10 Reasons Why Physical Media Owns!

[Sussudio]

Great article posted over at FormatWarCentral website by Mehar Gill (and recently reposted on DVDTown.com):

1. People Like Physical: Wether its a 12″ vinyl record or simply a DVD case, people have always wanted something they could hold, to tell them “Hey, you own that!”. Stigma related to this ensures people will always have place in their hearts for years to come.
2. Bit Rates: Consumers are a odd bunch when it comes to quality, some are fine with VCD type video playing back on their 55″ HDTV, others won’t settle for that, they want the best! Physical media is capable of reaching bit rates which currently wouldn’t be possible on digitally distributed content for a variety of reasons.
3. You Can’t Sell Digital: If you’re sitting on 50 copies of Doom on HD DVD hoping they’ll be worth something one day, don’t bother. Depending on the title, you could get a hefty sum of money for it down the line. Unfortunately, the same would not apply to digital content, something tells us your 20GB Xbox 360 HDD filled with the third season of Heroes won’t hold much value 20 years down the line, infact a few months down the line and were sure the HDD would be worth more than the show! We wonder how much your colorized Casablanca VHS is worth?
4. Unified: With Digital Downloads, almost everyone and their sister [company] are releasing a distribution device/platform, it’s a lot to take in! To add to the frustration none of them will work “across the board”. Compared to lets say a Blu-ray player where you can play almost every format known to man, including Blu-ray, DVD, CD, HD DVD [combo player], VHS (Yes that’s right, VHS!) and more! Adding to the irony, many also have the ability to stream content from places like Netflix and soon Blockbuster!
5. Restrictions Restrictions!: When Digital Downloads were ushered in it meant doom for users who imported their movies. Before region coding was the only issue to worry about, with downloads restrictions are but not limited to:
* ISP Locks: In today’s day and age it’s not hard for providers to cut you off solely based on the country your connection is coming from.
* D.R.M.X!: You may have heard of Digital Rights Management, but have you heard of Digital Rights Management Xtreme! before? With Digital Distributed content, DRM has been taken to new heights, giving you viewing windows, HDD locks, and a whole slew of other nasty surprises.
* The Studio Equation: Believe it or not, studios only want you to give them money when they tell you too! Despite the digital market being capable of providing millions in revenue, studios choose to ignore the market or limit them. Theirs a reason why your countries XBLVM only has 10 HD movies while the American store has close to 1000
6. 6.So Easy Howard Stern Can Do It!: Pop in your disc/tape and play, simple isn’t it? Compared to downloads where you have to find the movie you want to watch, queue, optionally wait for it to download, find where the file is stored, and playback, if necessary take time out of your experience to watch the buffer bar load.
7. Instant Access: It goes without saying, if you want a top quality video distributed digitally, streaming just won’t cut it.
8. “I always feel like somebody’s watching me”: If you tend to use your VUDU box or Bit Torrent Client (Legally….we hope) at least once a day to watch your HD/HDX movies, odds are someone will take notice. We won’t blame you if you decide to watch Tropic Thunder while your neighbour gets fined and/or arrested for “piracy”.
9. It’s Not A Wired World!: Shockingly surprising yes we know, their are locations in this world that have have little to no Internet access at all (Even in North America!)! Despite not even having 56K access, there is a really good chance those locations have access to at least one form physical media to enjoy.
10. No Back Up Plan: In a Democratic system, a company is capable of losing millions overnight, the unfortunate case for many is they are forced to shutdown. Suppose your favourite content provider is forced to shut down their servers for any reason, any content you bought would be gone! Any DRM server checks needed for content to work would fail, leaving you with an empty shell of a movie/album/game. Although some services, such as Microsoft Digital Locker (Confirmed to be shutting down this morning, August 2009) allow you to back up your data periodically, unfortunately this model is yet to applied to any other service.

Full story: http://formatwarcentral.com/2008/12/...al-media-owns/

[Mr. J]

I'll always prefer physical media over downloads!

[gringo flip]

I feel #2 justifies physical media over downloadable / streaming media.

[dialog_gvf]

Discs are a great gift too. A movement to a gift card is like giving cash. Hardly much thought in that.

Gary

[jdc115]

I'd add, easy to exchange or lend physical media. We sometimes do a movie night at a friend's place but switch who chooses the film. Or if I watch or find something i think is interesting that my friend's might like, then it is very easy to just pass it to them

[Anscules]

gummo rules.

