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

[PenguinInfinity]

Originally Posted by Vilya

I have even less concern for the future of digital sellers; they are a fixture on the home entertainment landscape. We won't see wholesale loss of titles as it would seriously undermine consumer confidence.

I don't think that's necessarily true. The digital libraries of entire video game consoles have been discontinued but it hasn't stopped people from buying new video games in digital form. I think the same would be true with movies.

Many people are just interested in the newest movies and wouldn't be particularly bothered if they lost their old movies. They certainly wouldn't give up the convenience of streaming just to ensure that they retain their old movies.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by PenguinInfinity

I don't think that's necessarily true. The digital libraries of entire video game consoles have been discontinued but it hasn't stopped people from buying new video games in digital form. I think the same would be true with movies.

Many people are just interested in the newest movies and wouldn't be particularly bothered if they lost their old movies. They certainly wouldn't give up the convenience of buying digital just to ensure that they retain their old movies.

If they do not care what happens to their purchased content then there is even less reason that the possibility of losing it would deter them from continuing to make such purchases. Either way, digital storefronts remain.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

So you don’t believe a carbon ration will be applied to all individuals?

So by magic, we as a human race are all going to comply and lower our emissions, eat 60 % less meat, stop travelling as much and install solar, batteries and sign up to a Green energy tarif?

All by 2030? People don’t even want to give up burgers.

No, I do not. I thought I made that abundantly clear already. Carbon rationing will not happen. At least not here in the U.S.; we won't stand for it.

Goals, whatever they may actually be, for the year 2030 are not laws; they are not legally binding. The only goalposts that move as often as your own are those of governments.

Besides, you said that carbon caps would 100% happen by the end of this year. Get back to defending that wacky prediction and stop trying to drag your goalposts to 2030.

[PenguinInfinity]

Originally Posted by Vilya

If they do not care what happens to their purchased content then there is even less reason that the possibility of losing it would deter them from continuing to make such purchases. Either way, digital storefronts remain.

I agree with that.

Thousands of unpopular titles could be removed to reduce storage costs. Bitrates may be reduced as bandwidth limits are instituted. Digital stores could certainly get worse, but they definitely aren't going to disappear.

[flyry]

got myself an OLED for the living room for christmas. of course had to get the dolby vision 4K player(matching the one in the bedroom) and the new DV roku for it. i love the TV, but i do miss the curved Samsung. it just looked like art even when the screen was off. i gave it to my mother.

[unberechenbar]

Originally Posted by Vilya

I received a PM from a new forum member (completely unknown to me) that asks me if I would just give them the digital code that came with one of my blu-rays because it is a movie that they want to see.

People amaze me. I would NEVER randomly write to someone and ask them to give me their stuff. Does this happen to anyone else here?

Yes I received one on Christmas. I was pretty surprised when it happened.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by flyry

got myself an OLED for the living room for christmas. of course had to get the dolby vision 4K player(matching the one in the bedroom) and the new DV roku for it. i love the TV, but i do miss the curved Samsung. it just looked like art even when the screen was off. i gave it to my mother.

Congratulations! I'm very happy for you! Which make and model did you get?

[gotmule]

Originally Posted by Vilya

Your regurgitated prediction has no traction. It's just your same old prediction with a date and probability assigned and then both reassigned and then both reassigned again in a matter of hours. A prediction as firm as a bowl of Jello stirred with a vibrator.

Nothing to see here and nothing to support a single word of any of it. It's just you being scared...again.

I am going to borrow your quote at some point down the road about jello and a vibrator. Never heard that one.

[flyry]

Originally Posted by Vilya

Congratulations! I'm very happy for you! Which make and model did you get?

Went with the LG C1

[lgans316]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

ATV4K users with HUD, posted the following at AVS. If you have Disney+ can you check Boba Fett

Audio: Atmos 768 Kbps

[bhampton]

Originally Posted by Vilya

If they do not care what happens to their purchased content then there is even less reason that the possibility of losing it would deter them from continuing to make such purchases. Either way, digital storefronts remain.

I read that movies on iTunes purchased in 4K still revert to HD on occasion sometimes for months and no one cares.

22 Jump Street reverted to HD in November and hasn't updated to 4K yet.

This is the exact reason I abandoned my idea to go "all in" with online movies. There's no reliability and the target audience also doesn't care.

Originally Posted by Petey Parker
Has 22 Jump Street disappeared from the 4K library of anyone else and only available in HD now? I’m not sure how long ago it happened but I know it was recently.

Originally Posted by mlabonte21

Mine has done the same— very strange.

Yes, this happened in November and hasn’t returned since unfortunately. See post 13788 in the iTunes 4K thread.

At one time I had no UHD BD and had planned to buy all my movies online but my copy of Skyfall 4K reverted to HD and the other Craig's followed for a few weeks before updating to 4K. This was temporary but you know I didn't like it. The problem is your average movie consumer doesn't notice or give a damn about stuff like that so it's going to take a while before people realize there really is a problem with this new online movie thing.

