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

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Vilya

Hey, this link doesn't work! I really wanted to visit this website, too. I love both a bargain and British humor.

According to Forbes, The U.S. ranks 9th globally in "fixed broadband" speed in an article dated Aug. 14, 2017. Our average download speed is 70.75 Mbps and 27.64 Mbps upload. Singapore is number one with average download speeds of 154.38, more than twice the U.S. average. Since July 2016, the U.S. climbed from 11th place to 9th.

U.S. mobile internet ranks 46th in the world, with an average download speed of 23.05 Mbps and 8.26 Mbps upload. We just beat out Albania in the rankings. Since July 2016, the U.S. dropped from 44th to 46th place.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kevinmu.../#7307bdd065b5

These fixed broadband average speeds are more than enough to stream in 4K and even I can do so in the tiny village where I live, but the reliability of the service remains quite poor. These wonderful speeds mean little when the service is out or when it is just stuttering along. I rarely go two months without having to make a service call.

Just a mile from my home, though, and outside of the village limits, people can only get DSL service with a maximum speed of 18 Mbps. At my sister's home, 5 miles away, her best speed averages around 12 Mbps. Lots of rural folks can not stream in 4K and the ISPs do not seem to be in any rush to invest in network upgrades in these areas. If they want to watch 4K content, a 4K disc player is their only option.

Maybe I should get my sister an Oppo 203 for her birthday this year as it is the only way she'll get to watch 4K content?

That for sure would be a good buy.

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by alchav21

Nobody is saying that 4K Streaming equals Blu-ray Disc, it's Like for Like. If Blu-ray Disc has a maximum Bitrate of 40Mbps, then Bandwidth of 50+Mbps will be more than enough for Blu-ray Disc like Quality. Blu-ray Discs are also compressed, so Streaming Disc or Server are all the same.

Originally Posted by Vilya

Actually, you are the one who said it:

"4K Streaming Providers average 25Mbps, and the average Blu-ray Player averages 20Mbps. So Blu-ray Disc Quality has been achieved, and the top Streaming Providers are working on matching UHD Disc Quality."

Those are your words from your previous post on the previous page of this thread. So, from your own words streaming has not achieved 4K UHD disc quality AND your comparison was not "like for like" as you specifically compare 4K streaming provider bitrate averages to that of what you claim are the bitrate averages for blu-ray players. 4K streaming is only analogous to 4K UHD disc and that is not the comparison you make in your posts.

I can understand if you have trouble comprehending what you write; you are not alone in that.

Yes, blu-rays discs are compressed, but streaming is more compressed. This is evident from looking at the bitrates from a high definition streaming source and that of a blu-ray disc. The blu-ray disc has a much higher bit rate than that of its high definition streaming counterpart. High definition streaming is only analogous to blu-ray disc. "Compression" is what the first half of the word "codec" means after all. I won't provide links to any definitions as you have immunity to them.

Despite your insistence on misusing the word "streaming", reading data from an optical disc is NOT the same as receiving data from a server via the internet. Where the data is located is different, how the data is accessed is different, the requirements to accomplish that access are different, and the degree of compression is different. When there are differences between things they are no longer the same; do you see how that works?

I guess you have never looked at a Disc or done any Back-ups, the Files and Bit Streaming are the same. Those same Files I put on a Back-up Disc or Network Server were the same. A Player Reads and Bit Streams the same from a Disc or a Server. The Codec used now is based on H.265, and with Adaptive Bitrate can start off in a lower Resolution and go up according to your Bandwidth. So a Streaming Provider like Sony Ultra that has all their Movies in 4K, goes up from SD, through HD+HDR, to 4K+HDR. According to your Bandwidth and Movie Resolution. Same Codec, but the Quality goes up according to your Bandwidth so if you have 50+Mbps your HD Movies will be Blu-ray Disc Quality easily. I'm saying the other 4K Providers will do the same.

[flyry]

Originally Posted by cpr3584

Its amazing to see how quickly the movies go on sale through digital providers- while the UHD won't drop in price for months. This tells us the true value of movies in a cloud based system. there are worth about as much as a rental, $5-$6, or as much as people are willing to pay for a code. They are long-term rentals, nothing more.

