Because Blu-Ray will "obviously" be replaced rapidly by streaming only...

[chachaseeds]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

Well Tender Mercies is not available on blu ray in the USA but I streamed it in crystal clear 1080p from iTunes...

Yea, itunes is what I would call one of those "premium" services, where the selection is great but renting something is more expensive than renting a Redbox blu. When I mean poor selection, I'm mainly talking about Netflix, Amazon Prime, Redbox Instant, the $8/month buffet type. I could see people who live far away from Redboxes easily opting for the more expensive streaming route though.

[bruceames]

Originally Posted by chachaseeds

Okay, yea if I scoot up close to my TV and try to find the differences, sure I'll see that bluray looks better and has less artifacts. However, I don't find myself noticing from an average viewing distance when I'm not trying to nitpick bluray from streaming. I can sure hear the difference though, if that makes you happy...

Actually the difference jumps out at you. You don't have to scoot up close and try to find the differences. Even on my bedroom 50" plasma from 14 feet away the difference is very apparent. And that is comparing VUDU 1080p HDX to Blu-ray.

[chachaseeds]

Originally Posted by bruceames.

Actually the difference jumps out at you. You don't have to scoot up close and try to find the differences. Even on my bedroom 50" plasma from 14 feet away the difference is very apparent. And that is comparing VUDU 1080p HDX to Blu-ray.

Well, if you say so, I guess it varies from person to person. I'm far from being picky, and I watch my 55 inch. 1080p LED from around 10 feet away. Yea, I can see a difference from that distance, but really only in the scenes where there's lots of action and movement. That said, I wasn't wearing my new prescription glasses, so maybe the difference is significant after all, sorry about that. How many bars do you get for 1080p HDX, and what's the speed of your connection? The highest is 3 bars, which is what I get on my 30 mbps connection (although Vudu caps bitrate around 10 or so). Anyways, I'm not saying that bluray isn't better, I'm just saying that for me, the improved quality isn't the biggest selling point for bluray.

[bruceames]

Originally Posted by chachaseeds

Well, if you say so, I guess it varies from person to person. I'm far from being picky, and I watch my 55 inch. 1080p LED from around 10 feet away. Yea, I can see a difference from that distance, but really only in the scenes where there's lots of action and movement. That said, I wasn't wearing my new prescription glasses, so maybe the difference is significant after all, sorry about that. How many bars do you get for 1080p HDX, and what's the speed of your connection? The highest is 3 bars, which is what I get on my 30 mbps connection (although Vudu caps bitrate around 10 or so). Anyways, I'm not saying that bluray isn't better, I'm just saying that for me, the improved quality isn't the biggest selling point for bluray.

speedtest.comcast.net says I have 16 mbps, which is plenty.

The difference is mainly in the level of detail. The Blu-ray picture is just sharper. I compared Game of Thrones season 2 and frankly I was surprised to see such a difference from 14 feet away. Since I got the UV copy free with the BD purchase anyway, I thought the convenience of streaming it would outweigh any small difference in PQ I would notice from that distance. But I was wrong. I'll gladly go through the hassle of putting each disc in the tray and putting the other disc back in the fold out case with outer shell and slipcover, suffering through the longer load times and the lack of resume, just to get that extra detail and "pop". The audio sounds better too and I'm using the speakers on the TV.

Call me anal, but I hate watching something knowing that a better version is available. Especially when its sitting on my shelf. But that's how most of us home video enthusiasts are who typically visits sites like this, am I wrong?

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by bruceames.

speedtest.comcast.net says I have 16 mbps, which is plenty.

The difference is mainly in the level of detail. The Blu-ray picture is just sharper. I compared Game of Thrones season 2 and frankly I was surprised to see such a difference from 14 feet away. Since I got the UV copy free with the BD purchase anyway, I thought the convenience of streaming it would outweigh any small difference in PQ I would notice from that distance. But I was wrong. I'll gladly go through the hassle of putting each disc in the tray and putting the other disc back in the fold out case with outer shell and slipcover, suffering through the longer load times and the lack of resume, just to get that extra detail and "pop". The audio sounds better too and I'm using the speakers on the TV.

