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

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

... there is nothing complicated about just watching movies from your iTunes or Amazon or Vudu library either.

When things work as intended, they are not so complicated. These numerous threads are often devoted to discussing problems that prevent them from redeeming and accessing their movies. Maybe not complicated to use in theory, but surprisingly problematic in practice.

"Hey farmer! When you gonna fix that leakin' roof?

Ah stranger, when it's a rainin' it's too wet to fix it and when it's dry it's just as good as any mans house."

-Michelle Shocked

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by Vilya

If just my blu-ray collection were digital, I wonder how many hard drives I would need to download them all? And without aggressive compression, either. It does not seem like a very practical or cost effective option.

I think it's far more practical and cost effective to store a few cheap USB drives than shelves and shelves full of discs, and then possibly spending hours and hours ripping them. And even that is only necessary if you're paranoid about losing your movies.

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by Vilya

When things work as intended, they are not so complicated. These numerous threads are often devoted to discussing problems that prevent them from redeeming and accessing their movies. Maybe not complicated to use in theory, but surprisingly problematic in practice.

You need to compare apples to apples. If you simply buy your movies through the digital stores like you buy your discs at a retailer, there is nothing "complicated" or "problematic" about it. Regular consumers do not scour the forums for cheap codes and elaborate redemption strategies.

[Vilya]

The largest USB drive I know of holds 256 gb of data. If I am ridiculously conservative and assume each of my blu-ray titles average 25 gb of data per title, I would need 327 of those USB drives.

At $65 per USB drive, that would cost $21,255. My shelving was considerably cheaper.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

You need to compare apples to apples. If you simply buy your movies through the digital stores like you buy your discs at a retailer, there is nothing "complicated" or "problematic" about it. Regular consumers do not scour the forums for cheap codes and elaborate redemption strategies.

If what you say is true, and I don't know having never used digital, that only addresses the redemption side of the coin: higher priced codes from digital stores redeem easily is the hypothesis.

These aforementioned threads contain several complaints about missing titles and problems accessing the content that they have purchased. These are the issues I find the most worrisome. It's great that the code may have redeemed easily, but it would be greater still if the content actually played without hunting for missing files or troubleshooting the chosen portal.

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by Vilya

The largest USB drive I know of holds 256 gb of data.

You can buy 4TB 2.5" USB drives for ~$100 (if you're willing to buy sligthly larger models with 3.5" drives, it's even less expensive per GB).

If I am ridiculously conservative and assume each of my blu-ray titles average 25 gb of data per title, I would need 327 of those USB drives.

Downloaded iTunes movies are usually between 5-10GB. You could store roughly 400-800 movies on a small 4TB drive.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

You can buy 4TB drives for ~$100.
Downloaded iTunes movies are usually between 5-10GB. You could store roughly 100-200 movies on a single drive.

I cited USB drives because I thought you meant those little flash drives. I refer to the big TB drives as external hard drives.

If these files files are 5 to 10 gb, then they are heavily compressed. No thank you. I did not invest all of this money into my home theater to watch Youtube quality videos.

Even if I were fine with all of that compression and even with 200 titles stored per hard drive, I would need 17 of them costing about $1700. My shelving cost far, far less than that, too.

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by Vilya

If what you say is true, and I don't know having never used digital, that only addresses the redemption side of the coin: higher priced codes from digital stores redeem easily is the hypothesis.

Regular digital-only iTunes or Amazon users don't use codes. They click the "Buy" button on their Apple TV or Fire TV and start watching. And there are just as many (if not more) sales for digital movies as for discs.

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by Vilya

I cited USB drives because I thought you meant those little flash drives. I refer to the big TB drives as external hard drives.

If they have a USB connector they are obviously USB drives.

If these files files are 5 to 10 gb, then they are heavily compressed. No thank you. I did not invest all of this money into my home theater to watch Youtube quality videos.

Perhaps you should try watching a digital movie. They are far from "Youtube quality" these days (and, BTW, Youtube is also capable of high quality streaming, even in 4K).

Even if I were fine with all of that compression and even with 200 titles stored per hard drive, I would need 17 of them costing about $1700. My shelving cost far, far less than that, too.

You'd need somewhere between 4 and 8 for a collection of 3400 movies (I miscalculated in my original post but have fixed it since you replied). As opposed to how many meters of shelf space?

