UV Uncertainties (UV vs. iTunes vs. Blu-Ray)

[linuxhack3r]

A little backstory, I have 120+ iTunes HD movies from over the years. However, recently UV has caught my attention and I am nearly convinced that it is the better system.

I have typically been an "Apple Fanboy". Apple TV, AirPort Extreme, iPad's and iPhone's, MacBook's, you get the very expensive and exclusive picture.

However, recently I've been drawn back to Android (I started on that one with the original Motorola Droid). I tried a Nexus 5 when Kit Kat was just released, but I ended up iPhoning it up again because of my extensive movie collection in iTunes.

Yet, UV has some benefits that iTunes does not, notably:

• More "Codes"
• Better Cross-Platform Compatibility
• Potentially Higher Quality (I Think)

However, in reading reviews on the internet (admittedly, a lot of them were several years old), and I wanted them addressed here.

Something I read regarded that you don't own the movies, simply a license to view them. That is typical, but what I was reading hinted that some/all of the licenses would expire after a few years (not the codes, but the UV movie itself would expire from your library after a number of years).

Something I read regarded an extreme loss of privacy (particularly Warner Brothers). I assume it was talking about if you had some software installed on your computer (D2D or something?).

So it is great that you can use VUDU/Flixter/etc to watch your movies. Yet what exactly is "UV"? Apple is one of the biggest companies in the world and is not likely to "go anywhere". Who is behind "UV" and how likely is it to stay around for a very, very long time?

On quality. I've read that VUDU is supposed to offer the best streaming quality, calling it HDX. Yet, I was reading an article on the internet, and it speaks of:

As far as streaming goes, a minimum connection speed of 4.5Mbps is required to watch movies in "HDX," which is Walmart's name for its 1080p resolution content that streams at 24 frames per second. That's Blu-ray quality and the standard frame rate for film-based content. However, not all 1080p HDTVs can display 1080p/24; only those with a 120Hz or higher frame rate are capable. A TV with 1080p 60 fps will not display HDX. Moreover, PC, Mac, and iPad users can only access VUDU at the standard definition rate of 480p.

Surely that isn't true? If it is, please enlighten me. I only have 60hz because I didn't feel like 120hz or higher was worth it at the time (I thought it was a gimmick). Since then, I have retracted that now that I know how TV's work a bit more. But I figure 60hz>24fps, right? Something about a 2:3 pulldown? Also, it does suck that "mobile" devices can only do SD. Has that changed at all?

I currently use the Apple TV. I am considering getting rid of all Apple devices. As such, I'd have probably 50-100 movies I'd have to repurchase UV. That could get expensive, but I feel with D2D and more "codes" I could potentially grow my library quicker and cheaper than if I stick with iTunes in the long term.

It makes since, I use Amazon's Kindle library because it is cross-platform vs. Apple's "iBooks". So why didn't I start UV from the get-go instead of iTunes?

One of my biggest gripes about the whole UV scene is that the interfaces for most apps suck (VUDU on Xbox One, Vudu on iOS, etc). I don't think anyone could argue that iTunes is much more highly polished. Perhaps someday this will change.

Also, something I am concerned about is that I am shooting myself in the foot. I am attempting to "build" my favorite movie library, but then many will be re-released in the form of 4k eventually. I wonder which service offers the best track record of allowing some form of "upgrade structure" vs having to repurchase completely?