Physical & Digital EST: The Future of Home Video Discussion Thread

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by LMFAObros

I get what you mean. I just want to get some opinions from fellow collectors about why they refuse to bow down to our streaming overlords hehe.

Good survey, I for one saw this day coming back when the DVD came out. I see Discs as Storage Devices, put those Files on a Server and you have Streaming. If the Internet is a Collection of Servers, then access to that Content is all we need. The Future is Fiber, Networks, and Servers. Wireless for Mobile Devices, rural areas, or for those that can't get Fiber.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by alchav21

Good survey, I for one saw this day coming back when the DVD came out. I see Discs as Storage Devices, put those Files on a Server and you have Streaming. If the Internet is a Collection of Servers, then access to that Content is all we need. The Future is Fiber, Networks, and Servers. Wireless for Mobile Devices, rural areas, or for those that can't get Fiber.

I have had the misfortune of reading many of your posts and I have no recollection of you ever predicting that Samsung, or any other manufacturer, would stop making disc players. Disc players are still being made by several manufacturers, so if you predicted the utter cessation of their manufacture, well, guess what? You're still wrong.

You routinely predict the demise of physical media (you even gleefully wish for it to happen) and you were wrong the first time that you did and you remain wrong now. If you're consist about anything, it is that you are consistently wrong.

If you saw the rise of streaming from afar, surely you invested heavily in streaming providers from the outset back in 2007 when Netflix first began to stream content? Maybe even from their humble beginnings back in 1998? You should have made a fortune with such amazing foresight! I doubt that you could foresee your reflection in a mirror, yet alone anything else.

Discs are storage devices? What a revelation!

The internet is a collection of servers? Formal dining or casual? Should they be tipped the same?

Access is NOT all we need. It may be enough for you, but you are easily pleased. We need real tangible ownership, thereby giving us control over the content we purchase.

If the content is not in your possession it can be modified to appease the delicate snowflakes among us, as with Disney+'s deleting a scene from 1941's Dumbo, it can be DNR'd into waxy oblivion like with Terminator 2, and it can also be outright deleted like with the Simpsons episode "Stark Raving Dad."

Possession of your content also means that you are not dependent upon an ever more expensive internet service nor its reliability issues.

The quality advantage of physical media remains as streaming is nowhere near to matching it. Someday it might, in theory, but that has not happened yet. Until it does, if it ever does, I remain . Streaming has been stuck where it is since 2015.

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by The_Donster

I’m sure you already know this Wendell, but I think those test stores are called Stores of Tomorrow(?) or Future(?) and all of the stores will eventually go to this set up.

No, did not know that, thanks for that info. Please post any info that you may have.

We’ve got a couple here and I was working for Anderson Merchandising when one of them went through this facelift around Black Friday of all times.

NC is one of the states that Amazon has to collect sales tax for. I assumed Walmart saw this as an opportunity to capture or recapture some of the media sales away from Amazon, Best Buy and Target.

Is there a big In Store pick up with minimal check lanes in the front?

They did convert quite a few parking spaces to Store Pickup. We do not go there very often and I am usually in a grab and go mode so I do not pay much attention to the store. The spouse has Walmart pay so they tally our purchase, present her with a code which she scans and we are done. She has a better one for Sam’s Club, she scans every item that we put in the cart and checks us out when finished.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Vilya

Drink, or dope, might be the only things that could enable your worrisome self to relax.

Lost a great friend to drink, don’t touch the stuff.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Lost a great friend to drink, don’t touch the stuff.

Sorry to hear that.

I don't imbibe, either. It only gives me a headache and, as you may know, I'd rather be a headache than to have one.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Vilya

Sorry to hear that.

I don't imbibe, either. It only gives me a headache and, as you may know, I'd rather be a headache than to have one.

He left behind a young lad. Takes some getting over that. Such is life. Also lost my best friend just a day before his 21st due to a motorbike accident. It’s his family I always think of. Time has taken the edge of for them but I would imagine you never get over losing a son. Always awful seeing decent people going through that. It was hard enough for me but family is family.

[Ender14]

Originally Posted by alchav21

Good survey, I for one saw this day coming back when the DVD came out. I see Discs as Storage Devices, put those Files on a Server and you have Streaming. If the Internet is a Collection of Servers, then access to that Content is all we need. The Future is Fiber, Networks, and Servers. Wireless for Mobile Devices, rural areas, or for those that can't get Fiber.

