Oh noes teh sky is falling!

[Steedeel]

Oh and i trust my eyes not whatever some people on the internet say. My eyes tell me Bluray is untouchable as far as quality is concerned.

[Rob71]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

punkguy it's Steedeel!

Yes, i repeat streaming will never match Bluray. When i see hd advertised available for downloading or streaming in my opinion that is not really what the consumers are getting.
Also i just like the look of my blurays on my shelf and always will. You guys talk about all the freedom of choice and variety available with streaming. That will not remain the case and people who buy into this 'format' will probably have to sign up with three or more providers to get everything they like. In other words it will be similar to cable and satellite now!

Exactly. Want to stream a Criterion? Better get Hulu. How long until Apple decides to play? Seems to me, streaming is in the "one step forward, two steps back" phase. Netflix is even buying exclusive content now.

[punkguy03]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

punkguy it's Steedeel!

Yes, i repeat streaming will never match Bluray. When i see hd advertised available for downloading or streaming in my opinion that is not really what the consumers are getting.
Also i just like the look of my blurays on my shelf and always will. You guys talk about all the freedom of choice and variety available with streaming. That will not remain the case and people who buy into this 'format' will probably have to sign up with three or more providers to get everything they like. In other words it will be similar to cable and satellite now!

I agree it is not the same now, but it could be in the future. I also prefer my blu-ray physcial discs to a downloaded or streaming copy, I always have, but that doesn't change the fact some people if the quality gets to be as good as blu-ray people will switch to it. I also agree that there will be subscription costs and things of that nature, I don't even have cable at all, I just use netflix for tv shows and watch my blu-rays. However, some will want both. This is about the future and in the future it is possible that something will come out that will compete with blu-ray, I personally don't think it would put blu-ray under, but it will compete with it.

[Steedeel]

We will have to agree to disagree then! I have said in previous posts i think this is a backwards step for all movie lovers. Bluray fans embrace the quality of the picture, the sound, the extras and the collecting aspect of the format. All of these things do not and will not exist on download/streams now or ten years from now.

[milkinc13]

I think blu-ray will as I personally like to have a physical copy of what I own, as that way I can see it/hold it.

Can anything like that be done with downloads, also what happens should something go wrong then that copy could be lost but physical is there

[Terjyn]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

I'd take the word of the guys on HD Nation who said looks at least as good as HD Cable TV because they actually saw it and aren't biased.

At least as good as "HD Cable TV" is hardly an endorsement. Upscaled DVD looks as good as a large percentage of HD Cable TV too.

[punkguy03]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

We will have to agree to disagree then! I have said in previous posts i think this is a backwards step for all movie lovers. Bluray fans embrace the quality of the picture, the sound, the extras and the collecting aspect of the format. All of these things do not and will not exist on download/streams now or ten years from now.

I think overall we agree, we just have a few disagreements. I actually mentioned extras earlier, as far as I am aware they don't usually put all the cool extras on downloads.

[Anthony P]

This press release was for a new model a few years later and the extremely affordable price of $11,999 for that 42" TV
http://www.plasmavision.com/press06.cfm

BD is a just a media storage device. You stream data to your TV from the player to your TV. They aren't magical or anything.

agree

You guys are way too tied up with the source.

no man, we are tied to the content, and we want QUALITY you are the one hell bent on the source. The argument is we want quality and your reply is always "who needs lossless sound", "who needs 4k", "who cares if it looks like crap because it is extremely low bitrate 1080p unlike BD which is high bit rate BD"

Steedeel, the 1080p NetFlix is can only be streamed on a PS3 and only since October and only in the U.S. with a 3 or 4 mpbs connection. So let me guess. You are knocking something you haven't ever seen. I'd take the word of the guys on HD Nation who said looks at least as good as HD Cable TV because they actually saw it and aren't biased.

let m ask you this. BD has 1080p, why does it need 40mbps if there is no difference? the reality is that due to the way TCP/IP works and that the overhead is part of the stream, streaming would need roughly 1.5-2 times as much as BD to have the same quality. If it is DL to watch later, then it is still substantial but less then 1.5x. When Netflix is streaming 1080p@>60mbps then you can make a point. But it is as dumb as asking how do you know you won't like the job paying you 3-4$ an hour when the person knows he needs to make 40$ an hour to have the lifestyle he wants.