[flyry]

Originally Posted by veritas

if I say vudu 41 times will that change your mind. vudu is having just as many problems as itunes if not more its just people like to ***** about itunes and itunes happens to be new for a lot of people since it just came out with a new box. Trust me vudu and movies anywhere are screwing up in diferent but just as many ways as itunes. If you don't believe me then I could make a list of vudu problems and we could compare notes.

I think you made that figure up. The (now second to last) page had 41 instances for itunes and 20 for Vudu.

Just a few pages ago in this very thread you complained about itunes saying you can't access 3 movies, so I have no clue why you're talking about VUDU now.

I'm not saying VUDU is perfect, but some people still can't even connect itunes as a retailer over 2 weeks later.

But I digress. We are getting away from the point of the thread.

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

You need to compare apples to apples. If you simply buy your movies through the digital stores like you buy your discs at a retailer, there is nothing "complicated" or "problematic" about it. Regular consumers do not scour the forums for cheap codes and elaborate redemption strategies.

Originally Posted by Vilya

If what you say is true, and I don't know having never used digital, that only addresses the redemption side of the coin: higher priced codes from digital stores redeem easily is the hypothesis.

These aforementioned threads contain several complaints about missing titles and problems accessing the content that they have purchased. These are the issues I find the most worrisome. It's great that the code may have redeemed easily, but it would be greater still if the content actually played without hunting for missing files or troubleshooting the chosen portal.

I know this Thread has taken a life of it's own, but in order to really discuss it you do have to be a participant, and dip your feet into Streaming. The OP has long gone from this Thread because things have changed so much. When they talk about UV Stores these are very competitive, and the prices come down depending on the demand. Redeeming Codes is not difficult if you pay attention to the instructions. I have never lost any Movies, and my MA transition was painless but my main Providers are Amazon and Vudu. The other thing is Quality with Streaming, the BitRates have gone up dependent on your Bandwidth but Downloads are very compressed for efficiency.

[Vilya]

Using the label "Youtube quality" might be unfair when used in a disparaging context, but that compression still seems severe to me and it sure seems like there would be a very discernible difference in quality between a 5-10 gb file and a 25-50 gb file.

The discs take up a fair amount of space, but I have the space to spare, so that doesn't matter to me. My final objection to conventional hard drives is they do not have a very long life span; the median being 6 years. I use 3 500 gb SSD drives in my pc, but they are not cost effective for storing vast amounts of data.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by alchav21

I know this Thread has taken a life of it's own, but in order to really discuss it you do have to be a participant, and dip your feet into Streaming.

I occasionally stream content from Amazon Prime and Youtube, and formerly from Netflix and Hulu. My participation is limited to that and by my craptastic ISP. Relying on the internet here for playing videos is impossible unless you have a high threshold for pain.

[veritas]

Originally Posted by Vilya

If just my blu-ray collection were digital, I wonder how many hard drives I would need to download them all? And without aggressive compression, either. It does not seem like a very practical or cost effective option.

You would need assuming 10 gb per disc ( you could go stronger compression or weaker compression but at 10 gb quality would be pretty good) around 100 terabytes for the collection you have listed. If you wanted to keep all your extras and have no compression at all you are looking at cloning the discs and would require about 400 terabytes in storage plus you would probably need to replace them every 2 to 5 years as hardrives fail around that often.

I am not really sure how much 400 terabytes would cost since nobody really sells hardrives in that quantity or size to the consumer end and you would probably need to come up with your own cooling and power system for this. If you just bought cheap 4 terabyte harddrives and ignored how you integrated them just the hard drives would set you back 4 thousand dollars. When you include building a server room and cooling organizing this thing it would probably require a small house and 50k in remodeling lol.

If you are talking about doing this with the digital copies from the studios you could probably fit a collection your size into the 100 terabyte server but it wouldn't matter anyway if the servers went down the drm would basically brick all your backups anyway. Thats part of the problem even if you back this stuff up when the servers go down and cant call home the drm bricks the downloaded copies or locks them to a single device at best.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by veritas

...it wouldn't matter anyway if the servers went down the drm would basically brick all your backups anyway. Thats part of the problem even if you back this stuff up when the servers go down and cant call home the drm bricks the downloaded copies or locks them to a single device at best.

More like when the servers went down. I did not even think of the DRM bricking the downloads, so that essentially means downloading digital movies does not effectively back them up at all.

I am liking my disc collection more and more.

