Oh noes teh sky is falling!

[mredman]

Originally Posted by Gotho

You sound like me. I'm just too old school (or maybe just too old) to bother with streaming. If I pay for something, I need to have something to show for it, something I can physically hold or look at. Hell, I still buy VHS tapes on occasion, so I won't be embracing streaming anytime soon.

Even if I were open to the idea of streaming, it would do me no good. My internet speeds are slow as molasses and my isp has a monthly data limit, which would be quickly exceeded if I were to start streaming or downloading everything. I also have no choice of service providers, so I can't just switch.

I don't think physical media will disappear anytime soon. The fact that vinyl records were able to made a come back in an age of digital music, at least gives me hope that streaming won't become the status quo, and instead will remain just another option.

Its not going anywhere. Blu-Ray is already up 14% from last years sale at this time. That is impressive

[McCrutchy]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

It's happened in video games many times, servers were taken down which were the only way to access your content. Even large corporations like Microsoft and EA have done this. For movies though? Not that I have heard of. And you're probably right that iTunes and Vudu will be around for many decades. Still though, I hate the idea of purchasing something that I need to ask permission to access. Also big companies have surprisingly collapsed before, like Atari or MGM.

This is a really tall order, and I think people have lost sight of what it means. In order for things to be around for decades, they have to be very permanent, which the internet is not.

Let's put something into perspective, when people say decades, they usually mean more than two, which probably, realistically, means three decades, or thirty years.

Social Media is only as old as Facebook, so it started in...

2004 (MySpace, which predates Facebook by months, is essentially a zombie today). Before that, social media was for pedophiles and shut-ins, and we all went outside and used the actual physical environment to socialize. And 2003 was when normal people could buy what's called iPods to use on true PCs, instead of overpriced Apple tech. But those days are gone already.

How about Wikipedia? 2001. The same as iTunes, period.

And of course, the "dot com" boom, really happened in 1999-2000, but let's be generous and say 1998, which was the year something called Google (or, sorry, Alphabet) was founded. Before the "dot com" boom, the word "Google" meant "googley-eyed", and was negative. God help you if you used it as a verb.

Yet, even if you take decades to mean just twenty-odd years, that's Amazon.com, meaning Amazon. That's not an exaggeration, either. Amazon.com is literally only twenty-two years old. It was founded in 1994, in the US only, as a way to sell paper books online, which it began to do in 1995.

And let's not forget, to the laymen, the "internet" is really "the world-wide web", which is a part of the actual internet that was started in 1989, went public in 1991, and was only designated "free" to use in 1993.

So even at its crudest point, the very building blocks of the building blocks of the services you're referring to are only 27 years old, which is nothing. Yes, DVD is younger, but in general, it really predates the "internet" in terms of widespread use more or less entirely. Remember, in 1996-1997, the internet was something only your rich, pompous friends had, and it was slow as shit. Maybe if you were lucky, you got a 30-day trial CD-ROM of America Online (AOL), which is something you never hear anymore.

But, somehow, the idea has caught on that the digital-only media of today is going to be there "tomorrow" for infinity. Unfortunately, that's not likely, based on precedent. If digital were to ever take over entirely, films, television, music and even books over a certain age (and in the case of the first two, perhaps only twenty or thirty years), would probably become "obsolete" where the studios are concerned, and with less to deal with to remind consumers, more people would forget about older movies, which often continue in memory, thanks in part or whole to physical materials, either elements, or printed advertising, that is eventually discovered, due, simply, to finite physical space, if nothing else.

Let's face it: In a digital environment, the studios could have as much control as they wanted, and could disappear what they like, forcing you to agree to let them access "your" movies at will, for the very privilege of being able to watch them in the first place.

Quite why people have lost sight of this is totally beyond me, but it really speaks to the startling power of convenience in this time, and how it has significantly changed our society, and probably not for the better, on balance.

[flyry]

Originally Posted by doctor_who

I find it odd that you find it odd. Netflix is flush with great original programming and a good mix of other stuff that is constantly changing. I have it for their original programming alone but there's plenty of other stuff, including 4k material.

they are really providing the original programming lately.

OITNB last month
stranger things this month

The Get down in Aug

Narcos and Luke Cage in september.

not to mention daredevil and kimmy schmidt few months ago.