Call me anal, but I hate watching something knowing that a better version is available. Especially when its sitting on my shelf. But that's how most of us home video enthusiasts are who typically visits sites like this, am I wrong?

Well, according to the worrying trend of streaming fans joining a bluray forum (in my opinion). To the rest of us you are of course, correct.

[KRW1]

I'm a streaming fan, but I recognise it for what it is - a cheap cable TV channel with a choice of old and new movies I might not necassarily want to buy. It's also a sampler for things I might want to add to my permanent collection at some point, mostly, but in no way a replacement for a bluray library.

[blonde_devil]

i think streaming is going to replace tv to a degree before it replaces bluray. with some of the headaches concerning cable channels, I could see more shows being on netflix or more channels starting to go a streaming route instead of the traditional tv route. I think a lot of shows that got cancelled after a couple episodes could have gone on a lot longer had all the episodes been available to an audience on their schedule like on netflix so I think that could start to become a more viable option.

[Taikero]

Originally Posted by blonde_devil

i think streaming is going to replace tv to a degree before it replaces bluray. with some of the headaches concerning cable channels, I could see more shows being on netflix or more channels starting to go a streaming route instead of the traditional tv route. I think a lot of shows that got cancelled after a couple episodes could have gone on a lot longer had all the episodes been available to an audience on their schedule like on netflix so I think that could start to become a more viable option.

This is actually a reasonable point. I also believe that television shows have a great shot at improving both exposure and convenience with the rise of streaming services (though at the expense of the big three networks, I imagine). Most television shows I would see little point in owning on Blu-ray (aside my absolute favorites), and in that case, streaming is one of the best options for casual enjoyment.

Movies, however, due to their higher budgets, (generally) better acting, better sound mixes, and (generally) better visual effects, should be experienced in the best available format when possible, and at home that format is Blu-ray and will remain Blu-ray for the foreseeable future.

[pagemaster]

Originally Posted by blonde_devil

i think streaming is going to replace tv to a degree before it replaces bluray. with some of the headaches concerning cable channels, I could see more shows being on netflix or more channels starting to go a streaming route instead of the traditional tv route. I think a lot of shows that got cancelled after a couple episodes could have gone on a lot longer had all the episodes been available to an audience on their schedule like on netflix so I think that could start to become a more viable option.

Streaming will not replace cable tv...no chance, not going to happen. Streaming will be the way the majority watch movies, there is no debating this.

Physical ownership is sadly dying. Streaming offers a viable alternative. When movie studios are promoting Ultraviolet on blu ray movies, you know there is something not right with physical media. dvd never had to compete with streaming like br does.

From the Canadians up North of us.

http://www.thestar.com/entertainment...he_future.html

"“We just launched UV, which is UltraViolet, where you can download and store a movie in your (online) cloud. I envision the day where you’ll come to our theatre, you’ll watch a movie, and at the same time we’ll sell you the download and deposit it in your cloud.

“Three months later, you’ll own the movie for the rest of your life. You can watch it on any device you own. That’s the way it’ll go. People don’t want physical goods anymore; it’ll be like music but it’ll be for movies.”

[KRW1]

Jesus, just when we had a nice little discussion going.

To answer the last serious point, yes, Taikero and blonde devil, I think you could be right. Most channels already offer this streaming and downloading, here (UK) and the US I believe. It's only a question of someone realising they could save a vast amount of money by dropping the live broadcast side of things completely and going streaming/download only.

It'll take a few years, I think, but you can already see it taking shape and actually happening.

[pagemaster]

Originally Posted by Taikero

Movies, however, due to their higher budgets, (generally) better acting, better sound mixes, and (generally) better visual effects, should be experienced in the best available format when possible, and at home that format is Blu-ray and will remain Blu-ray for the foreseeable future.

I do agree to this, but I also do not agree. Most people are happy with dvd quality or 1080p with out the fancy speakers etc.

However, there are certain movies that simply beg to be watched in the full blu ray experience. But not everything needs to be perfect.

[Taikero]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

Streaming will not replace cable tv...no chance, not going to happen.

Why? Because you say so?

Originally Posted by pagemaster

Streaming will be the way the majority watch movies, there is no debating this.

