that limitation, people are STILL unlikley to give up physical media just because most people prefer physical media.

Rather than argue for DOWNLOADS that won't work, argue to get your digital copies a more efficient way: by being allowed legally to rip the BDs that are already available. But heck, I'd wager that most people who purchase media and are of the mindset to heavily prefer pure digital media would be more likely to illegally rip their collection than to purchase subpar downloads. Honestly, I know plenty of you ALREADY do this with DVDs!

[krazeyeyez]

Originally Posted by Afrobean

EDITED TO SAVE SPACE

Yeah but you gotta figure a thief walking out with a HDTV they could sell illegally for $500 or a bag of movies worth the same, sold legally to some used place, which is less obvious. I actually don't know how they bagged or boxed them up lol, but they did, and i know he had over 100 as at least 85 of them i sold to him myself (went a little crazy during the BOGO's before HDDVD called it quits ) They also got his ps3 and a number of other small things, but luckily left his two XBR's alone. Neighborhood isn't too bad but the "hood" is definitely expanding.

It was my understanding that a larger number then you stated of corporations are pursuing means of starting download content, whether they have started yet or not, but i could be wrong, and knowing the net maybe just rumors.

Fully agree on the being able to "backup" my content, and if that means pounds of DRM to stop piracy i can get behind that. I am generally careful with my discs, but i am not the only one handling them, and well i am not always 100% sober either (love me some natty light). Stuff happens, and i have unfortunately found this out the hard way with many a TV season box set. The most reason being my Gold Box of SG-1 all 10 seasons that had a couple episodes as casualties that needed to be replaced with a whole season for 1 episode. (hey now their is an idea for downloads as well, although not exactly a huge demand for that exact situation i am sure).

I morally find nothing wrong with backup for my stuff and think it is messed up how the laws are today, but at the same time cannot blame them. But because it is illegal the programs for doing this are shady type stuff, and in the short period of time i looked into it (during the SG-1 thing which i was pissed about) i could not find one that gave me a quality copy i could be happy with. Sorry if that bothers anyone, but i actually purchased season 7 of SG-1 3 times, and had to try to avoid a 4th.

While i don't have an IPOD to take advantage of the video, i do like the digital copies i have got so far with my blu's, came in mighty handy on my laptop last vacation, and do not understand why they can't take that a step further to offer a program that both rips a bit4bit, and applies DRM to the rip to protect the rights holders so they can allow us to back up all are old DVD's as well.

I myself won't take advantage of Downloads anytime soon, i just think the idea has potential. For now and i would guess for a long time to come, Blu-Ray is more then i need. I just could see this as an option i would like in addition to hard media purchasing, renting, etc...

EDIT: One other thing downloads could be a plus for is limited run type stuff, for instance a show that a company makes a limited run of DVD's for, not knowing how well they will sell, and/or discontinues production. They could just have that file up for download rather then lose the small amount of sales they otherwise would have gotten. Only reason i thought of this, is i have been kicking myself for sometime for not getting Farscape on DVD, and could only find it on places like EBAY for gouging prices, although they announced not to long ago another run of DVDs

[binarymelon]

Originally Posted by Terjyn

Music is not the same beast as movies. Music portable and small, and the problem with things like CDs is people do not necessarily like the entire CD.

Nobody is going to say "Man, how about the Chapter 23 of Independence Day, I'll gladly pay 2$ to own that one chapter."

You're right about people possibly not wanting an entire album, but how is a music CD or file any more portable than a movie file or a dvd? The media is only as big as the device you're playing it on and most devices play both now.

Originally Posted by Terjyn

Digital Downloads with no physical alternative are a long ways away, if for no other reason than to appease people who want the physical alternative. Can we at least wait until MP3s pass CDs in revenue before declaring "The future of Digital Downloads is here!"?

I'm not saying digital downloads will happen soon, but I do feel it will eventually and technology will be better and our media needs met better because of it (if we can escape brutal copyright protection methods and laws). I think that video media file sizes will continue to out pace download speeds for at least another 15-20 years, but in maybe 7 years a larger portion of the market will be fine with streaming 1080p even if there is something better available.

Also you have to realize that illegal downloads represent a portion of the market not represented by revenues and Apple is the number #1 music retailer in the US (without having to force the entire album on the consumer). This report states that 1/3 of music sold in the US was downloads last year and the physical music market is hemorrhaging consumers.

[Kyo28]

I also believe that in the not-so-near future, servers and bandwiths will allow companies to deliver HD content and BD quality to customers over the Internet.

However, to me the question is not whether or not they'll be able to do it or when. For me, it's a matter of what I want ... and call me old-fashioned, but I still love to be able to touch my collection.

Even if digital downloads can offer lossless audio and full 1080p picture quality like BD's, as well as all the extra's it would all remain pretty 'virtual' ... stocked somewhere on one of my hard disks.