[PenguinMaster]

People have very little sense of time and are extremely trusting. In the 10 years since iTunes has been selling movies they haven't taken them away so most people assume that every title they've bought will be available for the next 50 years. As if any company is likely to continually spend money to make sure something that hasn't been profitable in decades remains available.

[cheez avenger]

I want my cake and eat it too. If I'm buying the Digital HD version (assuming it has that 2-3 week window before physical release) then I will do it. I paid just over $20 for Batman v Superman Ultimate Edition, so I got to watch it 3 weeks early and then I recently watched the demo BD that received on release day - I bought the digital/disc option. I love Netflix and PRIME and I am in no fear of one day there not being a digital version of a flick online. Why? Physical media is relatively cheap assuming it's something that's not OOP. I'll buy the BD or the DVD again for a couple of dollars to replace the hypothetical crash of the online film databases and whatever films I may stored. More often than not I already have the physical copy of a UV copy.

[PenguinMaster]

Originally Posted by cheez avenger

I love Netflix and PRIME and I am in no fear of one day there not being a digital version of a flick online. Why? Physical media is relatively cheap assuming it's something that's not OOP. I'll buy the BD or the DVD again for a couple of dollars to replace the hypothetical crash of the online film databases and whatever films I may stored. More often than not I already have the physical copy of a UV copy.

So you think that the physical option will always be available? I'm assuming with the movies and TV shows you're watching on Netflix or Amazon Prime that you're not buying discs of all of them as well. Since so many other people are doing the same thing the disc sales of those titles are declining. With later seasons and similar titles they may not get a physical release at all. This has already happened with many titles.

[Blu-21]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

I refuse to pay for streaming or downloads. I had Netflix's streaming for several months when it was free with the disc plan and the selection was horrible. The quality was poor as well.

How is the PQ poor? Most movies and shows are OAR and in 1080p resolution with decent compression. The audio being Dolby Digital Plus lossy encoded isn't the best, but it's not horrible. I see Netflix steaming as a good substituent for renting to test the waters on content.

[PrestigeWorldwide]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

I refuse to pay for streaming or downloads. I had Netflix's streaming for several months when it was free with the disc plan and the selection was horrible. The quality was poor as well.

Originally Posted by Blu-21

How is the PQ poor? Most movies and shows are OAR and in 1080p resolution with decent compression. The audio being Dolby Digital Plus lossy encoded isn't the best, but it's not horrible. I see Netflix steaming as a good substituent for renting to test the waters on content.

The quality of Netflix streaming was poor when it was free with the disc mailing service. From what I recall, the streaming quality wasn't decent until around the time they started charging for it. Now Netflix's streaming quality is much better. I've had it since it launched. Netflix plus Amazon prime = no need for cable for me, but it's not a replacement for discs.

[Blu Titan]

Originally Posted by PrestigeWorldwide

The quality of Netflix streaming was poor when it was free with the disc mailing service. From what I recall, the streaming quality wasn't decent until around the time they started charging for it. Now Netflix's streaming quality is much better. I've had it since it launched. Netflix plus Amazon prime = no need for cable for me, but it's not a replacement for discs.

I agree with the above...I use Netflix and like it it but it is a supplement for movie watching...movies come and go all the time in the service. Sometimes, I find something cool to watch. In fact, a had quite a few Blu-ray purchases that were made after initially watching the film on Netflix.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by Blu-21

How is the PQ poor? Most movies and shows are OAR and in 1080p resolution with decent compression. The audio being Dolby Digital Plus lossy encoded isn't the best, but it's not horrible. I see Netflix steaming as a good substituent for renting to test the waters on content.

It's better than a DVD, but it doesn't come close to BD.

[I KEEL YOU]

Originally Posted by jetthead

I used to own over 2000 DVDs and currently have over 1600 Blu-rays and I've never encountered this "disc rot".

I hear a lot about "disc rot" and I fear it greatly, but have yet to actually encounter it. I've come to the conclusion that those who store their discs improperly, or perhaps live in very humid areas or areas with other unfavorable weather conditions will have high frequencies of disc rot, but so far my percentage is at an even zero, out of many hundreds of discs owned.

