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

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by rikraq

So you guys would rather spend money buying a lot of possibly crap movies than deign to use streaming first?

You must have money to blow.

yes and no. I am just smart with my money. I spend it on stuff that I like and is important to me (like films or food) because I save it on stuff that is not important to me (like clothes, cars, travel....)

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

in the end what's really the difference?

Quite a bit, in the days of LaserDisc titles were $25 and up, rentals were 2 to 3 dollars. My rentals number in the thousands so if I had purchased all those titles I would have a very large investment in titles that I did not like or were not worth repeat viewing.

In the US we have Netflix disc by mail so I get to check out new, and sometimes old, movies all the time in Blu-ray quality (mostly) and with the convenience of being placed in my mail box.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

How can you be wrong about something that will take time to develop? Not possible. It takes a generation to reach working age really to see the shift.

You can be wrong if it does not develop and others might already know why it won't develop. If I say "preadolescent kids don't work, so that means when they get older they won't work and so eventually no one will work when the older generations retires" does that make sense in any way ?
No and waiting for it to develop would be insane. The same here, history proves you wrong kids today love their phones (no doubt about it) but when I was a kid I loved my small monitor connected to a Betamax player that I used as a TV in my bedroom and my Walkman, and my uncle loved his portable record player. Kids will always love what gives them the most independence from their family and so individual devices, but if things go well they will eventually grow up and then they will value devices that strengthen the family bonds.

[The_Donster]

Let’s also keep in mind that we all have different equipment. So we all have different interpretations on what qualifies as quality and it is subjective. One argument I’ve always had is if every physical media person is such a proponent of it, why utilize cable? I mean, the quality is inferior isn’t it?

Because it’s cheaper and convenient. It’s basically the same argument some make towards streaming when it suits them. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. If you are so hardcore about your viewing why utilize anything that isn’t physically available. Aren’t you contributing more to the demise of physical than anyone else?

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

You can be wrong if it does not develop and others might already know why it won't develop. If I say "preadolescent kids don't work, so that means when they get older they won't work and so eventually no one will work when the older generations retires" does that make sense in any way ?
No and waiting for it to develop would be insane. The same here, history proves you wrong kids today love their phones (no doubt about it) but when I was a kid I loved my small monitor connected to a Betamax player that I used as a TV in my bedroom and my Walkman, and my uncle loved his portable record player. Kids will always love what gives them the most independence from their family and so individual devices, but if things go well they will eventually grow up and then they will value devices that strengthen the family bonds.

Family tv time you mean? Yeah, that’s decreasing by the way. It says so in those official stats.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

Quite a bit, in the days of LaserDisc titles were $25 and up, rentals were 2 to 3 dollars. My rentals number in the thousands so if I had purchased all those titles I would have a very large investment in titles that I did not like or were not worth repeat viewing.

In the US we have Netflix disc by mail so I get to check out new, and sometimes old, movies all the time in Blu-ray quality (mostly) and with the convenience of being placed in my mail box.

You have a rosier recollection than I do. I recall most laserdiscs costing an average of $39.99 circa 1993-1996. In 1994, that was like spending $69.12 today. People would go ballistic if that were the average price of a movie today.

Many laserdiscs cost $49.99, too. Collector editions could cost well over $200. I spent $250 for the Star Wars Definitive collection in 1993, that's $443.14 today. I still have it.

My experience with laserdisc prices makes me super appreciative of today's prices. Everything is a bargain in comparison. Speaking of which, I just ordered The Witch on 4K disc for just $9.99! I never could have imagined obtaining such quality at such a low price in the 1990s!

[The_Donster]

Can you please provide us a link for these stats and does the full body of the story support your argument or is it another sound bite you skimmed over?

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Family tv time you mean? Yeah, that’s decreasing by the way. It says so in those official stats.

All that article actually says is that the time spent viewing of TV channels are down across every age group under 65 in the U.K.; it says nothing about family TV time. People are busy, they are on the move, and they have many viewing options; that is all that that means. There is nothing sinister about it. We simply have more options, but, alas, not more free time.

Anyone familiar with the whole "discs are dying" refrain should be more than well aware that a decline in something is not the same thing as the demise of that same something.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

Quite a bit, in the days of LaserDisc titles were $25 and up, rentals were 2 to 3 dollars. My rentals number in the thousands so if I had purchased all those titles I would have a very large investment in titles that I did not like or were not worth repeat viewing.

In the US we have Netflix disc by mail so I get to check out new, and sometimes old, movies all the time in Blu-ray quality (mostly) and with the convenience of being placed in my mail box.

Agree, that is why I said

Originally Posted by Anthony P

...If I buy something and I don't like I spent a bit more than you, ..

The benefit of blind rental versus blind buying is just in $ if you assume you won't like it and watch it again.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by The_Donster

Let’s also keep in mind that we all have different equipment. So we all have different interpretations on what qualifies as quality and it is subjective. One argument I’ve always had is if every physical media person is such a proponent of it, why utilize cable? I mean, the quality is inferior isn’t it?

Because it’s cheaper and convenient. It’s basically the same argument some make towards streaming when it suits them. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. If you are so hardcore about your viewing why utilize anything that isn’t physically available. Aren’t you contributing more to the demise of physical than anyone else?

