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

[ScarredLungs]

Originally Posted by Midnight Rambler

Streaming will NEVER win out in the U.S. because in the U.S. the greedy ISP's, etc. will NEVER build out the "last mile" (more like last miles).

I live on the cusp of the suburbs of a major city in Ohio. Go a half mile down my road and my neighbors can't get cable TV, and their only Internet options are via telco or satellite, both of which suck horribly.

Exactly. Companies will not want to put forth the money to allow streaming to be available to all. Too many people prefer physical over digital. With a disc, you own it. Companies could start to define what is actually owned if it went to digital as well.

[vargo]

Originally Posted by CraigW

Many homes still don't have access to extremely fast connections that are required to stream HD content reliably. And the ones that do if they live in areas with little competition pay over inflated prices.

For all these arguments about convenience winning out over quality why don't we apply those to ISP customers. I know a lot of people who prefer to pay lower prices for slower DSL because they don't like the high prices of the cable companies. IOW, 3Mbps DSL is good enough for what they need to do on the net.

Not many people had colour TVs in the 1950s ? So I guess colour TV never caught on, right?

Not many people had HD-capable TVs in 2000. So I guess HD formats like Bluray were failures, right?

Its a completely dumb argument. What do you think - broadband availability, speed and caps in the US are going to stay the same, for the rest of time?

Average US broadband speed goes up every year. The amount of people with high-speed (10Mbps+) goes up every year. The amount of people connected full stop goes up every year. So to sit there and say streaming won't 'win out' because some people have slow internet at the moment....its a completely ludicrous and idiotic argument.

I swear you guys must be under 18 because you have no concept of time, or how rapidly things can change.

[ScarredLungs]

Originally Posted by vargo

Not many people had colour TVs in the 1950s ? So I guess colour TV never caught on, right?

Not many people had HD-capable TVs in 2000. So I guess HD formats like Bluray were failures, right?

Its a completely dumb argument. What do you think - broadband availability, speed and caps in the US are going to stay the same, for the rest of time?

Average US broadband speed goes up every year. The amount of people with high-speed (10Mbps+) goes up every year. The amount of people connected full stop goes up every year. So to sit there and say streaming won't 'win out' because some people have slow internet at the moment....its a completely ludicrous and idiotic argument.

I swear you guys must be under 18 because you have no concept of time, or how rapidly things can change.

Lets not forget that companies want to start to limit the amount of bandwidth. If you go over it, the cost would be very high, as to the point of not being worth the activity.

This has been talked about at comcast and other big internet providers over the last few years. They will find a way to make money and capitalize on anything they can. If it went streaming, you can bet they would put bandwidth restrictions in place.

[vargo]

Originally Posted by cvm

Lets not forget that companies want to start to limit the amount of bandwidth. If you go over it, the cost would be very high, as to the point of not being worth the activity.

This has been talked about at comcast and other big internet providers over the last few years. They will find a way to make money and capitalize on anything they can. If it went streaming, you can bet they would put bandwidth restrictions in place.

So not only do you think broadband speed and availability will stay the same as they are now for the rest of time, you also think that caps will go down every year without fail?

The logical conclusion to your argument is that eventually the caps will be 0 MB. Enjoy the internet while you can folks.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by vargo

Its a completely dumb argument. What do you think - broadband availability, speed and caps in the US are going to stay the same, for the rest of time?

The 'never' part is obviously ridiculous but going too far in the other direction can be just as silly. Will network infrastructure ever support large-scale streaming of BD quality video/audio? Of course.

Should we expect that anytime soon? Probably not. In addition to the technical obstacles there are all manner of political, regulatory and financial interests in play.

[Tok]

Originally Posted by vargo

Not many people had colour TVs in the 1950s ? So I guess colour TV never caught on, right?

Not many people had HD-capable TVs in 2000. So I guess HD formats like Bluray were failures, right?

Its a completely dumb argument. What do you think - broadband availability, speed and caps in the US are going to stay the same, for the rest of time?

Average US broadband speed goes up every year. The amount of people with high-speed (10Mbps+) goes up every year. The amount of people connected full stop goes up every year. So to sit there and say streaming won't 'win out' because some people have slow internet at the moment....its a completely ludicrous and idiotic argument.

