Ask questions to The Digital Bits team (Bill Hunt, Jeff Kleist et.al.)

[Jeff Kleist]

Doubtful Millenium will hit Blu any time in the forseeable future

Only the top TV titles are likely to get Blu-ray, so while X-Files is certainly a big contender, especially if the third one gets the greenlight (70/30 last I heard, especially if they can get it out next year), but Millenium, highly unlikely

[MerrickG]

I always appreciate Bills posts on the state of the industry and I am also glad that he made it perfectly clear that no media format will ever have the success of DVD.

I would call bluray a success if it does HALF as well as dvd.

[nathan_393]

Originally Posted by merrick97

I always appreciate Bills posts on the state of the industry and I am also glad that he made it perfectly clear that no media format will ever have the success of DVD.

I would call bluray a success if it does HALF as well as dvd.

Bill's post today was excellent. The article he linked to about Blu-ray not catching on was absurd - same with the comments, actually. People really do have no clue. It's sad.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by SpaceDog

While I largely agree with you - and I think the doomsayers are completely ridiculous - eventually flash memory is going to be cheap enough with a high enough capacity that the home storage issue won't be part of the concern.

I can't see that happening. For renters it is not an issue. if your collection count is under 100 like it shows then why I can see it as not being a big concern in the future. But I have well over 700BDs (have not been counting since I hit 600 so it could be over 800 or even more) and my collection is puny compared to many others here the first two pages are people with over 1000 and the top collections are over 2000. Think about it. a person with 1000 movies with an average of X GB per movie would need X TB and that X would be over 25 since most movies come in BD50 and there are multidisk sets/TV series. You look at people with 2000 and it becomes 2X TB. And everyone’s collection is growing. (not to mention that many like me don't even bother). Do you honestly see a day when a 50TB or 100TB flash drive is going to be cheap?

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

True, but network capacity/bandwidth are not standing still. Speeds will increase in the future, while the requirements of Netflix-level compression will not.

Not at all. Netflix just lowered the default quality in Canada to their lowest SD , and there is SD and HD, there is ~.3GB/h, ~1GB/h and ~2GB/h offered right now + tweaks as far as I know. Netflix can only offer what Networks can accommodate, and let's face it how can it get every one until it offers something at least close to BD quality? which would need more then 10x what is now the best they offer.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

Not at all. Netflix just lowered the default quality in Canada to their lowest SD , and there is SD and HD, there is ~.3GB/h, ~1GB/h and ~2GB/h offered right now + tweaks as far as I know. Netflix can only offer what Networks can accommodate, and let's face it how can it get every one until it offers something at least close to BD quality? which would need more then 10x what is now the best they offer.

Perhaps my comment wasn't clear. My point is that bandwidth will continue to increase, but the amount of that bandwidth required to stream movies at the compression levels Netflix currently uses will not.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

Perhaps my comment wasn't clear. My point is that bandwidth will continue to increase, but the amount of that bandwidth required to stream movies at the compression levels Netflix currently uses will not.

Unless more people want to stream more content via more outlets.

Which only seems likely, no?

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

Perhaps my comment wasn't clear. My point is that bandwidth will continue to increase, but the amount of that bandwidth required to stream movies at the compression levels Netflix currently uses will not.

but why would anyone want that or care. It is like someone in the 50's saying peoples salery will keep on increasing but if the housing market stayed at the same price then it is easier for people to buy homes, it does not make sense that the housing market would stay the same because salary and housing tend to be similarly linked to inflation.

Plus like I pointed out Netflix does not only offer one alternative so if more people now (and for calculations purposes) use the lowest quality 300MBph and in the future everyone is using 2GBph then the result would be different. And even if we look at any one of the playback options they are not all the same since the first job is to get none spastic playback. That is why http://techblog.netflix.com/2011/01/...-networks.html
if you look at the graphs (bottom one first) Rogers and Shaw customers watching HD are getting probably north of 3000 kbps when watching HD feeds (which is about 1.3GB/h) on average while someone using clearwater and watching the same HD content is probably getting around 1500 kbps. What do you use for HD (if limiting to HD)? The 3020 available from Shaw (according to Netflix) the 2667 of Charter (best US) the ~1500 (looking at graph) of Clearwater or the 4800 which according to Netflix is the best they supposedly can offer?

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by octagon

Unless more people want to stream more content via more outlets.

Which only seems likely, no?

good point, that is an other issue.