[lgans316]

Originally Posted by bhampton

I read that movies on iTunes purchased in 4K still revert to HD on occasion sometimes for months and no one cares.

22 Jump Street reverted to HD in November and hasn't updated to 4K yet.

This is the exact reason I abandoned my idea to go "all in" with online movies. There's no reliability and the target audience also doesn't care.

Originally Posted by Petey Parker
Has 22 Jump Street disappeared from the 4K library of anyone else and only available in HD now? I’m not sure how long ago it happened but I know it was recently.

Originally Posted by mlabonte21

Mine has done the same— very strange.

Yes, this happened in November and hasn’t returned since unfortunately. See post 13788 in the iTunes 4K thread.

At one time I had no UHD BD and had planned to buy all my movies online but my copy of Skyfall 4K reverted to HD and the other Craig's followed for a few weeks before updating to 4K. This was temporary but you know I didn't like it. The problem is your average movie consumer doesn't notice or give a damn about stuff like that so it's going to take a while before people realize there really is a problem with this new online movie thing.

22 Jump Street - The DV stream had issues. I had reported to Apple long time ago and few weeks later it got reverted to HD. Maybe Sony are fixing it. Sometimes these fixes takes months and at times few days.

Similar issue is there with Push (Lionsgate) and Lego Batman on iTunes (4K DV) but I think Warner are yet to fix it although the same on MA looks fine.

99% of the 4K movies haven't reverted to HD. I am keeping a constant tab of my iTunes library (US - 1019 / UK - 318).

On a side note, you do realise the problems with 4K UHD releases of Silence of Lambs, Hard Target, Mad Max 2, Invasion of Body Snatchers etc. Only Hard Target and Mad Max 2 are getting re-pressed and the distributors have shown the middle finger to us for the rest.

I got about 400+ 4K discs in my collection and I have experienced a fair amount of playback issues with about 5% of them. Some got fixed via f/w update on the player (Panasonic UB-820) and some discs still have playback issues.

Both have their pros and cons and down to how to embrace and use them.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by bhampton

I read that movies on iTunes purchased in 4K still revert to HD on occasion sometimes for months and no one cares.

22 Jump Street reverted to HD in November and hasn't updated to 4K yet.

This is the exact reason I abandoned my idea to go "all in" with online movies. There's no reliability and the target audience also doesn't care.

Originally Posted by Petey Parker
Has 22 Jump Street disappeared from the 4K library of anyone else and only available in HD now? I’m not sure how long ago it happened but I know it was recently.

Originally Posted by mlabonte21

Mine has done the same— very strange.

Yes, this happened in November and hasn’t returned since unfortunately. See post 13788 in the iTunes 4K thread.

At one time I had no UHD BD and had planned to buy all my movies online but my copy of Skyfall 4K reverted to HD and the other Craig's followed for a few weeks before updating to 4K. This was temporary but you know I didn't like it. The problem is your average movie consumer doesn't notice or give a damn about stuff like that so it's going to take a while before people realize there really is a problem with this new online movie thing.

Yeah, imagine buying a 4K disc that reverts back to HD. Like you say, it’s just unacceptable. When you buy 4K, you want 4K every time, not having to wait months for someone to pull their finger out.

[Ender14]

I'm a little late to the party, but I added 319 discs to my collection last year which is a record for me. 110 were 4K discs and 209 were Blu-ray's. I already have 6 4K titles pre-ordered for this year. But I don't foresee adding as many discs to my collection in the new year. But I've said that before .

I would like to add at the minimum a Dolby Atmos Soundbar to my setup this year. I just don't really have the dedicated space for a full 7.1 setup. But my next house WILL have a dedicated theater room.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Vilya

No, I do not. I thought I made that abundantly clear already. Carbon rationing will not happen. At least not here in the U.S.; we won't stand for it.

Goals, whatever they may actually be, for the year 2030 are not laws; they are not legally binding. The only goalposts that move as often as your own are those of governments.

Besides, you said that carbon caps would 100% happen by the end of this year. Get back to defending that wacky prediction and stop trying to drag your goalposts to 2030.

I’m not sure your country would have a choice if carbon rationing with some trading scheme came into place. The more countries that took it up, the more pressure the U.S would be under. No country would want to be the one that prevents the world reaching those 2030 targets.

Here is how I see it impacting the major streaming services if it is implemented.

Rationing with a carbon trading system

Disney+
Worst affected due to the age group of its subscribers skewing to the young. I am pretty sure the vast majority would prioritise social media such as Tik-Tok and other user generated content like YouTube. Given a ration, many youngsters would probably spend their time with those apps in their limited time and therefore, Disney may lose millions of subscribers.

Netflix
Netflix would fare better as it skews towards older, more adult content. It would still lose millions but not as many as Disney. Long term, it would have to really cut down on its carbon emissions because consumers rations would deplete every year to fall in line with the next year’s carbon targets. It would undoubtably have to rely on tradable credits while it transitions to a renewables centric operation.