[vladittude0583]

All I have to say though is that even with my cable internet (6 Mbps downstream / 2 Mbps downstream) which is faster than most of the other "high-speed" internet choices in my area (AT&T DSL, Clearwire, etc), it takes forever to download just even 2GB of data. Therefore, I will always prefer physical media over digital downloads and the like. Also, I like the accessibility of the media (i.e., just pop it in into the media player without having to boot it up like a PC, etc). Furthermore, I like the feeling of "owning" it physically rather than digitally, etc.

[hamisht]

Digital Downloads wont be 'the next big thing', broadband is not available everywhere, and some countries have very small data caps.

I can understand people having a HTPC and having their DVD collection on their PC for easy access, but your not going to through out all your dvds when you rip them are you? (if you are, let me know and ill pick em up).

People like looking at stuff to, what are you going to say about digital? "check this out mate i got Lord.of.the.Rings.avi in my c:\Documents and Settings"

Wouldnt you rather point to a wall of dvds/blu-rays and pick up the cover and check it out.

[hamisht]

Oh yeah, Digital files might be harder to copy too, they might have really good encryption. When you rent a movie on dvd, sometimes you copy it (dont deny it).

[FIDDYPOP]

Lets not forget about hard drive space. Even a couple terabytes might fill up quick when downloading complete HD movies. I have about 150 blu's how much memory would that take up?

[Afrobean]

Originally Posted by FIDDYPOP

Lets not forget about hard drive space. Even a couple terabytes might fill up quick when downloading complete HD movies. I have about 150 blu's how much memory would that take up?

Easily around 3 TB.

Originally Posted by caliminius

This is a pretty weak reason. I've downloaded numerous games from the Playstation Store and don't feel like I've lost anything by not having a physical copy. Of course, this is helped by the fact that I could go download it again at a moment's notice (something this article touches on in #10).

That's a different situation. Those games are not currently available in a physical format to even have the choice. Their file size is not enormous, they don't require absurd bandwidth to download.

Originally Posted by caliminius

That's a current issue, but there's nothing truly stopping the studios from making Blu-Ray quality video files available through online distribution.

Bandwidth and server maintenance costs. It's not prudent of them to pay the costs to serve so many TB of data to many customers so much. It's also not an effective means for most consumers to receive movies in this way; I know I wouldn't like having to leave my computer on for days at a time to get a single movie that leaves my couple-years-old harddrive essentially FULL.

Downloads could easily provide the same quality as Blu-Ray.

Yeah... and fill up our harddrives instantly, and require us to download for days for a single feature, to say nothing of the absurd costs the distributors would see to serve so many people so much data.

it's unlikely Blu-Ray will be the last movie format.

I'd say it's probably the last optical disc format. And I wouldn't expect a new system to be worth upgrading to unless there was a difference. Like, SD is to HD as DVD is to BD. But SD is to HD as HD is to ____? There has to be something new to be worth upgrading, something that 1080p picture and 7.1 surround fails to deliver.

It’s cheaper. No packaging or shipping. Logistics are completely thrown out the window. No retail and no middlemen.

Wrong. The middleman just shifts from disc manufacturers, shippers, and retail stores to servers and your ISP. You pay for the lower monetary cost with less product though; you may see the physical form as a hindrance, but until I can interact with digital data in the same way I can interact with a case and a disc, I'm not biting and I know plenty others won't either.

no need to waste resources.

Resources are only wasted in the physical form if you throw them away. If you save the disc and the case, it's not WASTE. Anyway, where do you think the electricity comes from to power the device that downloads the media? Where do you think the electricity comes from to power the server that sends the data to you? Usually by burning coal. If you want to talk about environmental awareness, this is the wrong way to go about it.

No chance you will not get the game you want, when you want.

Places like Amazon are a good counter to this sort of problem. Rare things are going to be rare, but that is true of ANYTHING in this world. Using Amazon or even something like eBay can help you get the rarer things you want.

No need to drive anywhere. No putting up with traffic and stress. Less time traveling means more time for games

You pay for it in that regard for downloads too. How long does it take to download? How long do you need to have a large portion of your Internet connection assigned exclusively to that? Notice also that your points about wasting time with travel are likewise avoided with Amazon (and with proper shipping choices, you get your disc delivered in about the same time it'd take to download).