Until the digital service's servers shut down, which has already happened multiple times in the music industry to much outrage by consumers.

So no, this won't happen very soon, if it even happens at all. You can't rely on a company to always keep your data available to you "for the rest of your life", whenever you want it.

Originally Posted by pagemaster

Physical ownership is sadly dying.

Originally Posted by pagemaster

dvd never had to compete with streaming like br does.

DVD is still the dominant format as far as revenue is concerned and it has been competing with both Blu-ray and streaming just fine, though it is declining as Blu-ray revenue increases. Streaming is the least profitable of any of the formats thus far.

Originally Posted by pagemaster

From the Canadians up North of us.

http://www.thestar.com/entertainment...he_future.html

"“We just launched UV, which is UltraViolet, where you can download and store a movie in your (online) cloud. I envision the day where you’ll come to our theatre, you’ll watch a movie, and at the same time we’ll sell you the download and deposit it in your cloud.

“Three months later, you’ll own the movie for the rest of your life. You can watch it on any device you own. That’s the way it’ll go. People don’t want physical goods anymore; it’ll be like music but it’ll be for movies.”

A CEO/marketing exec's dream will not necessarily become reality. UltraViolet is a nice idea, but as I've tried to tell you time and again, streaming today does not have the benefits that physical media does, for all its apparent convenience.

[KRW1]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

Streaming will not replace cable tv...no chance, not going to happen. Streaming will be the way the majority watch movies, there is no debating this.

Do you ever not just read back your comments to yourself before posting, and think, 'hang on a minute, that completely contradicts itself. I'd best go away and do some serious thinking before I make myself look silly'?

[Taikero]

Originally Posted by KRW1

To answer the last serious point, yes, Taikero and blonde devil, I think you could be right. Most channels already offer this streaming and downloading, here (UK) and the US I believe. It's only a question of someone realising they could save a vast amount of money by dropping the live broadcast side of things completely and going streaming/download only.

It'll take a few years, I think, but you can already see it taking shape and actually happening.

Some of the big three networks are offering recent episodes via streaming (ABC does this, and my fianceé catches up on her shows this way).

Netflix has their own television series that will be released in its entirety for on-demand consumption (if it already hasn't been released, can't remember the date).

The problem with completely replacing traditional methods is the public hasn't caught up to technological possibilities. Much of America has no better than dialup internet (or none at all), even though they have access to the big three networks.

Once the politicians wake up and realize the internet has to be a utility that is taken seriously, that is both neutral and (even if initially limited in speed) free, then we'll see advances the like of which we can't even dream of now, and I'm not just talking television but technology and the human experience and way of life as a whole.

[pagemaster]

Originally Posted by Taikero

Why? Because you say so?




Until the digital service's servers shut down, which has already happened multiple times in the music industry to much outrage by consumers.

So no, this won't happen very soon, if it even happens at all. You can't rely on a company to always keep your data available to you "for the rest of your life", whenever you want it.








DVD is still the dominant format as far as revenue is concerned and it has been competing with both Blu-ray and streaming just fine, though it is declining as Blu-ray revenue increases. Streaming is the least profitable of any of the formats thus far.




A CEO/marketing exec's dream will not necessarily become reality. UltraViolet is a nice idea, but as I've tried to tell you time and again, streaming today does not have the benefits that physical media does, for all its apparent convenience.

There is no laughing at this. Streaming will take over.

Pioneer (my favorite brand) has just announced that the new receivers will support tablet and the option to stream 1080p from your tablet with 7.1 sound. The new receivers are capable of air play, etc. As well as HTC connect etc.

Yes, the machines will be compatible for 4K, as well as existing blu ray.

[KRW1]

Originally Posted by Taikero

Some of the big three networks are offering recent episodes via streaming (ABC does this, and my fianceé catches up on her shows this way).

Netflix has their own television series that will be released in its entirety for on-demand consumption (if it already hasn't been released, can't remember the date).

The problem with completely replacing traditional methods is the public hasn't caught up to technological possibilities. Much of America has no better than dialup internet (or none at all), even though they have access to the big three networks.

