Oh noes teh sky is falling!

[Septimus Prime]

That's right. Digital download will perpetually be "the future."

[krazeyeyez]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

two issues with this

1) does any legal service allow you to DL and make a Hard copy to a disk that will play in a DVD/BD player?

No, they won't even allow you to back up copies of your BD DVDs. why? because there will always be people that abuse it, that guy that wants to make a back up/ hard copy for his 5, 10, 500 or more closest friends.

2) let me ask you two questions
a) how much does a 50GB + flash stick costs (I am not willing to go backwards in what I get)?
b) how much does 8 MB flash costr and where can I get it new?

the questions might look odd, but the reality is 50GB is extremely expensive now and you have not bought a movie yet (so add an other 20$+ for it) now I know, it happens most times this comes up, chances are you are thinking "but it will get cheaper". That is true, but that is why I asked B, there was a time when 8MB was expensive, but before it got cheap enough (when we compare it to something like the cost of disks) it disappeared. as memory grows you get more GB per $ but at some point it is not worth making it any more which is why they don't make 8MB or 16MB or 256MB or 512MB or 1GB any more. The issue is to compete with BD or DVD it needs to be much less then that. Let me put it this way, I can go and buy 100 blank DVDs (just because it is an easy example) and they would be between 20 cents and 30 cents each (and this is way more then what replication would cost), I don't care about amount of memory (we are assuming it will get cheaper perGB with time), what is the cheapest flash unit I can get (be it USB, SD....)? Why would the studio want to pay a hell of a lot more to go flash instead of disk? If the studio does not eat the cost, then why would any buyer prefer to pay a premium for flash instead of disk?

My REAL point was more about the fact that someone would have said not to long ago phones like Iphones would have been impossible and far to expensive, not to long ago people were saying i won't spend 500 bucks on blu-ray player, not too long ago.....

Technology is advancing at an extremely fast pace both in functionality and inter connectivity, who knows, just like the same way a digital copy limits itself to 8 devices, so could this. If a chance for piracy is gonna be the stopper on tech, we would have never got blu-ray, especially not in computers... It is pretty obvious that while things are abused the people that would not abuse it far outweigh those who would and from a sheer money standpoint, it is worth it.

I always hear your harddrive could be wiped out, look at the kindle, they keep records of what you have bought for just that occasion, digital copies in blu-ray/dvd's allow 8 copies i believe, which means unless you have a random error 8 times you still have your content, sure right now their are limits, but to believe that won't change is silly imo.

ALSO you ask about eating cost, what about offset cost, instead of paying for storage, distribution, a cut of the profits to the stores that they give low cost to to sell them, etc... but instead straight to the consumer, cost comes down, think amazon

[Astrakan]

The first post of this thread reminds me of Stereo Boy's (aka, Patrick T. Chamberlain's) classic "Analysis of the DVD Format" post in the alt.video.laserdisc newsgroup.

While that post is a lot lengthier and hits a lot more points than Elvispookie's, they both have the basic premise of dismissing something which clearly is coming down the pipe.

In terms of my own prediction, I think Blu-ray will stick around for quite a while, but it'll never reach the heights of DVD and it will not be the format that replaces DVD.

The format that replaces DVD will be downloads.

No, downloads aren't as good as Blu-ray. But for most people downloads are simply "good enough." And these days, good enough is what people want - provided it's also more convenient, which downloads definitely are.

By the way, I'm not saying DVDs are going the way of the do-do in the next year or two. Neither is Blu-ray.

Both will continue to co-exist for some time to come, and eventually DVDs will be phased out in favour of downloads, and then downloads and Blu-ray will co-exist for a while until downloads completely take over.

Both the articles I linked to are worth a read by the way. The first one for the humour, the second one for the insight. I especially like the bit about how people are becoming used to the sounds of MP3s to the point where they prefer it over better quality audio.

KM

[krazeyeyez]

Originally Posted by Astrakan

I especially like the bit about how people are becoming used to the sounds of MP3s to the point where they prefer it over better quality audio.