Physical media can be stolen

This is an absurd argument to make. Anything physical can be stolen. Does that mean we shouldn't want nice clothes or a nice car? "OH NO! Don't buy that car, it'll just get stolen >"

With digital distribution you can of course download again any software you had.

Even if the device you bought it on is taken? Even if it was a gift and you have no means to prove you actually "owned" it before? What if the software is no longer available because the provider just decided to no longer host it? What if the provider has gone out of business or has shifted interests elsewhere and is no longer in the digital distribution business?

No clutter.

Most of us wouldn't identify a neatly aligned shelf of cases to be "clutter". If you had a couple dozen books neatly lined up on a shelf, would you call that clutter?

Games that are loaded off a HDD or SSD or Flash media do so far faster then loading off a disc Little to no load times. No pop-ups

Which is why flash is probably going to be the format of choice if BD gets knocked out. Alternatively, why don't you suggest a system whereby BD movies could install on harddrives to decrease load times (that frankly, are already not very long on a quality device). Xbox 360 has a system like this and it apparently works rather well.

Games that were out of production can be available again with min cost for all to enjoy.

Sorry are we talking about old games or movies? Because digital distribution is a great medium for old, out of print games. If you made the same claim for movies on the same ideals, I'd say you're absolutely wrong. Ghostbusters on NES would not sell well in a physical format (even a current standard, such as Nintendo DS), but I assure you that Ghostbusters would sell well on BD.

DD makes it possible for smaller companies to put there products on the market for all to enjoy.

Companies that small aren't even going to be producing BDs anyway, so how is that an argument against BD? Let them distribute their cheap videos online or on DVD; that has no bearing on the merits of BD.

Despite what anyone thinks a Digital copy is just as tangible a a disc

I really wish a spit take was a realistic response to something, because reading that made me want to do it. There's a reason there is a differentiation between "physical" copies and "digital" copies. One physically exists, the other exists only as digital information on an electronic device. Do you know what tangible means? Something that does not PHYSICALLY exist IS NOT tangible.

Originally Posted by GodofBlu

I like renting physical media. But, I have no desire to own or collect BD's.

You're in the minority. Most people who buy movies prefer to physically own it. If you think BD-devotees make a small slice of the market, just imagine how small the slice of the market people who legitimately buy downloaded movies are.

[UKTruBlu]

You can just bet that all those people who pre fer downloads over physical media have never had a hard drive crash on them!!! If this were to happen to some one with over 700 films on download they would be the first to complain, sometimes it takes the bad things to happen before people learn.

Its happened to me and my wife before, which is why i still buy cd's and import them to my itunes account - i know you can make back up cd's but does everybody????

[caliminius]

Originally Posted by Afrobean

That's a different situation. Those games are not currently available in a physical format to even have the choice. Their file size is not enormous, they don't require absurd bandwidth to download.

And what is your point about them not being available in a physical format? There are several games that have physical counterparts.

Bandwidth and server maintenance costs. It's not prudent of them to pay the costs to serve so many TB of data to many customers so much.

You think digital distribution costs more than physical? Buying raw materials to produce discs, packaging, etc? Paying the numerous people to run the manufacturing machines, the packaging machines? Paying for shipping those goods to a physical location? Are you really going to tell me that costs more than digital distribution?

I did some math. Assuming there are 2000 current Blu-Ray releases and assuming they are all on 50GB discs and use that entire amount, it comes out to about $10,000 for the hard drives to store them all. That's using retail pricing for the hard drives. How much do yo think it would actually cost the studios to secure that much storage space? Yes, I realize that they would need more than one set, but the storage costs are pretty minimal from the studios standpoint.

It's also not an effective means for most consumers to receive movies in this way; I know I wouldn't like having to leave my computer on for days at a time to get a single movie that leaves my couple-years-old harddrive essentially FULL.

If one movie is going to fill your hard drive, perhaps its time to upgrade. 1TB hard drives are available for around $100 on newegg.com. That's the problem with new tech, it needs new equipment to run on. You had to buy a new player for Blu-Ray. Why would you think anything different for downloads?