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by alchav21

I see Discs as Storage Devices, put those Files on a Server and you have Streaming.

Remember this?

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

Name one CDN that would be willing to expand their storage 8 to 10 times in order to accommodate disc file sizes. Then think of the huge cost of infrastructure in order to deliver disc data rates. Not going to happen.

Now I am really going to complicate this for you. Remember I asked you to count the number of streams associated with the Netflix Test Pattern and an UHD episode of House of Cards 6. I asked you several times to do this but you never did. The reason for doing this was to show you how much storage is needed for just 1 hour of a Netflix UHD stream at 16Mbps. For 60 minutes @ 16Mbps = 7.2GB which is not a lot. Here is the problem, in order to minimize buffering and program start most streamers use adaptive streaming. So that one UHD episode of House of Cards is 7.2GB for the 16Mbps version, is XXGB for the YYMbps version, is ..... I have counted at least 6 different data rates for Cards and 10 different data rates for the Netflix Test Pattern. I have not noted the resolution and data rate for each change because I don’t care, its just streaming. If you, or someone else cares to do this then post your findings and I will calculate the storage needed for that program.

For adaptive streaming the program is segmented into 2 to 4 second segments. In the case of UHD Cards one segment will be 3840 x 2160 @ 16Mbps, the next segment may be 3840 x 2160 @ 11.45 Mbps and so on till the last one being the lowest resolution and data rate. So when you start a streaming program it will normally start at one of the lower resolutions and data rate then step up as the buffers fill. I don’t know how providers do the files, as in one large file or a separate file for each resolution and data rate. Also, I don’t know how they treat the boundaries of each segment, as in, it must be an I frame because I do not see how they could be P or B frames.

So, call and wake me up when a provider and CDN puts a 66 to 100 GB’s for the highest resolution and data and all the sub parts on a server for streaming purposes.

Like I said several times, providers want smaller file sizes, not larger.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

Remember this?



Now I am really going to complicate this for you. Remember I asked you to count the number of streams associated with the Netflix Test Pattern and an UHD episode of House of Cards 6. I asked you several times to do this but you never did. The reason for doing this was to show you how much storage is needed for just 1 hour of a Netflix UHD stream at 16Mbps. For 60 minutes @ 16Mbps = 7.2GB which is not a lot. Here is the problem, in order to minimize buffering and program start most streamers use adaptive streaming. So that one UHD episode of House of Cards is 7.2GB for the 16Mbps version, is XXGB for the YYMbps version, is ..... I have counted at least 6 different data rates for Cards and 10 different data rates for the Netflix Test Pattern. I have not noted the resolution and data rate for each change because I don’t care, its just streaming. If you are someone else cares to do this then post your findings and I will calculate the storage needed for that program.

For adaptive streaming the program is segmented into 2 to 4 second segments. In the case of UHD Cards one segment will be 3840 x 2160 @ 16Mbps, the next segment may be 3840 x 2160 @ 11.45 Mbps and so on till the last one being the lowest resolution and data rate. So when you start a streaming program it will normally start at one of the lower resolutions and data rate then step up as the buffers fill. I don’t know how providers do the files, as in one large file or a separate file for each resolution and data rate. Also, I don’t know how they treat the boundaries of each segment, as in, it must be an I frame because I do not see how they could be P or B frames.

So, call and wake me up when a provider and CDN puts a 66 to 100 GB’s for the highest resolution and data and all the sub parts on a server for streaming purposes.

Like I said several times, providers want smaller file sizes, not larger.

Now he will conclude that he can assign any number he chooses to to the "XX" and "YY" variables. He already thinks that adaptive streaming can use all of your ISP's bandwidth when it can not. Netflix's 4K streams do not exceed 16 Mbps although they often drop below it. I posted a link to an article awhile ago where a test site tested Netflix extensively and they plainly stated that they never received a bitrate above 16 Mbps under any conditions or network configurations. Netflix, and others, "adapt" downwards due to deteriorating network conditions more than anything else.