HBO Max
Would have to cut emissions drastically or suffer the consequences as it’s productions are mostly prestige, expensive budgets. Consumer wise, again it’s skews towards older audiences so may stand a chance if it can keep up with carbon reductions. Like Netflix, would need to rely on trading carbon (safety net) to survive.

Rationed without a trading system

All three services would struggle with a straight forward ration with no trading. There would be far less breathing space for all streaming services and their future would depend on carbon restricted audiences managing their allowance while they (streaming services) slice their carbon use at a record pace. It would be a very fragile situation. Luxuries may have to take a back seat and more people would cancel to manage that. Or at best, they would cancel for a few months then just catch up with stuff they really need to see when they have sufficient ration space.

Last scenario is a situation where only select countries take up the carbon rationing. This would prevent streaming services being global and they would lose tens of millions. As more and more countries are put under rations, the more unstable the businesses would become.

Or carbon taxes!

[bhampton]

I don't know about Carbon rationing however,

It's already standard to charge more for better bandwidth. I have a 25mbs connection that barely qualifies as high speed but have no interest in paying $80/month for a faster connection to bad video.

[bhampton]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Yeah, imagine buying a 4K disc that reverts back to HD. Like you say, it’s just unacceptable. When you buy 4K, you want 4K every time, not having to wait months for someone to pull their finger out.

With iTunes you can only DL the HD version anyway. 4K is supplied when available and all those 4K titles are simply "available" for the moment.

It's still a better system than Kaleidescape in my opinion.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by bhampton

With iTunes you can only DL the HD version anyway. 4K is supplied when available and all those 4K titles are simply "available" for the moment.

It's still a better system than Kaleidescape in my opinion.

I got Apple’s tv service free as part of another contract. The picture quality is very decent for the stuff I watched to be fair. But as you know, I like to ‘own’ my stuff, so film wise I have only watched exclusives like Greyhound.

[bhampton]

I have ATV+ forever because of the Apple One program which is less than I was paying for just music and online storage.

Servant is good if you're an M Knight fan. Most people I know love Ted Lasso ... it's ok ... I almost got through a season.

I liked Coda. I loved Mythic Quest.

This one called Calls should have been an audio only thing IMO ... the video was gibberish and personally I couldn't get into it .. just seemed like junk to me.

There's a lot on there now.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

I’m not sure your country would have a choice if carbon rationing with some trading scheme came into place. The more countries that took it up, the more pressure the U.S would be under. No country would want to be the one that prevents the world reaching those 2030 targets.

Here is how I see it impacting the major streaming services if it is implemented.

Rationing with a carbon trading system

[Show spoiler]Disney+
Worst affected due to the age group of its subscribers skewing to the young. I am pretty sure the vast majority would prioritise social media such as Tik-Tok and other user generated content like YouTube. Given a ration, many youngsters would probably spend their time with those apps in their limited time and therefore, Disney may lose millions of subscribers.

Netflix
Netflix would fare better as it skews towards older, more adult content. It would still lose millions but not as many as Disney. Long term, it would have to really cut down on its carbon emissions because consumers rations would deplete every year to fall in line with the next year’s carbon targets. It would undoubtably have to rely on tradable credits while it transitions to a renewables centric operation.

HBO Max
Would have to cut emissions drastically or suffer the consequences as it’s productions are mostly prestige, expensive budgets. Consumer wise, again it’s skews towards older audiences so may stand a chance if it can keep up with carbon reductions. Like Netflix, would need to rely on trading carbon (safety net) to survive.

Rationed without a trading system

All three services would struggle with a straight forward ration with no trading. There would be far less breathing space for all streaming services and their future would depend on carbon restricted audiences managing their allowance while they (streaming services) slice their carbon use at a record pace. It would be a very fragile situation. Luxuries may have to take a back seat and more people would cancel to manage that. Or at best, they would cancel for a few months then just catch up with stuff they really need to see when they have sufficient ration space.

Last scenario is a situation where only select countries take up the carbon rationing. This would prevent streaming services being global and they would lose tens of millions. As more and more countries are put under rations, the more unstable the businesses would become.

Or carbon taxes!

You're doing it all wrong. My fantasies are all pleasant ones; why are yours always so negative?

I only skimmed your word salad because none of it is based in reality. You really think all of that absurdity will come to pass this year? That's what you said "by year's end."

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Data centre carbon caps will be enforced this year (by years end) throwing a massive spanner in future plans for Netflix, Disney+, HBO max and Amazon instant video. The future may not be streaming.

Carbon rationing legislation will be proposed, debated, passed, enacted, international agreements negotiated, concluded, and all of it enforced within the year? I think even the timetable of your fantasies have fantasies.

Can you provide a single credible link showing where any such legislation has even been proposed? What legislative body, anywhere in the world, has had such legislation introduced, yet alone enacted?

I do like you and I want to take you seriously, but you don't make it easy when you post one unsubstantiated fear after another as if they were facts. I see no point in continuing my part in this particular discussion. Worrying needlessly is just what you do and I should realize by now that it is futile to try and reassure you.