KM

funny and not surprising, the few friends i have left that actually legally purchase their content like me and unlike me have IPODS with endless storage (i have 2GB) still won't get behind lossless rips because at some point they cannot have ALL their music on the thing, even though 75% of that ALL will go without play for a year or more

[Uniquely]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

lol

It's not that funny. I'm beta testing the Zune HD Marketplace right now.... and it's the closest thing to blu-ray quality I have seen yet. It's not quite there yet.... but the fact that I can smoothly stream something that looks even better than my DirecTV HD channels over my 6Mb DSL connection absolutely amazes me, and makes me believe the digital age may be closer than I thought. It's a very noticable jump in quality over Netflix HD and Amazon On Demand HD. Much smoother delivery than the others, with very few compression artifacts. It offers the choice to stream instantly if your connection can handle it (and my meager DSL can)... or to download to ensure highest quality. It even has Dolby Digital 5.1 audio. Sometimes improvements come in baby steps, and sometimes it comes in pretty big leaps.

[brettallica]

Originally Posted by robinandtami

As I said previously, I would much prefer my catalog neatly tucked away and out of sight on a media server in my network closet, or even stored on an internet server somewhere. I'd much prefer to see my titles, complete with cover pics and easily readable descriptions up on my big screen. I'd love to be able to instantly sort my titles by any combination of filters I choose. I'd love to be able to just hit play and have my title instantly start, without having to mess with discs. Many people feel this way which is why network media servers are becoming more and more common. It's not all about piracy. Many people are more than happy to pay for their titles, they just want to be able to use them in the manner that is most pleasing for them.

In this modern age of high tech electronics, having to to physically organize my titles in a single static way, and read through all of the tiny little spines, pulling each case out to read the descriptons, etc just feels like the 1985 VHS way of doing things.

(...)

I've said it before, and almost always get a negative reaction for saying it, but if blu-ray really wanted to get ahead of the curve and significantly extend their lifespan beyond the time that digital downloads can match it's quality, then they would at this time allows us to make full quality digital copies to our home networks. All it would take is a simple firmware update to network capable players. This would satisfy both those who prefer to use physical media and those who long for a digital catalog. It wouldn't change a thing for people who prefer physical media, but it would allow them to hang on to people like myself who simply want an easy digital way to access their media.

I am totally behind a system like this; one that allows you at least the choice of buying the movie on a hard copy, then burning it to hard drive if you so choose. Then there would be tons of different software — although there would probably only be a few major players whose software actually sticks, like Windows something-or-other or a QuickTime or iTunes — but in the end it would open up more opportunities for different ways of organizing and watching movies. This would make sorting and choosing way easier than it is now, although I don't really have a "problem" with the way it is now per se. I do think it would be really neat, and assuming storage was inexpensive enough and cpus were powerful enough to rip movies quickly, I'd be all over this. I have no idea how long it takes to rip a movie now since I don't have a BD drive, but my guess is it takes a very long time; i.e. longer than I'd want it to.

We are definitely a ways away from feasibly or reasonably expecting to be able to have the masses stream HD, but this system that robinandtami mentions is (or at least seems) much closer.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by krazeyeyez

My REAL point was more about the fact that someone would have said not to long ago phones like Iphones would have been impossible and far to expensive, not to long ago people were saying i won't spend 500 bucks on blu-ray player, not too long ago.....

Technology is advancing at an extremely fast pace both in functionality and inter connectivity, who knows, just like the same way a digital copy limits itself to 8 devices, so could this. If a chance for piracy is gonna be the stopper on tech, we would have never got blu-ray, especially not in computers...

and not too long ago people thought we would all have flying cars by now, that we would be eating pills and flights to the moon would be relatively common and flights to other planets would have started (and maybe even interstellar flight by now). Technology advances fast, but it has its own path which usually makes sense and is foreseeable if one does not use "technology moves at a fast pace" to believe stupid stuff that make no sense what so ever.

It is pretty obvious that while things are abused the people that would not abuse it far outweigh those who would and from a sheer money standpoint, it is worth it.

not in this case, there is no real reason for it (at least from a studio perspective). You just think it makes a good counter point, but a studio would not care for it.

I always hear your harddrive could be wiped out, look at the kindle, they keep records of what you have bought for just that occasion,

and it is a legitimate concern. Now not only does it not make sense for them to keep a record for the rest of your life (as well as obsolete movies on file). But that is not the biggest issue. Let me put it simply, I will most likely have 500 BDs by the end of the year, this includes some that are TV series and box sets could you imagine how impossibly hard it would e to re DL all of that if BD was DL?
And loss is not the only way an HDD becomes an issue. What happens when a new "format" or "profile" comes out? I bought a BD player, I can play my DVDs in it with no issue, after 3D BD comes out I will buy a 3D player. What if you want to upgrade to a better player, in late Sept/early Oct 2006 I got a Samsung player, in Dec 2006 I bought a PS3 it was easy to use my BD movies on my new BD player.