I swear you guys must be under 18 because you have no concept of time, or how rapidly things can change.

I know things change, but as I pointed out their a substantial portion of the population that won't be willing to pay the premiums to get upper tier speeds.

I know some people that hate Comcast that they won't go with cable at all. I bundle and my services between HD digital, phone and internet. I still pay $170/m. And the cable company has got it rigged if you drop some services like phone or try to downgrade to slower internet or cable packages that in the end your saving very little per month. Most consumers don't have competition in their areas.

As others have pointed out, some people are not on city services that live near large metropolitan areas.

Look I know things change, but it took the cable company ten years to finally upgrade my neighborhood. But as I said they have no real competitor so I don't have much bargaining room as a consumer.

Also in the current economy I don't see many people willing to spend close to $200/m on cable services.

The fact is if current TV trends continue meaning people drop their cable service in favor of internet delivered media, the owner of the pipe is going to look for ways to charge the same as what they did before. The easiest way is caps and overage fees.

[vargo]

Originally Posted by CraigW

I know things change, but as I pointed out their a substantial portion of the population that won't be willing to pay the premiums to get upper tier speeds.

I know some people that hate Comcast that they won't go with cable at all. I bundle and my services between HD digital, phone and internet. I still pay $170/m. And the cable company has got it rigged if you drop some services like phone or try to downgrade to slower internet or cable packages that in the end your saving very little per month. Most consumers don't have competition in their areas.

As others have pointed out, some people are not on city services that live near large metropolitan areas.

Look I know things change, but it took the cable company ten years to finally upgrade my neighborhood. But as I said they have no real competitor so I don't have much bargaining room as a consumer.

Also in the current economy I don't see many people willing to spend close to $200/m on cable services.

The fact is if current TV trends continue meaning people drop their cable service in favor of internet delivered media, the owner of the pipe is going to look for ways to charge the same as what they did before. The easiest way is caps and overage fees.

The average broadband speed in the US gets faster every year (currently 6.6Mbps). More people have access to high-speed internet (10Mbps) every year (currently 16% of the country). More people get internet access full-stop every year.

To say that broadband speeds will prevent streaming from taking over is akin to someone in 2006 saying Bluray would never catch on because there arent enough factories to replicate the discs.

Bandwidth caps are a short term response to inadequate infrastructure. But in the medium to long-term infrastructure upgrades to meet demand. The internet is a vital part of any country's infrastructure so its very short-sighted to look at it like some immovable obstacle.

[arrow61095]

Actually, I see 5 issues with digital downloads of movies:

1. Who wants to depend on a Hard Drive for all their movies, if the Hard Drive crashes, you lose all your movies. Movie studios would put write protection to prevent you from backing up movies because they are so paranoid about piracy. -- will never be fixed.

2. Video quality --- most streamed HD content is 720P or 1080i and/or is upconverted, not 1080p. -- this could change with the increase of better internet options and more bandwidth, but currently isn't up to snuff

3. Audio Quality --- For those that own Home Theater equipment, have you ever got Uncompressed PCM audio on a digital download? The audio quality on downloads is usually substandard (at best a lossy format like Dolby Digital - sometimes just normal stereo) -- this could change with the increase of better internet options and more bandwidth, but probably wont - because of the companies providing the movies - it would cost them more because the files would be larger.

4. Buffering --- Do you want to wait to buffer a movie to stream through the internet or wait for it to download? --- this will get better with better internet options and more bandwidth, but if everyone is downloading a movie from the same server at 7 PM on a Friday night, expect delays. I have had Netflix and Amazon Instant video and you sometimes get slowdown at peak hours that has nothing to do with your connection. The bottleneck is often the company serving the content.

5. What about less popular titles? Think of the selection of companies like Netflix and Amazon Instant Video --- while selection will get better with time, You would have difficulty getting that 20 year old movie that wasn't overly popular but has a small cult following.

[arrow61095]

Originally Posted by arrow61095

Actually, I see 5 issues with digital downloads of movies:

1. Who wants to depend on a Hard Drive for all their movies, if the Hard Drive crashes, you lose all your movies. Movie studios would put write protection to prevent you from backing up movies because they are so paranoid about piracy. -- will never be fixed.