[slick1ru2]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

We will have to agree to disagree then! I have said in previous posts i think this is a backwards step for all movie lovers. Bluray fans embrace the quality of the picture, the sound, the extras and the collecting aspect of the format. All of these things do not and will not exist on download/streams now or ten years from now.

Why not? Are you a network engineer? 10 years ago most people had 28.8k or 56k dial up. Comcast, the nation's largest internet provider is rolling out DOCSIS 3.0 nationwide. This is the kind of connection I get with that and I'm not even paying for top speed.



Fiber optic networks, Internet2, etc. are all insuring that in 10 years internet speeds could easily be double what I am getting. You scoffed at 98% of Americans having high speed internet in 5 years. Over about the past 10 years, most of the current 65% with HSI went from dial up to broadband DSL and Cable. Why can't 33% do it in half the time? You do realize that cable TV, 1080i goes over the Internet to most, if not all, cable providers now? And that satellite providers offer 1080p PPV?

If I could have On Demand access to tens of thousands of full 1080p, lossless movies, the ability to watch the extras, streamed via Internet (or satellite to a media server) to all my TVs along with portable device access wherever I go (iPhone, laptop, etc) for 1 fee a month like NetFlix vs having to physically buy movies, yes, I would rather have access. It is well within the realm of possibility in the not too distant future to stream full 1080p/lossless audio no matter what Steedeel thinks.

Geneva built network that may be the future, 10,000x faster then the current internet. Its so fast that the designers speculate that people could do away with HD and have all their computer software and files stored on remote, redundant, servers that are crash proof.


Google Fiber, 1GB/sec Internet speeds.

http://blog.hudsonhorizons.com/Artic...e-Provider.htm

Bell labs 16tb/sec...download an entire BD is 24 millsec.

http://royal.pingdom.com/2008/03/03/...00023-seconds/

Google is now the most valuable company in the world. Here is their view on the future of the Internet. Dr. Vinton G. Cerf, "The Father Of The Internet" says with GB/sec Internet, when its here (they are now starting to roll it out in their first city, KC), you can DL an entire movie and all the extras in a few seconds. You will be able to DL everything that is digitizable.

YouTube - Google's View On The Internet's Future

[slick1ru2]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

This press release was for a new model a few years later and the extremely affordable price of $11,999 for that 42" TV


.

Extremely affordable? $12,000 for a TV? For who? Payton Manning? Bill Gates? Donald Trump? $1200 is affordable, not $12k.

[Cevolution]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

Why not? Are you a network engineer? 10 years ago most people had 28.8k or 56k dial up. Comcast, the nation's largest internet provider is rolling out DOCSIS 3.0 nationwide. This is the kind of connection I get with that and I'm not even paying for top speed.



Fiber optic networks, Internet2, etc. are all insuring that in 10 years internet speeds could easily be double what I am getting. You scoffed at 98% of Americans having high speed internet in 5 years. Over about the past 10 years, most of the current 65% with HSI went from dial up to broadband DSL and Cable. Why can't 33% do it in half the time? You do realize that cable TV, 1080i goes over the Internet to most, if not all, cable providers now? And that satellite providers offer 1080p PPV?

If I could have On Demand access to tens of thousands of full 1080p, lossless movies, the ability to watch the extras, streamed via Internet (or satellite to a media server) to all my TVs along with portable device access wherever I go (iPhone, laptop, etc) for 1 fee a month like NetFlix vs having to physically buy movies, yes, I would rather have access. It is well within the realm of possibility in the not too distant future to stream full 1080p/lossless audio no matter what Steedeel thinks.

Geneva built network that may be the future, 10,000x faster then the current internet. Its so fast that the designers speculate that people could do away with HD and have all their computer software and files stored on remote, redundant, servers that are crash proof.