It also tells us how overpriced some of the discs are. The Matrix 4K went down to $24.99 for a few hours yesterday, but is now back up to $34.99 in typical WB fashion. I'm glad I have the low price locked in with my pre-order though, it'll probably be $30 for a while when it releases.

[Steedeel]

I think the mistake you guys fall into is thinking everything will be so much better with a digital landscape. It really won’t. I have spoke at length about my fears of ‘seperate’ Subscriptions depending on what device you watch on. Some CEO mentioned charging by screen size and the reason it stuck with me is because it was something I have had in mind.

For an example look at Spotify. At the moment you can subscribe and get your music on the tv, on your smartphone, through a tablet or laptop etc.
I say they will split these services into ‘smartphone only’ and ‘smart speaker only’ and charge different price points. Amazon do this right now with their prime service. You can pay (I think it’s £3.99 a month) and you will get the full catalogue but only on a Echo device. No smartphone, not tablet etc..
Apple could well do this next with a cheaper ‘Homepod only’ subscription. I’m convinced they will in fact. DMR will make it easy to implement as well.

These services are known as restricted tier and they are coming to a subscription service near you. Be that Netflix, Amazon whatever. I can see it now. In fact Netflix already have SD only (basically known as the smartphone option) at a cheaper price. Rather than anywhere anytime, we will have to pick and choose what device we want to watch on.
As we all know, given a much cheaper option, a huge percentage would choose a very cheap smartphone fillm and tv option over any other. Result? The smartphone takeover I have been predicting for years. Who would pay far more for tv screens when we already have a society that won’t pay much?

If there is any doubt, this restrictive tiered subscription offering has come from nowhere to represent 14% of the subscription market I understand. It’s on the rise I suspect because of the Amazon Echo’s success.

Before too long expect to see subscriptions tied to one device for movies and tv. The TV will suffer the fallout.

[flyry]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

I think the mistake you guys fall into is thinking everything will be so much better with a digital landscape. It really won’t. I have spoke at length about my fears of ‘seperate’ Subscriptions depending on what device you watch on. Some CEO mentioned charging by screen size and the reason it stuck with me is because it was something I have had in mind.

For an example look at Spotify. At the moment you can subscribe and get your music on the tv, on your smartphone, through a tablet or laptop etc.
I say they will split these services into ‘smartphone only’ and ‘smart speaker only’ and charge different price points. Amazon do this right now with their prime service. You can pay (I think it’s £3.99 a month) and you will get the full catalogue but only on a Echo device. No smartphone, not tablet etc..
Apple could well do this next with a cheaper ‘Homepod only’ subscription.

These services are known as restricted tier and they are coming to a subscription service near you. Be that Netflix, Amazon whatever. I can see it now. In fact Netflix already have SD only (basically known as the smartphone option) at a cheaper price. Rather than anywhere anytime, we will have to pick and choose what device we want to watch on.
As we all know, given a much cheaper option, a huge percentage would choose a very cheap smartphone fillm and tv option over any other. Result? The smartphone takeover I have been predicting for years. Who would pay far more for tv screens when we already have a society that won’t pay much?

If there is any doubt, this restrictive tiered subscription offering has come from nowhere to represent 14% of the subscription market I understand. It’s on the rise I suspect because of the Amazon Echo’s success.

Before too long expect to see subscriptions tied to one device. The TV will suffer the fallout.

I don't know why you fail to understand this after god knows how many months but subscription will exist alongside purchases. The casuals can subscribe to say Netflix, but we can just buy the titles we want on VUDU/Amazon/ITunes etc.

Just because Apple Music is around doesn't mean people cannot still purchase on iTunes.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by flyry

I don't know why you fail to understand this after god knows how many months but subscription will exist alongside purchases. The casuals can subscribe to say Netflix, but we can just buy the titles we want on VUDU/Amazon/ITunes etc.

Just because Apple Music is around doesn't mean people cannot still purchase on iTunes.

Why would that be restricted to those services? Same principle. Let’s say Vudu for sake of argument. Watch your (bought) films on a tv? £3.99 a month. Watch on mobile? £1.99 a month. Do you see? The subscription model I described could apply to viewing your content via a locker.

All this stuff is coming. You will pretty much have to pick what device you want to view on. Most will pick the cheap option.

[veritas]

Originally Posted by Cutter_

Agreed, digital wins the price war, it's not even close.