2. Video quality --- most streamed HD content is 720P or 1080i and/or is upconverted, not 1080p. -- this could change with the increase of better internet options and more bandwidth, but currently isn't up to snuff

3. Audio Quality --- For those that own Home Theater equipment, have you ever got Uncompressed PCM audio on a digital download? The audio quality on downloads is usually substandard (at best a lossy format like Dolby Digital - sometimes just normal stereo) -- this could change with the increase of better internet options and more bandwidth, but probably wont - because of the companies providing the movies - it would cost them more because the files would be larger.

4. Buffering --- Do you want to wait to buffer a movie to stream through the internet or wait for it to download? --- this will get better with better internet options and more bandwidth, but if everyone is downloading a movie from the same server at 7 PM on a Friday night, expect delays. I have had Netflix and Amazon Instant video and you sometimes get slowdown at peak hours that has nothing to do with your connection. The bottleneck is often the company serving the content.

5. What about less popular titles? Think of the selection of companies like Netflix and Amazon Instant Video --- while selection will get better with time, You would have difficulty getting that 20 year old movie that wasn't overly popular but has a small cult following.

Forgot to mention something about the popularity of physical media --- look at how many people spend extra on steelbooks or digibooks or special editions or collections because of the cool case/artwork/included extras. I think this may be a bit overlooked.

[joie]

I have 3 Mbps internet from a cable company. They unbundle it from the TV offerings, meter it, and it costs $40/month!

Codecs may improve, but at 3Mbps watching video can be frustrating. A well-done DVD uses up to about 9 Mbps, so until CODEC technology or bandwidth improves streaming isn't really an option (at least on the big screen -- it may look alright on a small screen, like a phone or small window on a computer monitor). By the way, I am living in a major city.

[Tok]

Originally Posted by joie

I have 3 Mbps internet from a cable company. They unbundle it from the TV offerings, meter it, and it costs $40/month!

Codecs may improve, but at 3Mbps watching video can be frustrating. A well-done DVD uses up to about 9 Mbps, so until CODEC technology or bandwidth improves streaming isn't really an option (at least on the big screen -- it may look alright on a small screen, like a phone or small window on a computer monitor). By the way, I am living in a major city.

Thanks for info joie. That's my point. Even if you supposedly have faster rates available not everyone wants them.

I have 25Mbps, but that's only because the TV package I want was bundled with it. If I dropped down to a lower speed I lose the bundled rate and would essentially be paying just a couple of bucks less (cable co rigging? i think so).

The other issue is some of the major pipe owners want you using their services vs. using their pipe to get content from other providers. Comcast and Netflix are competitors as far as Comcast is concerned.

Anyone who doesn't think there is going to be a showdown between streaming services and the pipe owners are out of touch.

The other issue is Netflix wants you to believe that you can stream any content you want. The reality is that Netflix's one price stream all we have available is going to have to change. Look at what you pay for the big pay channels. Netflix is going to have to eventually tier their streaming models if they want to be competitive in bidding for content. The recent Disney bid was for PR only. In reality if Netflix is going to bid on streaming new A-list material, then prices are going to go up. Remember the outcry against Netflix last time?

In the next ten years Netflix streaming is going to be tiered-plans based on monthly caps and/or access to premium A-list content.

The $7.99/m plan is detrimental to the value of the content. The studios were willing to do it initially to try a new distribution model, but that time has passed. I know people that got fed up with it because the majority of movies became Bollywood titles or D-list titles. I dropped it over a year ago and haven't missed it.

[KRW1]

The 'Downloading is the future of buying movies' argument misses one crucial point. For it to succeed, it needs the people who collect physical media on board; we're the early adaptors, the ones who go out and spend a ton of money on media and without us on board, it's doomed to fail.

For us to get on board, it's got to offer something above and beyond physical media which it doesnt by its very nature. It isn't more convenient, it offers no better sound or picture quality. It doesnt have a nice box, even, a basic requirement. I don't want or need a ton of hard drives in my house. I've had little hard 500gb drives fail and have to copy and restore stuff on those, I've no intention of wishing that on my future self when my 50TB drive fails. By the time broadband speeds are up to scratch for everyone (yeah, right) we'll have moved onto the next wave of physical media, whatever that may be (5-10years), and the arguments will still be exactly the same. 'Download quality is BD level at the moment, but in a few years time it'll be 8k ready, and we'll all have huge connections, you wait' etc.