digital copies in blu-ray/dvd's allow 8 copies i believe,

as far as I know only once, and not even that much, for example WB only keeps theirs active for a few months. Since they don't want to keep an ever growing DB of used/unused DCs

which means unless you have a random error 8 times you still have your content, sure right now their are limits, but to believe that won't change is silly imo.

if you believe this then you should be locked up. So you really think that a studio will let you make infinite or a large number of copies of the content you DL? Yeah, they want to legitimize piracy by telling you buy a copy and share it with everyone. :ROFL:

ALSO you ask about eating cost, what about offset cost, instead of paying for storage, distribution, a cut of the profits to the stores that they give low cost to to sell them, etc... but instead straight to the consumer, cost comes down, think amazon

you said that if people like HC then they can go to the store and buy a copy on a flash stick, how does going to the store (or Amazon) and buying it on a flash stick offsets any costs? Now if you mean DL, well then you are not offsetting cost, just moving it. they would need massive amounts of storage, they would need massive BW on the server side.... which could be equal or bigger to the "shipping to distributor costs" plus these would need to be eternal( especially if you assume that even movies that are “out of print” would need to remain because “what if something happens to the HDD”.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by robinandtami

It's not that funny. I'm beta testing the Zune HD Marketplace right now.... and it's the closest thing to blu-ray quality I have seen yet. It's not quite there yet.... but the fact that I can smoothly stream something that looks even better than my DirecTV HD channels over my 6Mb DSL connection absolutely amazes me, and makes me believe the digital age may be closer than I thought. It's a very noticable jump in quality over Netflix HD and Amazon On Demand HD. Much smoother delivery than the others, with very few compression artifacts. It offers the choice to stream instantly if your connection can handle it (and my meager DSL can)... or to download to ensure highest quality. It even has Dolby Digital 5.1 audio. Sometimes improvements come in baby steps, and sometimes it comes in pretty big leaps.

that is why I did not say ROFL , seriously, I don't know if it is the closest (I tink HD DVD was closer) but come on, the guy said we are at BD quality which is laughable to anyone that has seen both, and talking about all of them being 1080 as if it matters.

[Marquoz]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

2) let me ask you two questions
a) how much does a 50GB + flash stick costs (I am not willing to go backwards in what I get)?
b) how much does 8 MB flash costr and where can I get it new?

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.

[brettallica]

Originally Posted by Marquoz

2a) $200 for a 1TB external drive...

...or less than $100 for a 1TB internal...

[krazeyeyez]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

and not too long ago people thought we would all have flying cars by now, that we would be eating pills and flights to the moon would be relatively common and flights to other planets would have started (and maybe even interstellar flight by now). Technology advances fast, but it has its own path which usually makes sense and is foreseeable if one does not use "technology moves at a fast pace" to believe stupid stuff that make no sense what so ever.

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

Originally Posted by Anthony P

not in this case, there is no real reason for it (at least from a studio perspective). You just think it makes a good counter point, but a studio would not care for it.

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.

Originally Posted by Anthony P

and it is a legitimate concern. Now not only does it not make sense for them to keep a record for the rest of your life (as well as obsolete movies on file). But that is not the biggest issue. Let me put it simply, I will most likely have 500 BDs by the end of the year, this includes some that are TV series and box sets could you imagine how impossibly hard it would e to re DL all of that if BD was DL?
And loss is not the only way an HDD becomes an issue. What happens when a new "format" or "profile" comes out? I bought a BD player, I can play my DVDs in it with no issue, after 3D BD comes out I will buy a 3D player. What if you want to upgrade to a better player, in late Sept/early Oct 2006 I got a Samsung player, in Dec 2006 I bought a PS3 it was easy to use my BD movies on my new BD player.

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

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? As someone who is obviously an adopter of new tech you seem mighty hard pressed to notice how fast tech is advancing these days. New forms of lossless compression could make transferring blu-ray size files no problem at all.

Originally Posted by Anthony P

as far as I know only once, and not even that much, for example WB only keeps theirs active for a few months. Since they don't want to keep an ever growing DB of used/unused DCs

i know it is more then that as people put them on their laptop, Ipod, cellphone etc...