But when talking catalog titles, physical blu-rays can be found for the same price sometimes too, or cheaper. That's why I have price matching for physical, iTunes and Amazon Digital, if I want a title. Because I do both, physical and digital, and sometimes a physical blu-ray will be the cheapest. I just want the cheapest option. Sometimes you just gotta be cheap, patient, and smart to find the best price.

physical is easily the cheaper option. The used market alone assures that because you have the free market to avoid price gauging.

A lot of these people who went full digital admitted they sold their physical collections for like 50 cents a movie meaning somebody could buy physical collections for 50 cents a movie.

Anyway that is just my own personal experience if I could buy digital for like half to a quarter the price I pay for physical+digital I would go digital but I just cant find 10 to 25 cent digital copy codes (but I do find 50 cent to a dollar movies )

[kedavis]

I was at the Navy Exchange (NEX) in San Diego yesterday. They do price matching and don't charge sales tax (7.75% in this city).
I looked for the movies, and was told "we don't sell them anymore because they're not profitable and everyone's streaming."
I prefer physical copies because the picture and sound is better, there are often more extras, and availability wo watch isn't dependent on another company's whims.

[Vilya]

I understand that you think everything expressed in binary code is the same thing because it is "digital." You probably think everything ever written in English is the same thing because it uses the English alphabet.

"A Player Reads and Bit Streams the same from a Disc or a Server." -alchav21

A disc player operates entirely different when playing a disc than how streaming from a server is realized and you are the ONLY one who can not see that. The files present on a disc are different than those accessed over the internet from a streaming service, but a player does not, and can not, read and transfer data from a disc in the same manner as a device using a remote connection to a server via the internet does. I am pretty sure streaming devices do not need a laser to accomplish their task. Data is transferred in both cases, but there is nothing the same about how it happens or even how it is decoded. I would provide you with the definition of the word "same", but it would be pointless. Maybe an equation? Same=identical. Disc players accomplish their disc playing function entirely different than how data is acquired, and utilized, from a server via an internet connection.

Sure, theoretically, files on a disc and a server could be the same, but the reality is that the files you get from a subscription streaming service, or a digital sell thru provider, are different than those present on a disc. How that data is transferred and processed is completely different. Completely different means they are NOT the same, even partially different means they are not the same.

Adaptive streaming is a wonderful idea, but many services don't use it and many of us do not have access to Sony Ultra because we do not own a Sony TV. My high definition streaming from Netflix does not have a bitrate anywhere near what my blu-ray players provide during disc playback despite the capabilities of my ISP.

I have been backing up video content for over 13 years. I have made simple data discs with just the main feature's files and omitting all of the garbage trailers to complete 1:1 copies with everything included. I use single and dual layer dvds for some back-ups as well as single and dual layer blu-rays for back-ups. I even have some videos backed up to SSD drives and to a conventional external hard drive. I have told you this before, but seeing as you adore repetition, here it is again.

I hate to break this to you, but any monkey can make a back-up of a video; doing so does not make you a computer expert. I know enough to build mine from the mobo up, but I am no computer expert, either. I can read and follow instructions pretty good, though. When you can not even grasp the differences between how a disc player works and how streaming content from a server works and when you can not even define the terms correctly, you are ill equipped to discuss the subject.

[Vor4]

Originally Posted by PCFan

1. If you resell your discs after watching them or just have a small blu-ray or DVD collection because of you being selective of what you want to own and what you want to get rid of then space requirements is not really an issue with physical.

2. It's only cheaper if you are buying codes and someone must buy the blu-ray that includes the code to make the code available for sale. I would not be surprised that more and more people will go back to buying disc for 4k who usually are doing digital by buying cheap codes because now Fox from 4k discs released starting from 2018 will only redeem as HD through MA as that's what I read recently. Buying 4k digitally is getting more expensive digitally because more and more codes from 4k disc will not redeem as 4k through MA. With how convoluted MA is these days and more codes not being able to redeem through iTunes (means no free 4k upgrade in iTunes), I would not be surprised if those people who mainly rely on digital codes for digital go back to discs.

3. I agree with the convenience. However, should an employee be watching movies at work, even if it's during a break, especially on a business computer?

You say it's cheaper for you with digital. Is it mainly because of the cheap codes that are available for sale?