I'd say it's probably the last optical disc format. And I wouldn't expect a new system to be worth upgrading to unless there was a difference. Like, SD is to HD as DVD is to BD. But SD is to HD as HD is to ____? There has to be something new to be worth upgrading, something that 1080p picture and 7.1 surround fails to deliver.

2K? 4K? 14.2 surround sound? 3D picture?

Wrong. The middleman just shifts from disc manufacturers, shippers, and retail stores to servers and your ISP. You pay for the lower monetary cost with less product though;

Again, do you really think digital costs anywhere near the same as physical? The only manufacturing involved is creating the digital files, which they would have to do for the disc anyway. Server space is a minimal cost.

you may see the physical form as a hindrance, but until I can interact with digital data in the same way I can interact with a case and a disc, I'm not biting and I know plenty others won't either.

That's a different issue. One that the original article doesn't address very well. And its a valid argument against downloads.

Resources are only wasted in the physical form if you throw them away. If you save the disc and the case, it's not WASTE. Anyway, where do you think the electricity comes from to power the device that downloads the media? Where do you think the electricity comes from to power the server that sends the data to you? Usually by burning coal. If you want to talk about environmental awareness, this is the wrong way to go about it.

They are still in essence wasted. The resources get used. They are taken out of the resource pool. Not to mention that I doubt you keep the plastic wrap and perhaps even the advertising inserts that are in the cases. What about the discs with the digital copies. They are essentially waste once the file has been transferred. The coal required to keep a server going is a lot less than what is required to manufacture a pile of discs.

Places like Amazon are a good counter to this sort of problem. Rare things are going to be rare, but that is true of ANYTHING in this world. Using Amazon or even something like eBay can help you get the rarer things you want.

No, they aren't. I can't decide at 3am that I want to watch an episode of She Spies and get instant satisfaction from eBay or Amazon.

The fact that that things that would be rare in a physical don't have to be hard to get is a potential plus for downloads. As I've already stated, server space, unlike retail shelf space, is a minimal cost in digital distribution so companies could afford to keep less popular items available.

You pay for it in that regard for downloads too. How long does it take to download? How long do you need to have a large portion of your Internet connection assigned exclusively to that? Notice also that your points about wasting time with travel are likewise avoided with Amazon (and with proper shipping choices, you get your disc delivered in about the same time it'd take to download).

Not really. I could purchase something at work, start it downloading to my player at home and have it ready to watch when I get home. I'm at least 24 hours away from anything with Amazon. Not to mention that such delivery comes with increase in price that downloads do not involve.

Even if the device you bought it on is taken? Even if it was a gift and you have no means to prove you actually "owned" it before? What if the software is no longer available because the provider just decided to no longer host it? What if the provider has gone out of business or has shifted interests elsewhere and is no longer in the digital distribution business?

I'm pretty sure Amazon could tell you everything you've ever purchased from them. That is no different for a digital download service. They already know you own it. As for the other part, that's no different than any other movie going out of print or a distributor folding.

Sorry are we talking about old games or movies? Because digital distribution is a great medium for old, out of print games. If you made the same claim for movies on the same ideals, I'd say you're absolutely wrong. Ghostbusters on NES would not sell well in a physical format (even a current standard, such as Nintendo DS), but I assure you that Ghostbusters would sell well on BD.

But didn't you just make the point that it would work for old movies? There are a lot of old games people would love to get their hands on but might be considered niche markets at this point. The same is true of movies. They may not move big numbers, but they could still turn a profit.

Companies that small aren't even going to be producing BDs anyway, so how is that an argument against BD? Let them distribute their cheap videos online or on DVD; that has no bearing on the merits of BD.

Because cutting all the distribution and manufacturing costs means they might be able to put their product out in HD. If it's not profitable to put on Blu-Ray but could be as a DD, I'd say that has some bearing on Blu-Ray.

You're in the minority. Most people who buy movies prefer to physically own it. If you think BD-devotees make a small slice of the market, just imagine how small the slice of the market people who legitimately buy downloaded movies are.

There are many good reasons why people don't buy movie downloads. I really don't think needing something physical is a huge factor in it. The simple fact is that downloads currently don't provide the same quality or functionality as Blu-Ray. If you consider yourself a Blu-Ray devotee, you're an idiot; I can't say it any plainer than that. I'm a movie devotee which means that I currently support Blu-Ray because it provides the best movie watching experience. If downloads some day provide a better experience, I won't let some foolish devotion stop me from switching over.