What I, personally have experienced frequently though is player/laser failure. But in this case, I take comfort in the fact knowing that players will always be available, at least in game console form because the phenomenon of "retro gaming" has only gotten more popular so PS3/PS4/Xbox One consoles will always be available down the line.

[WhySoBlu?]

Originally Posted by cakefactory

I don't consider Netflix in what I'm asking, I would NEVER expect their stuff to be consistent (they've proven beyond all shadow of a doubt it isn't, they're practically just on-demand cable with a fancy name). I'm specifically asking about buying a digital copy of a film through some service like ultraviolet/Itunes and having THAT get removed. Has THAT ever happened? I'm unclear from your F4 example whether that happened there, or if it just was made so you couldn't buy it during that time if you hadn't already.

Digital copies being made unavailable to buy doesn't concern me that much, I'm asking if once you buy it if it's permanent. I know even if nothing has ever been yanked that the answer is still "we don't know," but if it's "so far, yes" then that's good enough for me. If anything's ever actually been yanked, then I will take that as a warning. Just so far, all I'm hearing are a lot of hypotheticals from zealots on this board.

Well, here's something that was pulled from Amazon by the content owner - not just for purchase but from the libraries of customers who "purchased" the content as well.

[cakefactory]

Thanks! I guess it wasn't just fearmongering. Why am I not surprised that it was Disney??

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

I cancelled my Netflix subscription (since 2008) earlier today after being fed up with the slow turnaround times for the last 2 years. If I send a disc back on a Friday I don't get a replacement until the following Wednesday. Five damn days! So, I was sick of it as it used to be a one day turnaround. If I mailed a disc back on a Friday I'd get a replacement on Monday. Netflix slowly kept pushing it back until enough is enough. They tried to tell me it was because my nearest distribution facility was in Little Rock. I told them that that is only 4 hours from me. My turnaround time should still be one day. Complete BS.

That sounds terrible! Did you try calling them and complaining about it.
I did after they dropped Saturday mail service and it seems like shipments during the week were taking a day longer than normal. Since that call I've been getting an extra disc shipped every time my 3rd disc goes back(I'm on a 3 disc rental plan) with a nice email saying that since a disc was coming from a different distribution center I would be compensated with an extra disc at no charge to me. All the discs still arrive in one day. So it's like I got a free upgrade to a 4 disc rental plan.
While I'm not totally thrilled with Netflix, the volume I do in a year more than makes the price worth it.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by rickah88

That sounds terrible! Did you try calling them and complaining about it.
I did after they dropped Saturday mail service and it seems like shipments during the week were taking a day longer than normal. Since that call I've been getting an extra disc shipped every time my 3rd disc goes back(I'm on a 3 disc rental plan) with a nice email saying that since a disc was coming from a different distribution center I would be compensated with an extra disc at no charge to me. All the discs still arrive in one day. So it's like I got a free upgrade to a 4 disc rental plan.
While I'm not totally thrilled with Netflix, the volume I do in a year more than makes the price worth it.

I did. I called about 6 months or so ago and all they did was send me a couple extra discs for a month.

[McCrutchy]

Originally Posted by cakefactory

Thanks! I guess it wasn't just fearmongering. Why am I not surprised that it was Disney??

For the same reason you shouldn't be surprised that Disney are all too obviously elated by the thought of a digital "devolution", where total control slowly but surely returns to the studios, just as things were up until the advent of home video.

After all, there's plenty of legally-traded Disney physical media that Disney would prefer didn't exist, like:

LaserDiscs, VHS tapes and some DVDs, which contain original coloring and film grain, instead of the highly revisionist mastering techniques Disney has applied to many Blu-ray (and simultaneous DVD) editions.

LaserDiscs, VHS tapes and DVDs which contain exclusive supplemental content.

LaserDiscs and VHS tapes of uncut versions of films like The Lion King, which contains lines of original dialogue and the infamous "SFX" animation, all of which were removed over the years by Disney, as parents misunderstood and/or complained.

LaserDiscs and VHS tapes of The Rescuers and Who Framed Roger Rabbit, both of which contain frames of nudity inserted into the original film deliberately by animators. The latter film also contains digital alterations to things like Baby Herman giving the finger as he reaches up a lady's skirt.