So it seems that you're back supporting physical media this week, but next week you'll be supporting digital hd. It seems that you're confused on both formats and have complaints on both formats. You have a huge digital hd collection and I've told you and many others may agree that its too late for you to return to physical media.

With point 2 is that its actually cheaper to buy 4k digital media that physical media. iTunes has 4k titles that are cost cheaper that the 4k disc version.Most people wait for sales on 4k digital media. Your wrong about 4k digital codes not redeeming as 4k in services through MA. Only Fox titles have that issue since their 4k movies only have the hd version code, but I heard that its going to change in a few months with upcoming 4k releases.

With the 3rd point, many businesses blockout streaming services on their computers and network, or set users with only limited function thats related to only business on computers.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Vor4

You have a huge digital hd collection and I've told you and many others may agree that its too late for you to return to physical media.

As long as physical media remains available, it is not too late to return to it. Its simple existence makes that return possible. He has to decide if that's plausible for himself.

The size of my blu-ray collection in no way precludes me from adopting the 4K UHD format. The size of one collection poses no impediment to having another.

You can certainly argue whether doing so is worthwhile and those arguments have already been presented in great detail and frequency. All you have to do is decide what you want. It can even be both.

[flyry]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Why would that be restricted to those services? Same principle. Let’s say Vudu for sake of argument. Watch your (bought) films on a tv? £3.99 a month. Watch on mobile? £1.99 a month. Do you see? The subscription model I described could apply to viewing your content via a locker.

All this stuff is coming. You will pretty much have to pick what device you want to view on. Most will pick the cheap option.

No. Those services I mentioned in addition to Google Play are all part of Movies Anywhere.

What you are saying makes no sense.

Why would you have to pay a monthly subscription to access those movies when the whole point of MA is being able to watch them wherever you want!?

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Vilya

To be exact, I said that if 4K streaming was equal to blu-ray, that would not be saying much as that means that state of the art streaming has only now reached where blu-ray was over a decade ago.

Let me be equally exact: that's nuts

If - again, if - streaming has caught up to BD quality that would be saying quite a bit. BD is not exactly a low bar. Being able to flip on a TV and stream a blu-ray would be no small accomplishment particularly when you consider where streaming was only a few years ago.

I mean, if I invented a transporter tomorrow would your reaction be 'holy shit, d00d, that's pretty impressive' or 'nice, bruh, it only took you like 5,000 years to catch up to the wheel'.

Originally Posted by Steedeel

The TV will suffer the fallout.

archer - danger zone [hq] - YouTube

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by octagon

Let me be equally exact: that's nuts

If - again, if - streaming has caught up to BD quality that would be saying quite a bit. BD is not exactly a low bar. Being able to flip on a TV and stream a blu-ray would be no small accomplishment particularly when you consider where streaming was only a few years ago.

I mean, if I invented a transporter tomorrow would your reaction be 'holy shit, d00d, that's pretty impressive' or 'nice, bruh, it only took you like 5,000 years to catch up to the wheel'.

Only amateurs are "nuts," I have papers proving that I am bona fide bonkers. Got no time for pretenders.

Streaming has made noteworthy advances and it can look very good, but second place finishers just don't get me all that excited. I don't particularly need another way of getting what I already have gotten. Stream me a holodeck experience and then you'll hear some hootin' and hollerin' from me.

You go on now and invent that there transporter thingamabob and just wait and see how much congratulating you get from me. I love ground breaking technology. I will pester the hell out of you for free rides.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by flyry

No. Those services I mentioned in addition to Google Play are all part of Movies Anywhere.

What you are saying makes no sense.

Why would you have to pay a monthly subscription to access those movies when the whole point of MA is being able to watch them wherever you want!?

It would only take a name change. Movies your way for example. They will for sure follow the trend and put movie watching in tiers. Sure, all your movies would be yours and watchable on any screen but at any point they could draw up a new agreement and declare Movies Anywhere dead. If subscription music and tv is going to be tiered like I mentioned, this system would be outdated.

[PCFan]

Originally Posted by Vor4

So it seems that you're back supporting physical media this week, but next week you'll be supporting digital hd. It seems that you're confused on both formats and have complaints on both formats. You have a huge digital hd collection and I've told you and many others may agree that its too late for you to return to physical media.