I love the fact that I can physically browse through my collection, that I can have a look at the cover, front and back, that I have a disc with artwork I insert, that I have a booklet, a slip cover and what not. Personal preference, sure, but as long as physical media is around, I'll prefer it over digital distribution.


Another important aspect will be the legal implications of digital downloads. When I buy a BD or DVD, I know I can watch it as many times I want for as long as I want. I own the movie.

With digital distribution, I fear we will move from ownership to a lease system, where you're only allowed to download a movie a limited number of times and where perhaps you can only use it until the timer runs out. If your hard disk fails and you aren't entitled to an additional download: tough titty!

So for me it's a matter of personal preference as well as legal implications. For that, I will always prefer physical media.

[MOONPHASE]

Originally Posted by Kyo28

I also believe that in the not-so-near future, servers and bandwiths will allow companies to deliver HD content and BD quality to customers over the Internet.

However, to me the question is not whether or not they'll be able to do it or when. For me, it's a matter of what I want ... and call me old-fashioned, but I still love to be able to touch my collection.

Even if digital downloads can offer lossless audio and full 1080p picture quality like BD's, as well as all the extra's it would all remain pretty 'virtual' ... stocked somewhere on one of my hard disks.

I love the fact that I can physically browse through my collection, that I can have a look at the cover, front and back, that I have a disc with artwork I insert, that I have a booklet, a slip cover and what not. Personal preference, sure, but as long as physical media is around, I'll prefer it over digital distribution.


Another important aspect will be the legal implications of digital downloads. When I buy a BD or DVD, I know I can watch it as many times I want for as long as I want. I own the movie.

With digital distribution, I fear we will move from ownership to a lease system, where you're only allowed to download a movie a limited number of times and where perhaps you can only use it until the timer runs out. If your hard disk fails and you aren't entitled to an additional download: tough titty!

So for me it's a matter of personal preference as well as legal implications. For that, I will always prefer physical media.

True words right there and also if you have a disc you can just pop it in at a friend's house and then you and your friend can watch the movie together.

[robinandtami]

Originally Posted by Kyo28

With digital distribution, I fear we will move from ownership to a lease system, where you're only allowed to download a movie a limited number of times and where perhaps you can only use it until the timer runs out. If your hard disk fails and you aren't entitled to an additional download: tough titty!

There's nothing to keep that from being done in the future with physical media as well. Just as a player can remember where you left off in a movie, it can be made to remember how many times you have played a movie. It's done now with digital copies that exist on hard media. I think however it is highly unlikely to happen in either format.

[ryan69969]

Originally Posted by Kyo28

Another important aspect will be the legal implications of digital downloads. When I buy a BD or DVD, I know I can watch it as many times I want for as long as I want. I own the movie.

With digital distribution, I fear we will move from ownership to a lease system, where you're only allowed to download a movie a limited number of times and where perhaps you can only use it until the timer runs out. If your hard disk fails and you aren't entitled to an additional download: tough titty!

So for me it's a matter of personal preference as well as legal implications. For that, I will always prefer physical media.

Essentially this. Once we get to talking about digital distribution, then we quickly wade into a sea of proprietary formats, DRM, etc. Not that I have a problem with those things, per se. But, in order to enjoy your purchased content, you need to have that continued, third-party support for it. If a provider goes out of business or simply abandons that aspect of its business without a replacement vendor picking up the slack, then your content will quickly become just wasted space on a hard drive.

The success of iTunes lies in Apple's perceived stability as company. People take solace in the idea that Apple, iTunes services, and the associated proprietary formats (.m4v, etc.) will last. But I think they have proven to be the exception moreso than the rule. So going forward, physical media still offer the convenience and usability of (basically) open standards: any disc on any player. And as mentioned before, loaning a movie out to a friend or family member is a no brainer with a physical disc, but with a digital download--such a prospect is either just not feasible at all, or easily convoluted.

[Elvispookie]

Original Poster here...

For those who claim that digital downloads are right around the corner and will be as great as Blu Ray.. you all know that the internet is running low on data transfer space right now, right? Many articles have been written on our horrible infrastructure. One that would require billions to upgrade.

While AT&T might be stretching it a little to say we will be out of space next year.. they still make their points:

http://news.cnet.com/ATT-Internet-to...3-6237715.html

other links:

http://news.cnet.com/ATT-Internet-to...3-6237715.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,518405,00.html

if you think our infrastructure can handle your futuristic needs for HD movies with lossless audio.. you also might think we will have flying cars next year.

Back to my original point.. downloads will be the next thing.. but they will not be the norm in this generation... there are too many people that do not adopt change or adapt either. Couple that with a bad setup.. just isnt going to happen..... yet.