[GuyIncognito]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

If you're so concerned about it, download your digital movies via iTunes and make backups. The end.

Tell me how your 4K DOWNLOAD looks...
The end

Originally Posted by Fiffy

Uhm, why would they need all these accounts?

The same reason we need more than Best Buy to sell movies. We want competition and different places to buy things on sale. Movies are not a universal price across all providers.

Originally Posted by Fiffy

If they have a USB connector they are obviously USB drives.
Perhaps you should try watching a digital movie. They are far from "Youtube quality" these days (and, BTW, Youtube is also capable of high quality streaming, even in 4K).
You'd need somewhere between 4 and 8 for a collection of 3400 movies (I miscalculated in my original post but have fixed it since you replied). As opposed to how many meters of shelf space?

You are probably the only person I have seen who refers to a 4TB 3.5" external hard drive as a "USB drive". What about an external hard drive that has a eSATA connection as well? Is that simply an "eSATA drive" even though it's the same thing aside from the connection?

[flyry]

Originally Posted by veritas

Well you needed the itunes account because its the best . you need the flixster and vudu accounts because the codes only worked on vudu and flixster. you need that google account for those 50% off sales. You dont really need amazon but again they sometimes have amazing deals. You need microsoft to get your disney movies cheap. You need movies anywhere to get your entire collection in one place again that got fractured by studio aholes. I am just saying my experience anyway I didint want all those accounts but I ended up with them just trying to get digital copies to redeem and get the best price on the few times I bought digital copies. When uv came out and every studio pointed you to a different site and tried to force you to sign up everywhere to snag your meta data and send you spam mail, its those sorts of things that makes people going digital have a ton of accounts.

Flixster is dead as is Microsoft's connection to Disney

You don't need to use the Movies anywhere app just to have your movies all in one place. You can do that now using your preferred retailer.

Really once Paramount, Lionsgate and MGM join,(and even now) the only point in looking at other retailers other than your preferred it to buy the movie at the lowest price.(or sometimes highest resolution - aka Vudu UHD exclusives)

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by Vilya

Using the label "Youtube quality" might be unfair when used in a disparaging context, but that compression still seems severe to me and it sure seems like there would be a very discernible difference in quality between a 5-10 gb file and a 25-50 gb file.

You should try it. You may be surprised how far modern encoders have come.

My final objection to conventional hard drives is they do not have a very long life span; the median being 6 years. I use 3 500 gb SSD drives in my pc, but they are not cost effective for storing vast amounts of data.

Spinning disc drives, when used as a backup medium that is only occasionally connected, last far longer than that. SSDs are a bad choice as backup devices since not only are they more expensive per GB, but the cells also gradually lose their charge if the drive isn't powered for longer periods of time.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

SSDs are a bad choice as backup devices since not only are they more expensive per GB, but the cells also gradually lose their charge if the drive isn't powered for longer periods of time.

That is commonly believed, but it has been debunked. SSD's do not suffer from data retention issues when they are without power.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/9248/...data-retention

"All in all, there is absolutely zero reason to worry about SSD data retention in typical client environment. "

https://www.pcworld.com/article/2925...after-all.html

https://www.pcworld.com/article/2921...liability.html

"But panicking when you unplug the thing is unwarranted. SSDs are designed for speed and day-to-day use, but the amount of time they retain data when put on the shelf is measured in years, not days."

https://www.itworld.com/article/2921...or-a-week.html

And anecdotally, I have a friend who works as a software engineer and CIO at his company and he has personally told me that this misconception has been debunked. Personally, I had my pc and its three Samsung SSD drives in climate controlled storage for 8 months and I did not lose any data.

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by veritas

If you are talking about doing this with the digital copies from the studios you could probably fit a collection your size into the 100 terabyte server but it wouldn't matter anyway if the servers went down the drm would basically brick all your backups anyway. Thats part of the problem even if you back this stuff up when the servers go down and cant call home the drm bricks the downloaded copies or locks them to a single device at best.

Originally Posted by Vilya

More like when the servers went down. I did not even think of the DRM bricking the downloads, so that essentially means downloading digital movies does not effectively back them up at all.

I am liking my disc collection more and more.

If you don't have the Bandwidth for effective Streaming stay with your Discs, and only use Streaming like you are doing now. Downloads are highly compressed, and there are no 4K Downloads. Streaming BitRates have been going up because the Codec File sizes are becoming comparable to Disc, and this is all dependent on your Bandwidth.