Originally Posted by Anthony P

if you believe this then you should be locked up. So you really think that a studio will let you make infinite or a large number of copies of the content you DL? Yeah, they want to legitimize piracy by telling you buy a copy and share it with everyone. :ROFL:

WOW it is really hard for you to understand ADVANCEMENTs huh? They manage to maintain control over there digital copies, why not better forms of control in the future, as in DRM. Sure you could burn it 3000 times if you want, but with everything able to access the internet these days, it is not to hard to believe you would have to register the content to only be able to be played through certain authorized devices. I am not all that creative, but all the gadgets coming out today tell me many in the tech industry are. Me thinks you should be the one locked up

Originally Posted by Anthony P

you said that if people like HC then they can go to the store and buy a copy on a flash stick, how does going to the store (or Amazon) and buying it on a flash stick offsets any costs? Now if you mean DL, well then you are not offsetting cost, just moving it. they would need massive amounts of storage, they would need massive BW on the server side.... which could be equal or bigger to the "shipping to distributor costs" plus these would need to be eternal( especially if you assume that even movies that are “out of print” would need to remain because “what if something happens to the HDD”.

To your last point, yeah they got it all in one place one drive and then whoops their it goes LMAO because compression itself doesn't advance just like basic tech capabilities also remain the same... riiiiiight.

Nope i mentioned the flashstick in regards to those that "want something on the shelf" lol. To think with Tv's being made on bendable plastic and here is one for yah just like sci-fi, that technology cannot adapt to make this form of media valid and appealing. If you think servers especially rented would be more expensive then the overhead of all that space and distribution i don't know what to tell you. The more you eliminate the cheaper you can keep your price while still making a profit, <----which is why i mentioned amazon.

[Grumpz]

Ahhhhhhhhh what the heck! I'm going to chime in here and see how long it takes Jaded to track down my post and attack it. I'm sure he's obsessed!

Digital downloads and streaming are the future. Period. The internet is evolving to allow much quicker downloads at a ridiculous rate, and all types of storage are getting cheaper and more reliable by the week.

Someone quoted $200 bucks for a 1TB HD which was high. I just about bought a 2TB HD two days ago for $129. I haven't properly ejected my Sandisk Cruzer 8GB flash drive since I got it (the way windows wants me to). This thing is my bread and butter and it's never failed me yet and I only paid like $15 bucks for it. THAT'S AN 8GB FLASH DRIVE!

The big players, the ones that matter are all positioning themselves for this "impossible future". Names like Microsoft, Sony, Disney and Apple are all being thrown around in these discussions and it's not rumours. TV's are being made internet ready, there are already multiple streaming services chomping at the bit to get quality HD to the consumer and frankly, digital is cheaper.

My parents are in there early 60's, and I just helped my dad network his PS3 so he can download his favorite tv shows and stream them, along with his itunes mp3 library. My Mom is happier than hell because they don't have to rent a PVR anymore, and they got rid of the clunkly old cd player that never gets used. I'm talking retirees people!

[Afrobean]

Originally Posted by robinandtami

Digital downloads for movies is still in it's infancy. The quality does not yet match that can be found on physical media, although Zune HD has made a giant leap towards that with crisp 1080P video and 5.1 Dolby Digital. When digital media is able to meet BD quality, there will be many people, including myself, who will readily jump to it.

Even if it costs the same (or more!!!) to buy a download as it would to buy the BD at Amazon?

As I said previously, I would much prefer my catalog neatly tucked away and out of sight on a media server in my network closet, or even stored on an internet server somewhere.

Then you should see the appeal of licensed rips. A BD has the peak in quality possibly available, so why not allow us to create licensed rips that apply the very same DRM that would be applied in a downloaded digital copy? It'd give people like you the benefit of having a totally digital collection without burdening servers and ISPs that can't handle the sorts of large file download distribution.

I'd love to be able to just hit play and have my title instantly start, without having to mess with discs.

If one rips their discs to serve locally, they need only to mess with a disc once: when they first rip it. BUT, if the studios would support a licensed rip for digital copy method like I am saying they should, ripping a disc would be as easy as inserting it into the drive and pressing a single button. It wouldn't require current workarounds using shady software.

Many people feel this way which is why network media servers are becoming more and more common.

Most people don't have them and most won't have them any time soon. Plenty of people can't even use a computer to type up a resume, why would you expect them to be able to build and maintain a networked system like that?

It's not all about piracy. Many people are more than happy to pay for their titles, they just want to be able to use them in the manner that is most pleasing for them.

People who download right now are more often than not, not like you. You don't partake in downloads right now in spite of wanting to, because the quality is subpar. Others don't care about quality, because if they can get it for free, they'll watch a low resolution viedo recording from a theatrical presentation.

In this modern age of high tech electronics, having to to physically organize my titles in a single static way, and read through all of the tiny little spines, pulling each case out to read the descriptons, etc just feels like the 1985 VHS way of doing things.