[Afrobean]

Originally Posted by caliminius

And what is your point about them not being available in a physical format? There are several games that have physical counterparts.

Not ones made specifically for services like Xbox Live Arcade. Ports like Wii's Virtual Console makes use of could be argued for, but I'm not considering out of print physical form. If you want to buy Super Mario RPG, it has to be digital distribution and that's just fine.

Movies are different though.

You think digital distribution costs more than physical? Buying raw materials to produce discs, packaging, etc? Paying the numerous people to run the manufacturing machines, the packaging machines? Paying for shipping those goods to a physical location? Are you really going to tell me that costs more than digital distribution?

Did I say that it was more costly? No, I said it wasn't prudent to pay those costs. This is because people will not want to pay ~20 bucks or whatever it would cost them to deliver BD-like bitrates on 1080p video with 7.1 surround.

I guess what I'm saying is that I'm confident that BD quality over DD would have a very low profit margin for them, high investment, high overall cost, and would make up a smaller source of income than Blu-ray.

I did some math. Assuming there are 2000 current Blu-Ray releases and assuming they are all on 50GB discs and use that entire amount, it comes out to about $10,000 for the hard drives to store them all. That's using retail pricing for the hard drives. How much do yo think it would actually cost the studios to secure that much storage space? Yes, I realize that they would need more than one set, but the storage costs are pretty minimal from the studios standpoint.

You clearly do not understand how the infrastructure of the Internet works. It's not merely enough for them to HAVE the data, they also have to SERVE it. They need servers which can handle sending many TB of data constantly, daily.

They can't just fill a harddrive with the data. They need to be able to handle getting the data to their hundreds to thousands of paying users.

This is why there's that controversy with that download box system. It doesn't have a central server that hosts files, it bounces files across individual boxes in a P2P system. This is an answer that saves them the trouble of costing them to host the file, but it hits you with sending and receiving a LOT more data than you actually want or asked for. Your ISP would likely get VERY mad at you.

If one movie is going to fill your hard drive, perhaps its time to upgrade. 1TB hard drives are available for around $100 on newegg.com. That's the problem with new tech, it needs new equipment to run on. You had to buy a new player for Blu-Ray. Why would you think anything different for downloads?

1TB? Sorry, 1TB isn't even close to enough to store the movies I have on BD, to say nothing of the dozens I plan on getting soon, nor all of the TV shows I've got on DVD that I would probably rebuy if I could get them in HD.

Saying "you can pay 100 bucks to store 1TB" just says "HDD is still not a viable means for storing BD quality content". I'd end up dumping like 1k dollars overall just to store my stuff and that is lame.

2K? 4K? 14.2 surround sound? 3D picture?

2K and 4K wouldn't look better on your screen unless you've got a super mega huge screen. The way people talk about 1080p now... imagine if there was another format with people saying "no you wont see a difference unless you have a 100+ inch screen". I wouldn't be surprised to see 2K and such formats available eventually, but that will fall immediately into the sort of hole that laser disc lived in for so long.

More points of surround sound go outside of what is available on the film masters, wouldn't it? That wouldn't add to the experience.

BD is already capable of doing 3D (or they're working on it or something). There was an article posted in this forum not too long about it. Anyway, do you really think most movies released on BD currently would be improved by viewing them in a new, exclusively 3D format? Polar Express would be pretty much it, right? Everything else would look the same or have a terrible 3D feature added on that is out of line with the director's intent.

Again, do you really think digital costs anywhere near the same as physical? The only manufacturing involved is creating the digital files, which they would have to do for the disc anyway. Server space is a minimal cost.

Ok, you set up a server and serve hundreds to thousands of people downloading large files simultaneously.

See how much that actually costs, because you definitely do not understand. You might be able to host the large files, but if you really expect people to be able to download them fast too, it'll cost ya.

They are still in essence wasted. The resources get used. They are taken out of the resource pool. Not to mention that I doubt you keep the plastic wrap and perhaps even the advertising inserts that are in the cases. What about the discs with the digital copies. They are essentially waste once the file has been transferred. The coal required to keep a server going is a lot less than what is required to manufacture a pile of discs.

