We are creatures of hard media by habit.

[tron3]

Why did Vaudeville die? Face it, it was a starving medium from the start. How many jugglers, dog acts, and skits can you watch before you get tired of the same thing? Did movies really kill Vaudeville? Probably. Why pay a few dozen people to perform each night when you can get the movie from the studio, entertain the people for 30 minutes and then get a fresh round of spenders within minutes - ALL DAY LONG.

Vaudeville died from a lack of evolution in a changing entertainment industry. It couldn't compete nor could it keep up. Lack of change killed Vaudville. With the advent of the Internet why are libraries still open? For the same reason you see people drinking coffee and buying donuts at Barnes & Nobels. Because those are social places. Book stores have a quality mankind has desired since he was made self aware. A sense of ownership. Something tangible you can touch and keep. The sometimes seedy social aspect of Vaudeville was replaced with a more family friendly theater experience. Thus, much more profitable as Walt Disney has proven.

Back in the day people played music from hardened wax cylinders on a Victrolla. While the medium was very fragile and soon replaced with a harder substance, it was clear people want to OWN music. Even records were fragile glass which shattered on impact. Yet they remained a staple of audio entertainment for decades before vynil records were stamped. It didn't matter the glass disc was prone to disaster, people wanted to own music. Radio didn't kill off the music industry. It just made people want to own music they were hearing on the radio.

Even today with our massive HDTV screens and blu-ray the vast majority of people still go out and watch a movie. Why? To get out of the house. To be social. To enjoy life with loved ones. TV of today has done more to hurt the theater business than the decades prior to it. But it still thrives because theaters offer you something you CAN'T watch on TV. At least not right now.

Before TV, movies could play for weeks or months and people would return again and again to watch it. Why? Well, they had no choice. But once you could OWN the darned thing people were less prone to repay to see a movie. I'm sure plenty of you saw Star Wars in the theater and went back over and over again because you "knew" once it left theaters it would never return. You took some solace in hoping it would come to TV. But you knew the big screen experience would forever be lost. You wanted to own that experience, even if just as a memory.

Much of our old media has been lost. Victrolla's sit mostly in storage or in museums, and many households probably own a broken record player they "want to fix one day". Even home movie film is a lost art. All replaced in the 80's and 90's with the inferior resolution of VHS tape and betamax. Your priceless memories forever recorded at substandard resolutions. But you still OWN them.

All this talk of Digital Download taking over is just spill over from the HD DVD camp. Even Toshiba took parting shots at blu-ray when they "graciously" bowed out. Claiming that upconverters and flashram were the new targets to unseat blu-ray. Sure Toshiba, "The look and sound of perfect" couldn't beat blu-ray so now two lesser technologies will.

History is clear. We are creatures of hard media by habit. Even DVD will continue to thrive compared to Digital Downloads. They serve two distinct markets. Those who just want the experience, and those who want the experience of owning. Blu-ray is not going anywhere for the time being.

Yes, one day SOMETHING will replace blu-ray. Maybe flashcards, maybe 3" holographic disc, but SOMETHING will replace it. Hopefully not for decades to come. The industry understands the importantance of supporting a standard to achieve massmarket penetration. VHS was still a spry 21 year old when DVD appeared. After 30 years of VHS everyone had one. Market saturation had virtually occured. A remarkable feat as most new consumer technologies take 50 years to fully intergrate into society. But DVD was a stella improvement.

Even flashcard movies will not be the giant leap in technology as DVD was to video tape. The benefits of disc are unchanged. Random access, clean freeze frame, super high speed search, and extras. It is most compelling for having virtually no moving parts. But again, people buy it because they want to OWN it, not "own to rent" like Div-X. Even the future of movie flashcard is uncertain because of the HD DVD fallout. Studios will not line up to support this thing. Now that we have HDM, anything that follows is just "repackaged blu-ray".

Perhaps one day free broadcast TV will be a thing of the past. Perhaps all new mediums will become pay-per-view and the consumer left with no choice. Then our choice will be to hold on to the media we have because we can play it any time we desire. Why? Because we OWN it.