[Jeff Kleist]

The big problem is that the cost of delivery is only going to go up and up, as the government is unlikely to enforce net neutrality the way they should. Bandwidth caps are only going down, and it's going to be a disaster

Do you really think Comcast is going to allow NBC/Universal content on there, or do anything other than escalate their bandwidth war with Netflix when the current contract expires, especially in light of losing Hulu? Hells no. Netflix is the biggest threat they have to their core business and they want it dead.

The big picture on streaming is that there's a big war coming, and it's going to get very messy and annoying for probably a good 5 years before they settle down. Netflix will merge with someone big, count on it, and that someone big may even be Amazon to give them huge purchasing power. Whatever happens, I doubt it's going to be nearly as fun, or as quickly resolved when the guns stop firing as the format war, because there's far too many players and probably half a dozen sides that are going to be in that picture.

[gettodamoofies]

Not only that but the infrastructure must also be available in all the major markets otherwise there will still be a reliance on physical media. Here in Australia it costs me $50US a month for a 100GB plan. The speeds and data allowances simply won't support the streaming of decent quality HD material, let alone something that even remotely approaches the quality that Blu-ray can provide.

Although some markets won't factor into the calculations due to the relatively small amount of money to be had in them I highly doubt studios would cease physical media usage or severely curtail it as they would be alienating a portion of the population where some good $$$ can be made.

The thing about discs is that as long as you have the hardware you're OK. Streaming is a whole other factor - my PC is perfectly capable of playing HD content, unfortunately the infrastructure (and I live in one of the largest areas of the state) simply isn't there to support it. If things are even remotely similar in some other countries then it's going to be a while before physical media stops being the dominant form of film/TV distribution.

Just my 2 cents on the matter.

[jdc115]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

Not at all. Netflix just lowered the default quality in Canada to their lowest SD , and there is SD and HD, there is ~.3GB/h, ~1GB/h and ~2GB/h offered right now + tweaks as far as I know. Netflix can only offer what Networks can accommodate, and let's face it how can it get every one until it offers something at least close to BD quality? which would need more then 10x what is now the best they offer.

I think netflix raised the compression due to Canada starting to charge for bandwidth usage so they are trying to help those that stream in Canada. At some point the bandwidth will catch up but in places like the US that have a large area to cover, it may take a will.

I recently upgraded my connection as they ran fiber to my apartment. My local speeds now top 200 Mbs per second download and over 70 Mbs per second upload. Connecting overseas I am suppose to get at least 25Mbs but some of my tests now have me hitting closer to 40 Mbs without any cap on my usage.

If they setup a local server, I would image I should be able to stream Blu-ray quality without an issue. Somehow I think they will still always try to do streaming using more compression and without lossless audio codecs, but it should be possible.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by octagon

Unless more people want to stream more content via more outlets.

Which only seems likely, no?

Still not clear, I guess... I meant per movie. I'm not talking about the total amount of bandwidth required based on the popularity of the service; I'm just saying that 5 years from now, it won't take more bandwidth to stream the same movie to you at the same compression rate, but the speed of your connection will probably be greater.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

but why would anyone want that or care. It is like someone in the 50's saying peoples salery will keep on increasing but if the housing market stayed at the same price then it is easier for people to buy homes, it does not make sense that the housing market would stay the same because salary and housing tend to be similarly linked to inflation.

Why do people want movies at the compression levels Netflix uses? I don't know, but they do seem to. Your analogy doesn't really work because while the cost of goods (the price of lumber to build a house) is tied to inflation, the quantity of lumber required to build the same house is not. And that's all I'm talking about. In 2015, the bit-budget required to compress Jurassic Park to Netflix levels will be the same (or, if anything, less, as compression schemes become more efficient) as it is today. Meanwhile, network infrastructure will keep lowering the per-bit price of that bandwidth for each customer.

[SpaceDog]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

I can't see that happening. For renters it is not an issue. if your collection count is under 100 like it shows then why I can see it as not being a big concern in the future. But I have well over 700BDs (have not been counting since I hit 600 so it could be over 800 or even more) and my collection is puny compared to many others here the first two pages are people with over 1000 and the top collections are over 2000. Think about it. a person with 1000 movies with an average of X GB per movie would need X TB and that X would be over 25 since most movies come in BD50 and there are multidisk sets/TV series. You look at people with 2000 and it becomes 2X TB. And everyone’s collection is growing. (not to mention that many like me don't even bother). Do you honestly see a day when a 50TB or 100TB flash drive is going to be cheap?

My preference is going to be optical media for the forseeable future. However, the rate of data storage increase does not prohibit the idea of a large format flash drive - or a bank of them. I don't think it will be soon and I don't think it will initially be cheap - but there will come a time.