The point I was trying to make is that it's not "green technology". Environmental factors are not a reason to choose DD over BD or otherwise. It's a reach for a reason at best.

If you're interested in living without waste, quit your life, give away your possessions and go live off the land. Be completely self sufficient from nature, and if you hunt, be sure to use EVERY PART DO NOT BE WASTEFUL

No, they aren't. I can't decide at 3am that I want to watch an episode of She Spies and get instant satisfaction from eBay or Amazon.

I guess restaurants are enemies now too. Damn that Arby's! I want my roast beef at 2 AM why aren't you open?!

If you want instant gratification for movies, you should have already had the movie in your collection. Anyway, instant gratification is a reasonable argument in favor of streamed content or low resolution/low quality download, but not BD quality material. You start your download at 3 AM and tomorrow evening you'd be able to watch it.

The fact that that things that would be rare in a physical don't have to be hard to get is a potential plus for downloads. As I've already stated, server space, unlike retail shelf space, is a minimal cost in digital distribution so companies could afford to keep less popular items available.

Except that major studio releases aren't as rare as you're arguing. What you're arguing in favor of is good for old GAMES and low quality, low budget, low release movies. I already said, old GAMES downloading is a good thing, and let the indie group have their cheap DD and DVD. Who cares? I assure you that major releases will never be rare in the same way that old games are now rare.

Not really. I could purchase something at work, start it downloading to my player at home and have it ready to watch when I get home. I'm at least 24 hours away from anything with Amazon. Not to mention that such delivery comes with increase in price that downloads do not involve.

Sorry, maybe I have super slow Internet, but I can't download 30+ GB in under 8 hours. Am I the only one who can't download 63 MB/s? I know I'm nowhere near the best, but I top out under 200 kb/s. You know how long it'd take me to download that crap? You know there are PLENTY of movie watchers in this country with even slower Internet connection than me? Would you suggest forcing them to get a much more expensive ISP just so they can watch a movie without downloading for 2 weeks straight just to get it?

I'm not against downloads or streaming overall. I just know that it's not a viable means of delivery on BD quality material. It's scarcely even viable for delivering 720p with stereo sound.

I'm pretty sure Amazon could tell you everything you've ever purchased from them. That is no different for a digital download service. They already know you own it. As for the other part, that's no different than any other movie going out of print or a distributor folding.

I don't know about you, but I don't like buying all that I own at one place... not every BD I own was bought from Amazon. Some were other online stores, some places like Target, some Best Buy. If I downloaded... I'd be able to choose from one source, right? No competitive pricing I see there...

But didn't you just make the point that it would work for old movies?

No, old movies are constantly rereleased. You can't go pick up a copy of Donkey Kong Country for the Nintendo Wii, but you can go and buy The Third Man on Blu-ray. With time, more and more older titles will arrive on BD. If you're arguing for old titles, your argument falls apart if the title has been released on DVD. If at this point, something HASN'T been released on DVD, DD would be a good venue for it.

There are a lot of old games people would love to get their hands on but might be considered niche markets at this point. The same is true of movies. They may not move big numbers, but they could still turn a profit.

Yeah, except that online distributors are likely to pull underperforming titles even if it costs them relatively little to keep them hosted. Think of it like DD's answer to being "out of print". I assure you it will happen with DD.

Because cutting all the distribution and manufacturing costs means they might be able to put their product out in HD. If it's not profitable to put on Blu-Ray but could be as a DD, I'd say that has some bearing on Blu-Ray.

If they can't afford to finance a BD release, they'd not be able to finance a 1080p 7.1 surround BD quality DD release. If they wanna get it out there in 720p with stereo, yeah sure, but there is no way they could afford to host a BD quality file if they can't even get their movie released on disc.

There are many good reasons why people don't buy movie downloads. I really don't think needing something physical is a huge factor in it. The simple fact is that downloads currently don't provide the same quality or functionality as Blu-Ray. If you consider yourself a Blu-Ray devotee, you're an idiot; I can't say it any plainer than that. I'm a movie devotee which means that I currently support Blu-Ray because it provides the best movie watching experience. If downloads some day provide a better experience, I won't let some foolish devotion stop me from switching over.