Once the politicians wake up and realize the internet has to be a utility that is taken seriously, that is both neutral and (even if initially limited in speed) free, then we'll see advances the like of which we can't even dream of now.

Perhaps we're slightly ahead by virtue of being smaller but all our main channels offer streaming as an alternative and, some channels, I honestly couldn;t tell you if they still broadcasting as we watch all our TV through the PS3. Most of my work colleagues watch TV from Iplayer or Sky+, which I know little about.

We usually have to wait a few days to talk about TV shows as we're all waiting for someone to catch up. It can be tense avoiding spoilers!

Netflix have already produced TV shows and I think House of Cards was the first major production that's made other channels sit up and take notice. I think Arrested Development will go stellar.

I think, as you say, technology roll out will be the major stumbling block but, in its way, Netflix is the first internet only TV channel. It won't be the last. Over here, one of our more low end supermarkets has introduced its own streaming channel with heavy advertising. It's definitely happening but as Cable TV alternatives, nothing more.

[Taikero]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

There is no laughing at this. Streaming will take over.

I never said it couldn't. The fact is, with the state of technology today, it won't.

Originally Posted by pagemaster

Pioneer (my favorite brand) has just announced that the new receivers will support tablet and the option to stream 1080p from your tablet with 7.1 sound. The new receivers are capable of air play, etc. As well as HTC connect etc.

Yes, the machines will be compatible for 4K, as well as existing blu ray.

My current receiver supports all sorts of nice streaming functionality, as does my Blu-ray player, and I use my Blu-ray player as an in-network DLNA device. Having said that, I still prefer Blu-rays over DLNA-served media because the quality is just superior.

• DLNA devices do not support a wide enough range of formats yet.
• Internet service providers don't provide enough bandwidth or available data over the course of a month.
• Wi-fi technology is unreliable for home-wide media streaming (or expensive if you want a reliable router that is powerful enough to support 5 GHz DLNA serving).
• Streaming services provide crappy video quality and oftentimes not even better than 2.0 Stereo audio.

Because of all these limiting factors, no, streaming isn't taking over anytime soon.

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

There is no laughing at this. Streaming will take over.

Pioneer (my favorite brand) has just announced that the new receivers will support tablet and the option to stream 1080p from your tablet with 7.1 sound. The new receivers are capable of air play, etc. As well as HTC connect etc.

Yes, the machines will be compatible for 4K, as well as existing blu ray.

wait wait wait!! you mean people buy receivers still?? I thought people didn't care about receivers and speakers anymore and were leaving them in droves? I think you REALLY need to re-read your messages so you can actually make sense

[pagemaster]

Originally Posted by Taikero

I never said it couldn't. The fact is, with the state of technology today, it won't.



My current receiver supports all sorts of nice streaming functionality, as does my Blu-ray player, and I use my Blu-ray player as an in-network DLNA device. Having said that, I still prefer Blu-rays over DLNA-served media because the quality is just superior.

• DLNA devices do not support a wide enough range of formats yet.
• Internet service providers don't provide enough bandwidth or available data over the course of a month.
• Wi-fi technology is unreliable for home-wide media streaming (or expensive if you want a reliable router that is powerful enough to support 5 GHz DLNA serving).
• Streaming services provide crappy video quality and oftentimes not even better than 2.0 Stereo audio.

Because of all these limiting factors, no, streaming isn't taking over anytime soon.

This is not true at all. I have never had an issue with streaming...In fact I was surprised at how outstanding an iTunes 1080p movie is as an alternative to blu ray.

Off the laptop, 1080p struggled, but not on an Apple TV. And Netlfix looked superb off the Apple TV

The average person DOES NOT CARE about sound. Master audio does not mean much to average people.

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

This is not true at all. I have never had an issue with streaming...In fact I was surprised at how outstanding an iTunes 1080p movie is as an alternative to blu ray.

Off the laptop, 1080p struggled, but not on an Apple TV. And Netlfix looked superb off the Apple TV

The average person DOES NOT CARE about sound. Master audio does not mean much to average people.

the average person is a complete moron in most aspects of life. the elite are the ones who control the market, otherwise big screens and speakers and receivers never would have taken off