Google Fiber, 1GB/sec Internet speeds.

http://blog.hudsonhorizons.com/Artic...e-Provider.htm

Bell labs 16tb/sec...download an entire BD is 24 millsec.

http://royal.pingdom.com/2008/03/03/...00023-seconds/

Google is now the most valuable company in the world. Here is their view on the future of the Internet. Dr. Vinton G. Cerf, "The Father Of The Internet" says with GB/sec Internet, when its here (they are now starting to roll it out in their first city, KC), you can DL an entire movie and all the extras in a few seconds. You will be able to DL everything that is digitizable.

YouTube - Google's View On The Internet's Future

Your faith in the Internet is your biggest problem, not everyone likes the Internet like u do. Heaps of people will never want it connected to their tv's etc, just because you're a person in your 50's who likes computers, the Internet streaming etc, doesn't mean that most other people in your age group do as well. The Internet can be a joke at times, it's full of more opinions than facts, it can be much quicker to just pick up an encyclopedia to find an answer to a question instead of searching through thousands of opinions on the Internet before u get to the right answer.

Most people in your age group don't even know how to use a computer and a lot don't want to know, so then why would they want to stream content?

[john_1958]

can't see why it shouldn't survive its the perfect media for viewing video and listening to audio

downloads can't match the quality of blu

not everybody has internet or wants it

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by punkguy03

The debate between these two (slick and steeldeal) has nothing to do really with your preference. One believes that streaming can NEVER be as good as blu and the other says it can (and has presented some supporting data to support it).


Streaming has the POTENTIAL to get as good as blu-ray in the FUTURE.

I have not seen any data from slick1ru2, can you link to it?

I see the disagreenment as slick1ru2 saying quality does not matter. That is why talks about how "good" Netflix is. The issue is that once one opens his mind the discussion gets much more complex. Like I said in thye other thread to have 2D BD quality for streaming you need 60-100 mbps, how many years away is it before the average person has that? and let's face it, you would need at least twice that since from time to time someone might want to watch one thing while someone else something else.

The is not if we will get that BW , I am prepared to accept and hope we will, but how far away is that? If it is next week, then I will agree with slick1ru2 but if itis in 5 years or 10 years or more then there is enough headroom for better disk (or other media) quality as well. If by the time 100mbps is common place and not too expensive (i.e. comparable to what a 3-4mbps is today) disks have lossless video 4K, why would I be interested in it, it would need to be much more then the 100mbps to compete. That is why 4K and BW don't matter to him, it completely destroy his argument that it is inevitable that disks will be replaced by DL.

I believe (correct me if I'm wrong)that is some not all of course, that slick is saying, if you want to have blu-rays and streaming then go for it. There is nothing wrong with having multiple formats, as slick and I have actually discussed on here.
It is about choices and knowing about all of your options, whatever they may be.

disagree, slick1ru2 is saying that BD and all physical media will be gone and the only choice will be DL. That is why he keeps saying this thread is about BDs survival and not co-existance.. On the other hand I have not seen others say DL will go away

[slick1ru2]

Originally Posted by Cevolution

Your faith in the Internet is your biggest problem, not everyone likes the Internet like u do. Heaps of people will never want it connected to their tv's etc, just because you're a person in your 50's who likes computers, the Internet streaming etc, doesn't mean that most other people in your ago group do as well. The Internet can be a joke at times, it's full of more opinions than facts, it can be much quicker to just pick up an encyclopedia to find an answer to a question at times instead of searching through thousands of opinions on the Internet before u get to the right answer.

Well, I'm not in my 50s yet. Ironic that your statements on the Internet are made over the Internet. 65% of the U.S. have high speed internet and that's relatively low percentage of industrialized countries. Everyone, tens of millions, with cable TV have Internet access, even if they don't get the Internet. That's how they stream their TV programming. Streaming HD can be just as seamless, they don't even have to know its the Internet. You guys must be in low tech fields, that's all I can think.

You do know that not everyone likes HD TV? More people have the Internet then HD TVs and many times more then have Blu-ray disc players.