Movies won't have a better look or sound than they do on BD. The only way they could is if it was a poor transfer and they remaster for a better DD release. But that's not DD providing a better experience, that's the studio failing on BD, then later getting it right.

ps I dont appreciate the implication that I'm an idiot. I'm only even in the Blu-ray camp because
#1: I like movies
#2: I like HD
#3: I like physical media

[ps3andlovinit]

Originally Posted by caliminius

I won't let some foolish devotion stop me from switching over.

Has nothing to do with foolish "devotion"...it's about owning something and having the freedom that goes along with ownership. It's called common sense. Giving up your control of ownership .. to the whim of an ever changing corporate policy and terms of agreement of a corporation ... that is legally bound to their shareholders .. is the foolish devotion. Is owning your home and being in control of your own house a foolish devotion vs renting a house and the landlord kicking you out when their circumstances change? Now DD might make some sense for renting.

You also realize that losing or having key account information stolen means you lose your entire investment in one shot. And any recourse to resolve it is out of your control. . If someone steals my physical copies my insurance covers it. Good luck telling your insurance company that MS or Sony legally banned your account from their systems and you want it covered. That's a foolish fantasy.

[ScarredLungs]

Originally Posted by jayvo2009

I'll always prefer physical media over downloads!

Originally Posted by FIDDYPOP

Lets not forget about hard drive space. Even a couple terabytes might fill up quick when downloading complete HD movies. I have about 150 blu's how much memory would that take up?

+1 Digital is not logical in my mind. Hard copies are always better.

[CptGreedle]

I do agree, physical is better. I like collecting things and owning them. I have seen Cars probably 4 or 5 times now. I have watched several others many times. But there are some I still have not watched. I know I can watch them at any time, so I don't feel rushed about it, and I can watch them at my convenience rather than the time limit on a digital download.
The quality is clearly better to me too, but so many people I know can't tell the difference or think resolution is the only thing that matters and fail to notice the glaringly bad errors and artifacts in their digital downloads.
Sound too is important, and I have yet to find a single download service that offers anything as good as 7.1, or HD audio.

[caliminius]

Originally Posted by DoYouBlu

1. People Like Physical: Wether its a 12″ vinyl record or simply a DVD case, people have always wanted something they could hold, to tell them “Hey, you own that!”. Stigma related to this ensures people will always have place in their hearts for years to come.

This is a pretty weak reason. I've downloaded numerous games from the Playstation Store and don't feel like I've lost anything by not having a physical copy. Of course, this is helped by the fact that I could go download it again at a moment's notice (something this article touches on in #10).

2. Bit Rates: Consumers are a odd bunch when it comes to quality, some are fine with VCD type video playing back on their 55″ HDTV, others won’t settle for that, they want the best! Physical media is capable of reaching bit rates which currently wouldn’t be possible on digitally distributed content for a variety of reasons.

That's a current issue, but there's nothing truly stopping the studios from making Blu-Ray quality video files available through online distribution.

3. You Can’t Sell Digital: If you’re sitting on 50 copies of Doom on HD DVD hoping they’ll be worth something one day, don’t bother. Depending on the title, you could get a hefty sum of money for it down the line. Unfortunately, the same would not apply to digital content, something tells us your 20GB Xbox 360 HDD filled with the third season of Heroes won’t hold much value 20 years down the line, infact a few months down the line and were sure the HDD would be worth more than the show! We wonder how much your colorized Casablanca VHS is worth?

I don't know what the heck the author was trying to say in his rambling nonsense. If he'd had kept it simple and said you can't resell digital downloads, it would have been a good point. Instead, his point gets lost in space.

4. Unified: With Digital Downloads, almost everyone and their sister [company] are releasing a distribution device/platform, it’s a lot to take in! To add to the frustration none of them will work “across the board”. Compared to lets say a Blu-ray player where you can play almost every format known to man, including Blu-ray, DVD, CD, HD DVD [combo player], VHS (Yes that’s right, VHS!) and more! Adding to the irony, many also have the ability to stream content from places like Netflix and soon Blockbuster!

This to me is the biggest problem with downloads. Massive incompatibility between the myriad services.