There is actually plenty of cataloging software that can sort and do all of the things you would want. The only difference is that you'd have to get up and pick up the disc off the shelf after deciding what to watch.

I mean really on movie night, would you rather have your guests squeezed in around your movie shelves straining to see the titles, or would you prefer that they be able to remain seated in your nice comfy home theater seating and easily peruse your titles on the big screen with cover pics and movie descriptions easily readable?

Yeah, that would be nice, and in fact, it is! Download some catalog software and you can get that now.

I've said it before, and almost always get a negative reaction for saying it, but if blu-ray really wanted to get ahead of the curve and significantly extend their lifespan beyond the time that digital downloads can match it's quality, then they would at this time allows us to make full quality digital copies to our home networks.

This is exactly what I'm saying they should do. They already give us digital copies on many movies, so why not just design software that can rip from the BD itself when a person inserts the proper code and the code is verified over the Internet?

Originally Posted by steve_dave

we are at Gen1 of Blu-ray quality downloads but lossless audio is still not available.

No.

There is no way that streamed media can match the bitrate on the video that Blu-ray delivers.

It might be able to be good looking HD, but it's nowhere near BD.

provided it's also more convenient, which downloads definitely are.

No they're not.

For you or me, yeah, they're convenient, but for the average person, they'd not want to get on board with it. Most people aren't technophiles and will shun anything they think is over-their-head, even if it's not difficult to use. For these people, they will always prefer taking a unit and inserting it into a player. Because that's what they know.

And for technophiles, they're more likely to be on board with Blu-ray, I think. So the people who would be willing to get on board with the convenience and be able to understand and do it would probably be the current youth of the generation, and frankly, it'll be a long time before they have strong enough market power to make a difference here, assuming the even ever have the desire to buy that older generations do. I'd think that the people who would support downloads would be the type to just have Netflix and use their streaming service and never buy anything.

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.

Movies are not music. You CANNOT look at how music is performing in the digital world and ASSUME it will play out the same way for movies. People are willing to take quality loss in music, but people who really watch movies (i.e., the ones who buy them, the ones who collect them) NEVER would.

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

Lossless compression isn't that impressive. Blu-ray discs with their 50GB limitation are nowhere near being capable of storing lossless video on them. Blu-rays are actually HIGHLY COMPRESSED to fit on disc. Not as highly compressed as DVD or downloads, but highly compressed regardless.

i know it is more then that as people put them on their laptop, Ipod, cellphone etc...

Most people watch movies and TV shows on their TV set. My mom missed a TV show recently and I told her she could probably see it on Hulu.com. She scoffed at me. And this is even in spite of the fact that the computer is hooked up to the TV and she'd've been able to watch it on the TV set anyway!

Digital downloads and streaming are the future. Period. The internet is evolving to allow much quicker downloads at a ridiculous rate, and all types of storage are getting cheaper and more reliable by the week.

Just because Internet infrastructure will EVENTUALLY be able to support it, doesn't mean the technology will go anywhere. People don't automatically jump for the best technological choice, they stick with what they know, what they feel comfortable with, what is easy for them to understand.

I'm talking retirees people!

Your example is anything but typical, and you should be ashamed to have tried to foist it off on us like older retirees are all jumping at the chance to download movies.

[Astrakan]

Originally Posted by Afrobean

I'd think that the people who would support downloads would be the type to just have Netflix and use their streaming service and never buy anything.

Sure. That's still digital downloads. Personally I've never claimed that digital downloads that you purchase is what will eventually take over. I'm sure that will be part of it, but the big "threat" is on-demand streaming where you either have a monthly account that lets you watch as much as you want, or you pay a rental fee for each piece of content.

Originally Posted by Afrobean

Just because Internet infrastructure will EVENTUALLY be able to support it, doesn't mean the technology will go anywhere. People don't automatically jump for the best technological choice, they stick with what they know, what they feel comfortable with, what is easy for them to understand.

Exactly. Which is why I personally believe in a future where people will be able to buy devices, not unlike PVRs in their design and functionality, that will connect to download services like Netflix or Amazon. It will then be simple and straightforward enough for the average user.

If downloads don't graduate from using the current complex delivery methods they definitely won't be the next big thing. Which is why the powers that be won't let it stop at that.

KM

[ouflak]

Originally Posted by Afrobean

Your example is anything but typical, and you should be ashamed to have tried to foist it off on us like older retirees are all jumping at the chance to download movies.