[Steedeel]

at last, three posters with common sense.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Rob71

Exactly. Want to stream a Criterion? Better get Hulu. How long until Apple decides to play? Seems to me, streaming is in the "one step forward, two steps back" phase. Netflix is even buying exclusive content now.

Apple TV is already out and you can do video from itunes already. Actually when you use your DC copy and it says iTunes what do you think it means. It is DL but apple is a bit more sneaky about it, the contents given to you for free (with the physical copy you bought) and since it is on disk it is less painful then a true DL (let's face it they could have just added the sheet of paper with the code)

[Steedeel]

All know is i trust my eyes and my eyes tell me bluray is the greatest gift film fans have had in their home in my lifetime. To settle for anything else is just pointless to me. Yes, for general entertainment shows i can manage poorer quality but for films nothing less than full hd 1080p will do for me.

Slick1ru2, maybe your eyesight is going? It would explain your love of streaming!

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

We will have to agree to disagree then! I have said in previous posts i think this is a backwards step for all movie lovers. Bluray fans embrace the quality of the picture, the sound, the extras and the collecting aspect of the format. All of these things do not and will not exist on download/streams now or ten years from now.

I don't know if it will never happen. But to me it is like flying cars, I seriously doubt it and if it does it is too far a way for any intelligent person or person without an agenda to care.

When it is close to feasible then wake me up.

[Cevolution]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

Well, I'm not in my 50s yet. Ironic that your statements on the Internet are made over the Internet. 65% of the U.S. have high speed internet and that's relatively low percentage of industrialized countries. Everyone, tens of millions, with cable TV have Internet access, even if they don't get the Internet. That's how they stream their TV programming. Streaming HD can be just as seamless, they don't even have to know its the Internet. You guys must be in low tech fields, that's all I can think.

You do know that not everyone likes HD TV? More people have the Internet then HD TVs and many times more then have Blu-ray disc players.

Sorry I though u were in your 50's based on something u said last week. It's not ironic at all since I was talking about middle aged and elderly people who haven't grown up with the Internet unlike me (as I am in my 20's) and people from my age group. Most people in their 40's and above don't care about the Internet like younger people do, and a big percentage of people in your age group (regardless of how good streaming might possibly become in the future) will never ever want to stream content or have an Internet connection connected to their tv's.

Having more Internet connections out there than HDTV means nothing at all in this debate, because most who have access to the Internet still aren't using the internet for the same reasons u do. U would find that less than 10% of people worldwide who have an Internet connection would use it for streaming. That's where u have gone wrong in your argument, u think that everyone who uses the Internet uses it how u do.

U still need a net connection connected to your cable tv box to be able to stream content to it, and a wireless router setup in your home to be able to use the internet between multiple things in different rooms, which a lot of people don't do. I don't have a wireless router setup in my home, I've just got 1 ethernet connection going from my modem to my computer and that's it, that's all I want, I don't care about connecting every bit of technology I have in my home to the Internet and neither do a lot of other people.

Can u honestly see your mum/mom wanting to ever stream content? cause I can't see mine ever wanting to, just like so many people in the same age group (and younger for that matter). It's like u think in the future studios are just going to tell people who don't want to stream that they won't ever be able to watch a new release movie again unless they do. Like it's been said many times before, streaming will always just be another option for consumers, it will just coexist with whatever physical format is available, even if streaming does take off consumers who don't want to stream aren't just going to be pushed aside without another way to watch movies.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

Extremely affordable? $12,000 for a TV? For who? Payton Manning? Bill Gates? Donald Trump? $1200 is affordable, not $12k.

my post got a bit messed up, but yes it is funny that someone will think that several years later and Tvs where still 12k$ is affordable. On the other hand , that link was supposed to be associated to the crazy comment

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

Well, there is a big difference between $900 or $10,000 and $500,000. The price of 4K is much higher then plasma and LCD was when introduced.

the first plasmas where more then 15k$ by 1998, the link I included the price had already fallen a lot. Today you can get a bigger plasma for 1000$ but it was not always so and one day you will be able to get a 4k plasma for 1000$