It also misses the point that HD movie downloads to buy are here now and no-one is really bothering. My PS3 wants to be buy films everytime I turn it on. Why would I?

The MP3 has been with us for decades now, and still hasn't killed off the CD or vinyl, even, and some would have us believe the Bluray is almost dead because of technology that is 'nearly there'. Pull the other one. The future lies in market fragmention, with a variety of different ways of consuming media; not everyone doing the same thing like days of old. That's the difference between this and older tech, like VHS or Colour TV. You want to spend £10 on a downloaded version of The Exorcist? Knock yourself out, you can now. I can keep the disc version.

I'm not against streaming. I've got Netflix and Lovefilm but if I 'rent' something I like, I go out and buy the disc to add to my 500+ others.

[ack_bak]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

The three you mention are just about the only three that are successful. Even then isn't it just the fact that samsung are doing so well with other products that they can keep going down the tv route? Just my opinion, of course.

So you are saying even though Samsung had record HDTV sales, revenue, and profits in 2012, they will bow out of selling HDTV's just because??

Sorry, your opinions just don't make any sense.

[ScarredLungs]

Originally Posted by vargo

So not only do you think broadband speed and availability will stay the same as they are now for the rest of time, you also think that caps will go down every year without fail?

The logical conclusion to your argument is that eventually the caps will be 0 MB. Enjoy the internet while you can folks.

No, my argument is that as speeds increase, so will the desire for companies to capitalize on the speeds by financial means.

[rdodolak]

I expect streaming to be the future for cable companies. It wouldn't surprise me if cable, as we know it today, with preschedule shows is a thing of the past within the next 10-20 years. Assuming the infrastructure can be adequately upgraded and support the demand.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by ack_bak

So you are saying even though Samsung had record HDTV sales, revenue, and profits in 2012, they will bow out of selling HDTV's just because??

Sorry, your opinions just don't make any sense.

Maybe not to you.

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Maybe not to you.

sorry, I respect your love of blu-ray but your paranoia is beyond bizarre.

[Steedeel]

How is it bizarre to suggest TV sets that are shrinking in sales and by all accounts been replaced by tablets for bedroom TVs, will be no more in a few years?

Tablets and smartphone displays are where the money is, plus the kids now just watch TV on their smartphones or tablets. The more this happens, the more traditional tv screens will be under threat. If 4k screens do not take off, where from there?

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

How is it bizarre to suggest TV sets that are shrinking in sales and by all accounts been replaced by tablets for bedroom TVs, will be no more in a few years?

Tablets and smartphone displays are where the money is, plus the kids now just watch TV on their smartphones or tablets. The more this happens, the more traditional tv screens will be under threat. If 4k screens do not take off, where from there?

for one, tablets and smart phones have NOT replaced bedroom tvs. TV sales have declined because it has hit the GROWTH peak, every market has to hit the growth peak. Also KIDS are using tablets and phones. everyone grows up sooner or later. when I was a kid I was happy with a portable dvd player and a walkman.... it's a proven fact that as you grow up your tastes mature and adapt. which is why Home theater is mainly an older mans sport. most of the "young" people have 32 inch bedroom tv's while they live at home, as they age their price ranges increase and they adapt to full size sets.

and kids watch tv on their smartphones and tablets only??? sorry, but I see kids quite often and except for youtube crap or the occaisonal netflix while they're on the go I know of almost NO ONE , kids included who use their tablets and phones to watch TV on a regular basis.

[Terjyn]

Originally Posted by vargo

So not only do you think broadband speed and availability will stay the same as they are now for the rest of time, you also think that caps will go down every year without fail?

The logical conclusion to your argument is that eventually the caps will be 0 MB. Enjoy the internet while you can folks.

You sure do love slippery slope arguments don't you?

Are you denying the fact that Broadband availability is growing slowly? Are you denying the fact that ISPs are putting caps on downloads?

Nobody but you is extending these trends to the absurd. And you don't win "points" for your arguments by doing so.