5. Restrictions Restrictions!: When Digital Downloads were ushered in it meant doom for users who imported their movies. Before region coding was the only issue to worry about, with downloads restrictions are but not limited to:
* ISP Locks: In today’s day and age it’s not hard for providers to cut you off solely based on the country your connection is coming from.
* D.R.M.X!: You may have heard of Digital Rights Management, but have you heard of Digital Rights Management Xtreme! before? With Digital Distributed content, DRM has been taken to new heights, giving you viewing windows, HDD locks, and a whole slew of other nasty surprises.
* The Studio Equation: Believe it or not, studios only want you to give them money when they tell you too! Despite the digital market being capable of providing millions in revenue, studios choose to ignore the market or limit them. Theirs a reason why your countries XBLVM only has 10 HD movies while the American store has close to 1000

One by one:

ISP Locks: Just like region coding, 99% of the general populace won't give a crap. Early adopters may be big on importing, but for the vast majority of buyers, they'll go to the local Wal-Mart and be completely oblivious that they could buy a better version of Movie X from the UK. The same is true with downloads.
D.R.M.X.: Okay, this one is more of an issue. As a rental model, most of the restrictions don't really matter to downloads. For ownership, yes they're a problem (and part of the reason I have no desire to purchase videos from the PS Store).
The Studio Equation: I have no idea what the author is trying to say here. To me it sounds like the author is trying to imply things like Sony doesn't think Canadian money isn't good enough for them. It's obviously not that simple, though the author tries to make it sound that way. There's a multitude of issues keeping content from certain countries.

6. 6.So Easy Howard Stern Can Do It!: Pop in your disc/tape and play, simple isn’t it? Compared to downloads where you have to find the movie you want to watch, queue, optionally wait for it to download, find where the file is stored, and playback, if necessary take time out of your experience to watch the buffer bar load.

Has the author even used any of the download services? Apparently not. There's no service where you have to "find where the file is stored." Every download service is pretty brain-dead simple: AppleTV, Vudu, Amazon Unbox, Xbox Live, etc. (Besides, the author looses points for invoking Howard Stern. I can't stand that piece of sh*t.)

7. Instant Access: It goes without saying, if you want a top quality video distributed digitally, streaming just won’t cut it.

And what about downloads? Downloads could easily provide the same quality as Blu-Ray.

8. “I always feel like somebody’s watching me”: If you tend to use your VUDU box or Bit Torrent Client (Legally….we hope) at least once a day to watch your HD/HDX movies, odds are someone will take notice. We won’t blame you if you decide to watch Tropic Thunder while your neighbour gets fined and/or arrested for “piracy”.

Once again, what is the author saying? If you're using a legitimate service (i.e., not downloading illegally from BitTorrent sites), you have nothing to worry about. Is he trying to get at monthly download caps? Doesn't seem to be. Just seems to be a FUD statement.

9. It’s Not A Wired World!: Shockingly surprising yes we know, their are locations in this world that have have little to no Internet access at all (Even in North America!)! Despite not even having 56K access, there is a really good chance those locations have access to at least one form physical media to enjoy.

Finally, another valid point. He's up to about to about 3 or or 3 1/2. Congrats!

10. No Back Up Plan: In a Democratic system, a company is capable of losing millions overnight, the unfortunate case for many is they are forced to shutdown. Suppose your favourite content provider is forced to shut down their servers for any reason, any content you bought would be gone! Any DRM server checks needed for content to work would fail, leaving you with an empty shell of a movie/album/game. Although some services, such as Microsoft Digital Locker (Confirmed to be shutting down this morning, August 2009) allow you to back up your data periodically, unfortunately this model is yet to applied to any other service.

Wow, two valid points in a row! Sort of. You could see services shutting down as a similar fate to new formats being rolled out. How much longer will VCR's still be available? I searched Circuit City's site and the only VCR's are DVD/VCR combos. Nobody wants to hear it, but it's unlikely Blu-Ray will be the last movie format. Right now, there is an issue that download services are rising and falling at a much faster rate than the physical formats, but if download services established themselves, what's the difference between the demise of a download service and and a physical format?

Sorry if it seems like I'm trying to defend downloads, but most of the reasons in the article are just plain stupid or short-sighted. The author had to REALLY reach to get to 10 reasons and didn't even seem to know what he was really saying with at least 2 or 3 of them. Points 4, 5, 9 and 10 are the only ones with any teeth.

[Carlsberg19]

good post, i gotta show this to my anti-bluray friend who claims downloading BD Rips are off the same quality. Idiot lol

[mightypen]

1. People Like Physical: Wether

Fourth word.

ugh