While my collection is not accurately reflected here - I don't update it very often, and I frequently lose track of what I've added here and what I have not - I don't buy as much blu-ray as I did when I bought DVD. Though I love blu-ray more, I recognize that I don't have time to watch the 1000+ DVDs that I own. Thus I've become much more conservative about what I buy or do not buy on blu-ray.

If I sat on my butt night and day with no sleep - it would take me 83 days to watch my whole DVD collection, and that's on the conservative side. I stopped counting after 1000, and I'm suggesting a 2hr average per disc when there are plenty of TV discs that have much more content. I just don't need to fill my wall any more with content that I don't have time to watch - so no - I don't have 700 blu-ray titles yet. (Which conservatively is 58 days without sleep to watch)

You have to understand that I'm not arguing against blu-ray. Blu-ray is my prefered format - and I want to be able to engage in blu-ray purchasing versus any download/cloud/intangible format for as long as I possibly can.

That said - the personal cloud local data storage option is coming - and you will see some transition to a local home network solution.

I don't think the local storage issue will be the roadblock - it will be a contest of quality versus bandwidth. Blu-ray wins that contest hands down - and will for the forseeable future.

[radagast]

Originally Posted by SpaceDog

Unfortunately that gets back to the bandwidth issue. You are starting to see a variant on "the cloud" which is being positioned as "your local cloud".
http://iomega.com/about/prreleases/2...nal-cloud.html

...And it still doesn't get around the issue that I like boxes with movies in them and pretty cover art to keep on the wall.

The only thing clouds do is shift where the movies will be stored. If millions of people store large numbers of HD movies on cloud storage, there is going to be a limit imposed and prices will go up. That is just "clouding" the issue, so to speak.

[Jeff Kleist]

I think netflix raised the compression due to Canada starting to charge for bandwidth usage so they are trying to help those that stream in Canada. At some point the bandwidth will catch up but in places like the US that have a large area to cover, it may take a will.

I recently upgraded my connection as they ran fiber to my apartment. My local speeds now top 200 Mbs per second download and over 70 Mbs per second upload. Connecting overseas I am suppose to get at least 25Mbs but some of my tests now have me hitting closer to 40 Mbs without any cap on my usage.

East Asia leads in cheap and fast internet. The real problem is that once you exit the urban areas. That's why Obama has been pushing for federal broadband funds as part of infrastructure improvement. Left to the free market, a lot of the country will be left to hang, and the part that no one thinks about is that these locations become a bottleneck for the bigger network, slowing down the more profitable areas. If the data can't get from point A to B because the rural network can't handle the load, that's no good for anyone. A lot of people forget that the internet is originally a US government project, and that net neutrality is a very issue for a truly free market. Unfortunately, "free market" typically means "whoever has the most money to keep the competition down wins", which is exactly what Comcast and the other ISPs have been looking to do. Make Netflix as unappealing and inconvenient as possible as an alternative to the cable and VOD services they offer. You can bet that the kinds of deals they'll be looking to strike in the future for "free in-network calling" type scenarios where Netflix traffic doesn't count toward your cap is snagging a big chunk of your subscription dollar, which will then cause those prices to go up.

It's an investment that absolutely needs to be made, and that's one of the things government is there for. Bridges, roads, tunnels, and in this case, a series of tubes

[SpaceDog]

Originally Posted by radagast

The only thing clouds do is shift where the movies will be stored. If millions of people store large numbers of HD movies on cloud storage, there is going to be a limit imposed and prices will go up. That is just "clouding" the issue, so to speak.

I am almost certain that part of how "the Cloud" works is through data deduplication. Especially the Amazon cloud - I doubt that you have a discrete 5GB - it's shared with others who have the same songs as you do.

That said, I'm also referring to local storage - which is branded as a local cloud. I think you'll see consumers using this moreso. Your local cloud can be accessed in home or on the road - but it's storage that exists in your space.

[Uxi]

Definitely agree 100% with Bill when he said "My feeling is that movie streaming and downloads will most greatly impact the movie rental industry." That's what I've been saying all along. For people who want to own their content (much less enjoy fair use), DRM and more importantly HDD failure are massive problems to overcome.

[Jeff Kleist]

That's what Ultraviolet is for. Ultraviolet is a universal industry DRM that is unlikely to go anywhere. That way if you guy something, it stays yours forever

And that's a completely seperate war that's brewing. Apple's desire to hold the entertainment industry by the balls like Valve's Steam does with PC gaming vs the needs of the many.