There is no incentive to increase the storage capacity of a CDN 8 to 10 fold to accommodate disc file sizes; there is no incentive to increase streaming bitrates. Doing so would greatly increase costs; costs that would have to be paid for by the consumer. Streaming customers are mostly happy with the quality level that they receive now; they will not be happy to pay substantially more for an improvement that they did not ask for in the first place.

[Ender14]

If this is successful will Steedeel concede that his fears of vanishing TV's are unfounded?

https://www.engadget.com/2019/04/29/...o-vertical-tv/

I saw this and immediately thought of him. He's in my head man!

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Ender14

If this is successful will Steedeel concede that his fears of vanishing TV's are unfounded?

https://www.engadget.com/2019/04/29/...o-vertical-tv/

Sorry, I saw this and immediately thought of him. He's in my head man!

I have not found anything that will assuage his fears.

He will instead see this as "proof" that vertically framed video content will kill off horizontally framed content, which is one of his oft stated fears that feed into his dread of the smartphone; in other words movies as we know them are doomed!

Nothing new can co-exist with anything pre-existing. Sumpins gotta die! You knew that already, right?

[Ender14]

Originally Posted by Vilya

I have not found anything that will assuage his fears.

He will instead see this as "proof" that vertically framed video content will kill off horizontally framed content, which is one of his oft stated fears of yore; in other words movies as we know them are doomed!

I was worried I might be provoking another round of doomsday prophecy, but I couldn't resist.

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by Ender14

If this is successful will Steedeel concede that his fears of vanishing TV's are unfounded?

IIRC, several years ago some made vertical monitors for word processing. They never caught on.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Ender14

If this is successful will Steedeel concede that his fears of vanishing TV's are unfounded?

https://www.engadget.com/2019/04/29/...o-vertical-tv/

I saw this and immediately thought of him. He's in my head man!

There is a story behind this. I actually predicted that vertical format would be the dominant format and I got laughed off the forum. I’m sure some of these guys would remember, it was only about a year ago.

Like that article said, millennials aren’t buying TVs. That just leaves 45+ age groups. Got to die out if that’s the case.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Ender14

If this is successful will Steedeel concede that his fears of vanishing TV's are unfounded?

https://www.engadget.com/2019/04/29/...o-vertical-tv/

I saw this and immediately thought of him. He's in my head man!

You don’t want me in your head!

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Vilya

I have not found anything that will assuage his fears.

He will instead see this as "proof" that vertically framed video content will kill off horizontally framed content, which is one of his oft stated fears that feed into his dread of the smartphone; in other words movies as we know them are doomed!

Nothing new can co-exist with anything pre-existing. Sumpins gotta die! You knew that already, right?

You remembered!

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

IIRC, several years ago some made vertical monitors for word processing. They never caught on.

Yes, for word processing and (I'm not making this up, maybe you'll remember it too) typesetting and page layout. And while portrait mode monitors never caught on they never really went away either. There was always some niche 'rotatable' monitor on the market somewhere and of course, one could always just mount a traditional monitor vertically.

Originally Posted by Steedeel

There is a story behind this. I actually predicted that vertical format would be the dominant format and I got laughed off the forum. I’m sure some of these guys would remember, it was only about a year ago.

Yes, Hollywood is going to make nothing but vertical movies. Even by your standards that was a good one.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

You remembered!

You're a memorable guy.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Like that article said, millennials aren’t buying TVs. That just leaves 45+ age groups. Got to die out if that’s the case.

Except that the author does not say that. Rather, the author asks how else are they (Samsung) going to sell TVs to millenials? It does not say that millienials are not buying TVs. It kinda sounds like a dig at Samsung after their recent foldable phone fiasco; Samsung hasn't exactly hit a home run with their "innovations" recently.

Samsung is just hoping that this alternatively vertical or horizontal oriented display will appeal to them. No one knows if they actually will appeal to millenials as the author points out. Samsung has only confirmed that it will be offered in S. Korea.

Nothing here to make me , but feel free to start without me.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Vilya

Except that the author does not say that. Rather, the author asks how else are they (Samsung) going to sell TVs to millenials?

To be even more precise, the author of the subhead asks that.

It's bad enough when people point to online articles but increasingly you see people skim a headline and call it a day.

Oh, and while we're on the subject, 43" isn't exactly a big screen anymore. It's big for a desktop computer monitor but on the small end of bedroom TVs.