With point 2 is that its actually cheaper to buy 4k digital media that physical media. iTunes has 4k titles that are cost cheaper that the 4k disc version.Most people wait for sales on 4k digital media. Your wrong about 4k digital codes not redeeming as 4k in services through MA. Only Fox titles have that issue since their 4k movies only have the hd version code, but I heard that its going to change in a few months with upcoming 4k releases.

With the 3rd point, many businesses blockout streaming services on their computers and network, or set users with only limited function thats related to only business on computers.

I said the codes that come with the 4k discs from Fox for movies released starting from 2018 only redeem as HD through MA and won't redeem through iTunes. I read about this in the Movies Anywhere section in the digital forum here and also I was told in the iTunes Sales and Discounts forum here that Three Billboards code that comes with the 4k disc will not redeem as 4k and this is also a Fox title released in 2018. I mention Three Billboards because I wanted to buy a code for that movie and it's on sale for $9.99 in iTunes right now but the code that comes with the 4k disc only redeem as HD, so I must buy directly through iTunes to get it in 4k in iTunes but $9.99 is too expensive for me for a digital movie especially when I can't download 4k.

[flyry]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

It would only take a name change. Movies your way for example. They will for sure follow the trend and put movie watching in tiers. Sure, all your movies would be yours and watchable on any screen but at any point they could draw up a new agreement and declare Movies Anywhere dead. If subscription music and tv is going to be tiered like I mentioned, this system would be outdated.

Again you're making no sense. You really aren't qualified to speak on streaming services you don't even have access to.

You really think they would change MA to something else and all 5 providers will start charging? #makesnosense

this also leaves out of the discussion that Movies Anywhere itself is an app where you can watch your collection and nothing can even be purchased on it.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by flyry

Again you're making no sense. You really aren't qualified to speak on streaming services you don't even have access to.

You really think they would change MA to something else and all 5 providers will start charging? #makesnosense

this also leaves out of the discussion that Movies Anywhere itself is an app where you can watch your collection and nothing can even be purchased on it.

Ok, I will do this in stages.

Stage 1. A new model is introduced for movie purchases. 2 weeks after cinema release, you can purchase that movie on your tv for £20, tablet/Laptop £10 and smartphone for £4.99. This would also apply to subscription via the tiered restricted subscriptions I spoke of earlier.
This is very possible, especially if Digital HD growth has peeked already.


Stage 2
Movies Anywhere will continue to be playable on all devices but NEW purchases will not. They will still be stored in the cloud but will only be playable on the device you CHOSE at time of purchase. Movies Anywhere will be rebranded to reflect this new model.
You will still have the option to watch NEW films on all devices but you must pay a premium (basically the cost of 3 options I stated earlier). In other words, you would have to rebuy that film if you wanted 4K on the tv opposed to 720P on your mobile.

The subscription model would be similar but far more straightforward. Considering subs are going to be the dominating format in the near future, that’s where our concern should be for the most part. I have already explained what I think will happen there.

[Vor4]

Originally Posted by PCFan

I mention Three Billboards because I wanted to buy a code for that movie and it's on sale for $9.99 in iTunes right now but the code that comes with the 4k disc only redeem as HD, so I must buy directly through iTunes to get it in 4k in iTunes but $9.99 is too expensive for me for a digital movie especially when I can't download 4k.

$9.99 is what most people want to pay for a 4k digital movie. I think its a good price for a 4k movie. The studios don't want 4k movie downloads yet due to large file size on 4k movies and piracy.

You don't even own a 4k tv, so why does that matter to you if the digital version only redeems in hd from the 4k disc. Would you rather spend $20 on the blu-ray version, redeem the code, watch one time and sell the disc for about $3 after selling fees. Or would you rather spend $25 on the 4k disc version, redeem the code, watch one time, then sell the disc for $6 after selling fees.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by flyry

Again you're making no sense. You really aren't qualified to speak on streaming services you don't even have access to.

You really think they would change MA to something else and all 5 providers will start charging? #makesnosense

this also leaves out of the discussion that Movies Anywhere itself is an app where you can watch your collection and nothing can even be purchased on it.

I had access to UV which was the same principle but a disaster. It didn’t work. The idea was Movies Anywhere but that should have been Movies Anywhere but your tv.

As for Movies Anywhere, I understand how it works, of course I do.