M$ Counting on HD-DVD's demise

[MrBogey]

WiMax is a gap filler and not capable of the speeds you'd want. Basically the bandwidth allocation makes it too sparse. Fiber to near the customers house is the only way to get the speeds you'd need.

[supersix4]

I guess the reason they couldnt put a blu-ray player in the new 360 is they would smack everyone in the face who bought the hd-dvd drive.. stink's im not paying 549 or w/e they want for that to get an hdmi connection

[Blu-Ray Buckeye]

In general download services are lame unless they are very, very cheap fast. You are always at risk of losing everything with a HD crash, which has happend to lots and lots of people and we all know it. People complain about $0.99 songs but in reality that is fairly cheap when you consider many people just collect single songs like that then go buy CDs if they want the whole album... I never download the whole album on iTunes (on a subscription service like eMusic maybe). With movies it's always all or nothing so the price can't ever be that good. Besides you lose the whole angle of the movies as a "collection". Doesn't matter to everyone but it does to a lot of people.

[Shadowself]

Originally Posted by boweyang

I didnt realize this until after I started my new job but I believe that downloadable movies will be here in less than 5 years. I work at Corning which right now are working on fiber optic cables like crazy. There are a bunch more details, but here is a summary of what I am taoking about. This may not hinder Blu-ray (I dont think it will) for a while, but if this format war does not end soon, we may see the end of Blu-ray.

<snip>

Anyway, I just want to get word out if anyone didnt know that high speed internet through fiber optics is coming faster than you may think.

I almost forgot, eventhough some of you may give me hate comments, id rather get honest comments than no comments on this issue.

The reality is that Corning is very bullish on fiber. It is there business to be into glass/optical plastic after all. However, Corning has been overly bullish on fiber before. Corning (and others) sold a ton of fiber back in the .com bubble. There was a *huge* amount of dark fiber (unused) laid some of which is being lit up now. When the .com bubble burst and sales of fiber radically dropped Corning was caught unprepared for the sales decline. It has only been recovering in the past couple years.

I love Corning. I really do. They have had some truly amazing glass/optics technology over the past several decades. But the company has a tendency to be too optimisitic at times about the future of its sales.

(As an aside, if any of you ever get a chance to go through Corning's public exhibit / museum about glass and optics you should do it. And don't miss the Steuben Glass exibits. It's one of the few places in the U.S. where real craftsmen exist. You'll be blown away. )

I've read about all these wild projections on fiber build outs several times before. Only in very, very localized, limited cases has any of these wild projections ever become reality in the time frames projected. Therefore, I'm very skeptical of any projections of this type.

Originally Posted by Ascended_Saiyan

Fiber optics is the way to boost transmission speeds to the level where 1080p w/ lossless audio downloads can be a comfortable reality. The problem is the "last mile" (getting fiber from the major junctures to neighborhood to homes). That's been the problem for the last 7+ years.
<snip>
Test areas will start to pop up in a while with much faster speeds (like Verizon's optical service in Texas), but even then servers aren't able to handle those types of connection speeds per user. Basically, we are talking about a major overhaul to the US servers and "last mile" connections. It's a long road.

I agree. The last mile has a long way to go. In the rural U.S. (where houses can be miles apart) that "last mile" could be more than 10 miles. Sure various mode fiber technologies could be optimized for that last mile, but putting that fiber in the ground for the majority of homes is not going to come soon.

Additionally, if we do the simple arithmetic, the server 'net connection loads get huge. Assuming everyone has a 50 Mbps (or faster) link in order to download Blu-ray equivalent imagery and sound in real-time, just a couple thousand users would require the distributing company to need a 100 Gbps link to the net (assuming no additional overhead). There are no standard 100 Gbps link today (40 Gbps is the upper limit today).

Originally Posted by dtrush

We already have Fiber running to peoples residence here in Murray, UT.
http://mstarmetro.net/offerings/fastestnet-chart.php
The Upload/Download speeds are 15Mbps on residential service.
Businesses (which I subscribe to at work) is set at 30Mbps Up/Down. My service is provisioned at 100Mbps but I haven't got the correct box to get that kind of speed off it. There are 100 Gig/Month caps of transfer and then it's like $1/Gig overage. I doubt it's even monitored right now though because we haven't been notified of any problems yet

I'm aware of the fiber build outs in several municipalities around Salt Lake City, Utah. Many are quite interesting. However, there are many of Murray, Utah's neighboring municipalities which refuse to do such an implementantion. There are many, many other municipalities across the U.S. have done or are doing similar things to Murray, Utah, and many more which refuse to do so. However, as a fraction of the entire set of 'net users the number of users supported by implementations such as in Murray, Utah is still a very small percent.

Yet, even with the large bandwidths available (even if a person could connect at the 100 Mbps upper limit mentioned) what is the real download speed? What good is a 100 Mbps connection if the real download speed from the typical site on the 'net is still in the low single digit Mbps? You have 95% headroom in your end of the link, but what good is it doing you?