I don't have cable, Videotron way over compresses the video, I use OTA and FTAS both offer higher quality then streaming. In Canada OTA =20mbps 1080 video (so it works with my quality demands) and it is free (so I am not wasting money on rentals or fake purchases that can be taken away from me)

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by The_Donster

Let’s also keep in mind that we all have different equipment. So we all have different interpretations on what qualifies as quality and it is subjective. One argument I’ve always had is if every physical media person is such a proponent of it, why utilize cable? I mean, the quality is inferior isn’t it?

Because it’s cheaper and convenient. It’s basically the same argument some make towards streaming when it suits them. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. If you are so hardcore about your viewing why utilize anything that isn’t physically available. Aren’t you contributing more to the demise of physical than anyone else?

I use an over the air antenna and IPTV. I use subscription and VOD streaming services. The reason is simple; not everything that I want to see is automatically something that I want to own.

TV channel access and streaming services are just ways for me to sample content. If I wind up really liking what I watched, then I buy it on disc where possible. Therefore, TV channel access, subscription streaming, and VOD have increased my support for physical media.

[stonesfan129]

My issue with digital/streaming is that you don't really have any control over the content. At least with a disc, it will keep working as long as the disc or player works.

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by alchav21

So what are you trying to say, that Amazon, Netflix, and Streaming Providers like Vudu are taking over? Streaming is the next level of Video watching, and I think Displays will be the access!

Originally Posted by Steedeel

I notice how you have changed your stance from you original argument of Digital HD? .

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

Vilya has addressed the SVOD providers and that is where the streaming action is. Sites like Vudu will hardly show up on the radar.

You guys like to separate everything, Digital Streaming is all the same, not viewed from a Disc. Digital HD I guess are Streaming Movies, but that is from Providers like MA, FN, and Vudu. To me I access all these the same way, go to my Android Apps on my Sony UHD TV, and pick what Streaming Provider I want to access. I'm sure the General Public will discover the ease of accessing their Content in this manner, and that is why I say Displays will be the main Access Point!

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by stonesfan129

My issue with digital/streaming is that you don't really have any control over the content. At least with a disc, it will keep working as long as the disc or player works.

Exactly. When I purchase something, I insist upon having actual possession of it and full control over it.

I can not conceive of buying something and then expecting the seller to faithfully hold onto it for me and to guarantee my perpetual access to it.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by alchav21

You guys like to separate everything, Digital Streaming is all the same, not viewed from a Disc. Digital HD I guess are Streaming Movies, but that is from Providers like MA, FN, and Vudu. To me I access all these the same way, go to my Android Apps on my Sony UHD TV, and pick what Streaming Provider I want to access. I'm sure the General Public will discover the ease of accessing their Content in this manner, and that is why I say Displays will be the main Access Point!

Not all streaming services and providers are the same nor are they all equal. Anyone who really knew anything about streaming would already know this, which explains why you do not. You are the same astute observer who said last year that few people had heard of Netflix.

The "general public" already knows how to stream; there is nothing for them to "discover" about its ease of access.

A display is not limited to being a TV and repeating that people will access streaming via the apps that are pre-installed on a display is not worth stating even once, yet alone repeating. It is why the apps are there in the first place and it is not a great revelation that people actually use them.

What will you reveal to us next? That people use their phones to make calls? Isn't there something that is not painfully obvious that you can discuss?

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Family tv time you mean? Yeah, that’s decreasing by the way. It says so in those official stats.

the stats are meaningless all the shows is that technology has given more options to more people. The day before I built my TV it was 100% family TV time. The day I built my TV I was able to watch what I want on my TV so unless everyone else wanted to watch the same thing I was in there, but my sisters did not have that same choice and for them the only time it was not "family TV time was if I was not using my TV. Family TV time is somethings adults want, not adolescent

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by alchav21

To me I access all these the same way, go to my Android Apps on my Sony UHD TV, and pick what Streaming Provider I want to access.

On my Sony UDP-X1000ES I can pick: Amazon, Netflix and Vudu ● Play .TS files captured from PBS satellite and stored on a NAS or USB ● Play FLAC files stored on a NAS or USB ● Play CD’s, SACD’s, DVD-Audio disc, DVD, Blu-ray and UHD Blu-ray disc. And what it won’t play the Oppo UDP-203 will.

What does all of this mean, for me it means a good bit, for others, they probably could care less.

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by Vilya

You have a rosier recollection than I do.

I am not touching that line , have only a small shovel so I could never dig my way out.

I recall most laserdiscs costing an average of $39.99 circa 1993-1996. In 1994, that was like spending $69.12 today. People would go ballistic if that were the average price of a movie today.

A quick check of my db showed some titles were $40 to $45 in the 1987 to 1989 range. I had to be VERY selective of titles for purchase. There were several titles in CAV that I wanted but they cost a good bit more than the same title in CLV.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

the stats are meaningless all the shows is that technology has given more options to more people. The day before I built my TV it was 100% family TV time. The day I built my TV I was able to watch what I want on my TV so unless everyone else wanted to watch the same thing I was in there, but my sisters did not have that same choice and for them the only time it was not "family TV time was if I was not using my TV. Family TV time is somethings adults want, not adolescent

The stats are only meaningless when they back up my theory. That’s the rules of this thread.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

The stats are only meaningless when they back up my theory. That’s the rules of this thread.

Always the victim.

Nothing in that article, or any article, supports any of your fever dreams; it is why NO ONE else ever defends your posts in this thread or in any other thread. Your "theories" are met with scorn and ridicule wherever they are to be found. If there was actual evidence to support your predictions, they would be debated; as there is nothing to support them they are rightfully dismissed and often derisively due to your unrelenting repetition of them.