LaserDiscs and VHS tapes of Fantasia, which contain Deems Taylor's original audio narration, which was dubbed over by voice actor Corey Burton, when the original audio for newly added footage could not be found.

(Incidentally, Sunflower, a racially-stereotyped black centaurette, serving the other centaurettes in the segment with The Pastoral Symphony, never made it to home video. The clip circulating is from a digitized VHS recording of an Italian TV broadcast, where an old master was used, and the sequence appeared by accident.)

VHS tapes of The Little Mermaid, which have a hidden phallic image on the cover that was deliberately inserted by an animator, and is possibly on other versions of the artwork.

And of course, legal, Disney-produced LaserDiscs and VHS tapes of Song of the South (1946), the film where "Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah" originated and won an Oscar, just as its singer, and the film's star, James Baskett, was given an honorary Oscar for Best Actor, and became the first black male actor to receive one, albeit unofficially. Even though Disney released this in Asia and the UK as late as the 1990s, they are clearly terrified of a negative reaction if they release it today (which is completely rubbish, by the way) despite having multiple avenues to release the film properly.

In an all-digital world, you can say goodbye to all of these (Sunflower too, probably), because Disney will bury them.

[rickah88]

These threads always seem to devolve into a this or that debate.
Seems to me that physical and digital can coexist. Clearly they have been for years, and appear to do so for years, perhaps decades, to come.
Every time I see one of these threads pop up, I always check the sky...just to make sure it's still there. Sure enough, every time the sky is firmly intact.
Just my observation.

[mayorofsmpleton]

My biggest concern with digital only purchases isn't necessarily that the title will be removed -- it's that the content might be edited in the future. Without the physical copy if there's a music rights issue (perhaps the licensing fee only covered the first 5 years of digital streaming rights, etc.) or anything like that the studio can just edit the version offered and you've got no ability to preserve the version you "bought."

I like having the digital HD codes I get with my BDs. I redeem them and keep them for when I travel and need something to occupy my mind -- or upgrading my SD dvds via the disc-to-digital program for titles that aren't on BD and likely won't be for a long time... but I still would prefer to have the physical copy for the increased image quality.

[nmycon]

Originally Posted by mayorofsmpleton

Without the physical copy if there's a music rights issue (perhaps the licensing fee only covered the first 5 years of digital streaming rights, etc.) or anything like that the studio can just edit the version offered and you've got no ability to preserve the version you "bought."

Ha! Can you imagine if someone like George Lucas was directing blockbuster movies in this day and age?

Every time you want to watch something like Star Wars you would have to sign in and download the latest "patch" for the movie.

Come to think of it, isn't that kind of similar to what Kanye is doing with all of his albums? The digital versions include all the latest updates to his songs, I guess the only way to preserve the original versions would be to buy physical or refuse to update your files.

EDIT: Whoops... what an silly typo

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by McCrutchy

But, somehow, the idea has caught on that the digital-only media of today is going to be there "tomorrow" for infinity. Unfortunately, that's not likely, based on precedent. If digital were to ever take over entirely, films, television, music and even books over a certain age (and in the case of the first two, perhaps only twenty or thirty years), would probably become "obsolete" where the studios are concerned, and with less to deal with to remind consumers, more people would forget about older movies, which often continue in memory, thanks in part or whole to physical materials, either elements, or printed advertising, that is eventually discovered, due, simply, to finite physical space, if nothing else.

Let's face it: In a digital environment, the studios could have as much control as they wanted, and could disappear what they like, forcing you to agree to let them access "your" movies at will, for the very privilege of being able to watch them in the first place.

Quite why people have lost sight of this is totally beyond me, but it really speaks to the startling power of convenience in this time, and how it has significantly changed our society, and probably not for the better, on balance.

Well you're replying to me here so I feel the need to point out I was basically saying the same thing. I said I won't buy something that relies on them giving me access each time, and I mentioned video games have already had this turn out badly. So, you don't need to tell me that.

However what I also said is that the big services like iTunes will probably be around for decades, because I do believe that. I'm not sure how new the internet is really relates to that, as it is not going away. It's in the studios' best interests to keep those services viable and consumer pleasing.