I had fiber to my home over 5 years ago. I had broadband wireless well over 10 years ago. I'm not average. I don't try to claim that what I have is the near future. It's not.

This will all change. It will take time. My guess is 10 - 15 years. OC-192s (or the future equivalent) will become common place for most businesses and RAICs (Redundant Arrays of Inexpensive Computers [what we used to call high availability server farms]) to service them. OC-3 equivalents will be available to the home.

But to get back on topic...
M$ (and yes, they are much more about money than technology, always have been) is just trying to make sure they are on the leading edge of this transition. As I've said in other posts. Microsoft is in anything it does for the long haul. Since the mid 80s it has been willing to loose a lot of money for a huge long term payoff. Five to ten years is almost equivalent to a blink in the M$ plan. If M$ can keep *both* HD DVD and Blu-ray from becoming widely accepted standards (and the way to do this is to give *just enough* support to the probably looser) then online downloads will happen much more quickly. If either becomes a widely accepted standard then M$'s download plans will be delayed by up to a decade or more.

[ps3andlovinit]

Originally Posted by aaronwt

You remove the hard drive and take it to your 360 at your cottage.

And what are the kids going to do at home? It's not granular enough. Optical disks I can take only what I want or need without screwing everyone else's enjoyment. And transferring a HDD around just isn't practical from a reliability perspective...especially given my other questions.

Also means I have one vendor of choice for playback..instead of a wide variety of CE choices for players .. but that's really the point I think .. more vendor lock-in and less consumer choice. So it doesn't make sense to give up that flexibility and reliability.

Especially when I apparently can't even copy mp3's onto a 360 hard drive right now..it only supports streaming or ripping my CD's ALL over again to get them on that HDD .. no thanks. Have hundreds of CD's. Guess they want you to have multiple devices (and windows licenses) to store certain content when one device would do..so i have little faith they have my best interest in mind.

At least if it was a PS3 I could just copy over mp3's etc...plus I can backup and restore content to another drive .. so I guess your scenario is at least viable with a PS3 at the cottage...but 360 doesn't seem to be flexible enough to support it.

Flexibility and choice is good for the consumer..me.

[reiella]

Originally Posted by Ascended_Saiyan

Fiber optics is the way to boost transmission speeds to the level where 1080p w/ lossless audio downloads can be a comfortable reality. The problem is the "last mile" (getting fiber from the major junctures to neighborhood to homes). That's been the problem for the last 7+ years. The Bell companies (Southwestern Bell Company, NYNEX, BellSouth, Pac Bell...owned by SBC, etc) are experimenting with "last mile" solutions like EPON, GPON, and WiMAX. The costs are enormous for such ventures. It will take quite some time to implement these solutions (WiMAX would be the fastest since it is a wireless technology). They should be ready to go at the end of Blu-ray's lifecycle (if not...a little before). Test areas will start to pop up in a while with much faster speeds (like Verizon's optical service in Texas), but even then servers aren't able to handle those types of connection speeds per user. Basically, we are talking about a major overhaul to the US servers and "last mile" connections. It's a long road.

BS is looking at a FTTH solution currently as well. Very similiar to AT&Ts from what I've been able to tell.

FiOS isn't mostly in Texas anymore, those were just the test markets. They have begun full implementation roll out [at the same time as fighting for the franchise to do television]. The primarily deployment areas are the middle-east coast [Virginia, MD, PA]. Some NY communities have it, although there's a different set of difficulties there when you're looking at a FTTP solution versus a FTTH. But FiOS rollout is happening across VZ's markets, the 'last mile' areas [ie, places we still don't have good DSL or even ISDN service] are going to be harsh.

FiOS is the future for the Verizon's markets for the forseeable future though.

Originally Posted by ps3andlovinit

And what are the kids going to do at home? It's not granular enough. Optical disks I can take only what I want or need without screwing everyone else's enjoyment. And transferring a HDD around just isn't practical from a reliability perspective...especially given my other questions.

Also means I have one vendor of choice for playback..instead of a wide variety of CE choices for players .. but that's really the point I think .. more vendor lock-in and less consumer choice. So it doesn't make sense to give up that flexibility and reliability.

Especially when I apparently can't even copy mp3's onto a 360 hard drive right now..it only supports streaming or ripping my CD's ALL over again to get them on that HDD .. no thanks. Have hundreds of CD's. Guess they want you to have multiple devices (and windows licenses) to store certain content when one device would do..so i have little faith they have my best interest in mind.

At least if it was a PS3 I could just copy over mp3's etc...plus I can backup and restore content to another drive .. so I guess your scenario is at least viable with a PS3 at the cottage...but 360 doesn't seem to be flexible enough to support it.

Flexibility and choice is good for the consumer..me.