He wasn't implying that all retirees are jumping for change with his example, and I think you know that.

To elaborate, what he's saying that there are cultural shifts in the way we listen and view media. When people cite technological reasons to dispel such change, this alone is an unsound argument, especially when those reasons involve such blatantly fast paced changing characteristics as bandwidth, memory/storage, processing speed. Yet this is what the crux of the arguments against downloads seems to be. The other part of that crux is that we all live in a static culture that simply won't accept change, 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.

What percentage of junior high school kids in American today have ever even played a music CD? 50%? 30%? 10%? Less? It's probably depressingly less than any of us would guess. It's not going to turn around. And I suspect that many here, even those clamoring with 'logic' against downloads, will probably be leaders in that paradigm shift with respect to movies as well.

[binarymelon]

Originally Posted by Beast

Digital downloads will never replace hard media.

Humanity is too obsessed with getting a physical product for their money.

Add in the other problems with downloads, and there's no way it'll catch on.

I don't know about that. People are fine with their music being distributed digitally. They will eventually be fine with all media and software being distributed the same way. The problem with video is that the data size is still out pacing the available download speeds and I expect it will probably through at least this generation and possibly even the next. My hope is that they try and extend the life of Blu-ray using more layers and then we can eventually move to digital distribution after that.

[Terjyn]

Originally Posted by binarymelon

I don't know about that. People are fine with their music being distributed digitally. They will eventually be fine with all media and software being distributed the same way. The problem with video is that the data size is still out pacing the available download speeds and I expect it will probably through at least this generation and possibly even the next. My hope is that they try and extend the life of Blu-ray using more layers and then we can eventually move to digital distribution after that.

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."

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!"?

[Uniquely]

Originally Posted by brettallica

...or less than $100 for a 1TB internal...

I have seen 1TB externals for as low as $89. I payed $170 for a 1.5 TB external about 9 months ago.

[Grumpz]

Originally Posted by ouflak

He wasn't implying that all retirees are jumping for change with his example, and I think you know that.

To elaborate, what he's saying that there are cultural shifts in the way we listen and view media. When people cite technological reasons to dispel such change, this alone is an unsound argument, especially when those reasons involve such blatantly fast paced changing characteristics as bandwidth, memory/storage, processing speed. Yet this is what the crux of the arguments against downloads seems to be. The other part of that crux is that we all live in a static culture that simply won't accept change, 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.

What percentage of junior high school kids in American today have ever even played a music CD? 50%? 30%? 10%? Less? It's probably depressingly less than any of us would guess. It's not going to turn around. And I suspect that many here, even those clamoring with 'logic' against downloads, will probably be leaders in that paradigm shift with respect to movies as well.

Yes, you are exactly right. They may be the only seniors on the planet networking their pc, but as soon as they saw it at my house they were sold. People aren't giving the fact that people are lazy enough credit.

We all know when you order pizza, picking it up is will generally result in it getting to your home quicker. So why on earth do so many people get it delivered? It's faster to pick it up. Well guess what, it's only a bit longer to stay home, you don't have to leave your house and it may even be cheaper if delivery is free.

People love convenience and will pay for it.

[Uniquely]

Originally Posted by Afrobean

Then you should see the appeal of licensed rips. A BD has the peak in quality possibly available, so why not allow us to create licensed rips that apply the very same DRM that would be applied in a downloaded digital copy? It'd give people like you the benefit of having a totally digital collection without burdening servers and ISPs that can't handle the sorts of large file download distribution.

This is exactly what I have been saying for a long time. The digital age is coming; exactly when.... we don't know yet, but I feel it's very likely to be the next big thing after blu-ray. I think that if Blu-Ray wants to survive longer into the digital era, it should go ahead now and provide the advanced features and convenience that the digital era will bring with it. This will keep many people from moving on to the digital formats as soon as they come along.

It would be so easy to do right now, today. And it could be done in a way that the anyone who already had enough techno knowledge to put their blu-ray player on their home network could surely use. A firmware update to network capable players to allow ripping movies to a networked storage drive would be step one. It could be an option enabled through the service menu, so that when a disc is inserted into the BD drive, the user will be asked if they would like to play from disc or copy to storage. Those who are not interested would just turn this option off and automatically play from disc. The addition of a library app to sort organize the moves and show the covers and descriptions would make it complete.

This would be a great way to

1. give people who desire the digital convenience that they want now
2. bring more people to blu-ray when they see this new way of delivering content
3. hold on to people after the digital era comes of age.