And with the PS3, you have the option of RemotePlay through your PSP. If your cottage has wifi anyway.... Which I guess would remove the whole question in the first place.

[Coltboy]

So am i to understand MS is abandoning HD-DVD? Or is this double talk from MS? maybe i should go out and buy a cheap HD-DVD player just in case.

[Deciazulado]

Why would you buy a boat that's sinking?

[iceman]

Nice... I've been saying this ever since M$ decided to support HD-DVD. This deserves a news post tomorrow

[cacruden]

I would agree to a point with Microsoft. I think it would be ideal if:
I could download a movie/HD content quickly (ultra high speed connection),
I would be able to cache the HD content locally,
The service provider is not likely to go under,
And once it is purchased, I can download it again anytime in the future (no expiry)

Then I would not care about copying it onto any media.

BUT, I would still want the media to be available because I need it for backup of my computers

[DrinkMore]

What alot of people don't realize or factor into their little download scheme of the future is the following..

1 - HD Capacity is just now reaching levels never before seen. Storing DVD's is a feasible thing at this point. There is enough space. However storing HD movies is not.

2 - Hardware incompatibility. At the rate technology changes, would you prefer to have to deal with finding the right adapter/connector for you old hard drive to work on your new hardware (if possible) ?

3 - Damage/Age/Wear&Tear - nobody factors this into the equation. The average life of a HD per most manufacturers is 3 years. This does not take into account manufacturer defects. I have only had 1 hard drive fail on me. Luckily nothing was on it. However, the fact still remains - would you rather have a hard drive that is always spinning, heating up and sensitive to surges and the like - storing all your HD downloads? Or would you rather have a non moving, non electrical disk that can sit on your shelf that won't disappear if your hard drive crashes?

Who cares if you can even get the HD movie to your house on a high bandwith line. If you make it that far. Even if you get that far, how many people have computers hooked up to their tvs? Its just too soon.

[supersix4]

the .99cent songs are good remember before napster cd's were as high as 20$ for a new cd at bestbuy .. they were price gouging like no other napster and itunes and all that keeps them in check ...

[joeorc]

Originally Posted by DrinkMore

What alot of people don't realize or factor into their little download scheme of the future is the following..

1 - HD Capacity is just now reaching levels never before seen. Storing DVD's is a feasible thing at this point. There is enough space. However storing HD movies is not.

2 - Hardware incompatibility. At the rate technology changes, would you prefer to have to deal with finding the right adapter/connector for you old hard drive to work on your new hardware (if possible) ?

3 - Damage/Age/Wear&Tear - nobody factors this into the equation. The average life of a HD per most manufacturers is 3 years. This does not take into account manufacturer defects. I have only had 1 hard drive fail on me. Luckily nothing was on it. However, the fact still remains - would you rather have a hard drive that is always spinning, heating up and sensitive to surges and the like - storing all your HD downloads? Or would you rather have a non moving, non electrical disk that can sit on your shelf that won't disappear if your hard drive crashes?

Who cares if you can even get the HD movie to your house on a high bandwith line. If you make it that far. Even if you get that far, how many people have computers hooked up to their tvs? Its just too soon.

exactly.re buy media every (5) years with no real reguards for backward compatability..like the xbox360 and the first xbox. stop support for the first xbox , and get people to buy into the xbox360 for (5) years than when the new xbox360 come's in still use the standard DVD drive . and the developers can charge the consumer for an unfinished game and make more money on episodic content that should have been on the disc in the first place. yea thats realy looking out for the consumer..thanks but no thanks Microsoft but i am sticking with sony and nintendo.

[WickyWoo]

Downloading/VOD is the future of rental, of this I am 100% positive

People see music as disposible, they don't mind downloading it and they like a lot of it in one place

When you drop more than a couple bucks on something,70%+ of people want to see physical product in hand. People buy Tv shows and the occasional movie off iTunes for something to watch on a plane or the train. They're not buying for their personal collection

Personally I can't wait for the flash hard drives to come down. It's about $500 for 40Gb right now. No heat, no moving parts

[reiella]

Originally Posted by supersix14

the .99cent songs are good remember before napster cd's were as high as 20$ for a new cd at bestbuy .. they were price gouging like no other napster and itunes and all that keeps them in check ...

Poor example, because at the time Napster's album rates ended up costing more than similar albums at walmart.

Simply put, BestBuy is costly .

[Canada]

Originally Posted by haushausman

When will some companies realize WE DON'T WANT A FILE ON A HARD DRIVE. Am I the only one who wants a hard copy of the movie and not just some file?

Just to add to that will computures with multi tera-byte hard drives become cheap. Even if they were I would still want a hard copy. Can you imagine 4 people trying to access 4 different movies of one hard drive. I can't see it. But the people in the early or mid 70's could not see most people having home computers. The idea of getting hi def content off the net might take off who knows? If it does some people will still want a hard copy.