Marketing will never unprogram that desire to own. Demanding that we no longer own the free playing media is not poor marketing, it is revived communism. Long live hard media!

[dslhater]

Wow you're post is so right.

[dk3dknight]

I only disagree on the theaters in my experience sometimes people just want to leave there house, the theater provides a quiet, air conditioned place to watch a quality cinema at a price in some areas that is cheaper then renting a movie.

It gives you the ability to walk away from your life, almost like video games and enjoy something without worring about your boss, or did I finish that paper...

Most times its a escape from the house...

Oh and one of the best things, when you hear the surround sound and not have to worry about being fined...

Last I checked I think it was 150 dollars, my neighbor got that they didn't have surround sound either.. just watching the lion king.

[Kristin Simard]

Originally Posted by tron3

Back in the day people played music from hardened wax cylinders on a Victrolla.

I believe they played music from wax cylinders on a Victor Talking Machine, not a Victrolla. The Victrolla came later with wax discs.

[Vlad44]

Originally Posted by tron3

...

100% AGREE. nice article.

[un4gvn94538]

post way too long to read right now, but i agree with the title

[ussrelativity]

Thanks to Family Guy, no one will ever forget Vaudeville.

[SquidPuppet]

Marketing will never unprogram that desire to own. Demanding that we no longer own the free playing media is not poor marketing, it is revived communism. Long live hard media!

What is your point? Cant you just say what you mean. I dont understand where you stand on this issue.

[Skulltap]

For me, digital downloads of movies doesn't appeal for the same reason as digital music. Compression-compression-compression. Until bitrates are standardized somewhat, I will never prefer DDL over BRD. Ever.

I download MP3's at 192kbs and yeah, it's fine when I am on the go on my laptop and want my free music fix, but when I am sitting down to enjoy my favorite band, no way does it suffice for my ears. The high-end is too crappy. I mean, even Vinyl sounds better than CD's on the high-end, and that technology is how old again? Of course, hearing vinyl on a $25,000.00 system is different than an Aiwa.

My 2 cents...

[tron3]

Originally Posted by ussrelativity

Thanks to Family Guy, no one will ever forget Vaudeville.

Wow, this thread died quicker than Vaudeville. So much for being timeless.

[Rabidhunter]

Good read, wow, you summed up everything nicely.

[Marcusarilius]

Just think how long movie theaters have thrived through all of the entertaiment venues. Vaudville acts moved to the "talkies". W.C. Fields, Marx Bros., Three Stooges. Stage plays like the original Dracula with Bela Lugosi, moved to film. Radio shows existed as the average families source of mainstreme entertainment. And existed while TV was gaining momentum to become the mainstreme source of entertainment. Still, movie theaters thrived.

With the advent of VHS and DVD, owning physical movie media was just as desired as owning 78 lps, 45s, 8 track tapes, then fragile cassette tapes and then CDs for music. Yes, physical hard disk or hard anything is a natural desire by human beings. Would one be satisfied to have beautiful paintings only stored on your hard drive? Envite the neighbors over to look at the big blank space on your wall except for the small post it note sitting there stating "see PC for intended visual dominance and possible intended pleasure occupying this space." Not!

I personally don't believe movie theaters will survive ultimately. HDM with not especially the incredible PQ, but more so the SQ in my opinion can finally be (practically) rivalled at home for the first time in history. Blu-ray is what I have been waiting my whole life for.

[JJ]

I got emotional reading that. Very persuasive. Excellent work!

[SpikesBluBlooded]

A fantastic read, Tron, absolutely fantastic.

[dialog_gvf]

Great post.

Originally Posted by tron3

Yes, one day SOMETHING will replace blu-ray. Maybe flashcards, maybe 3" holographic disc, but SOMETHING will replace it. Hopefully not for decades to come.

Why hopefully? Your message is one that change does occur. But, why fear it at all? Why not encourage it?

If something better is possible within a short timeframe, then Blu-ray doesn't deserve to succeed. But I don't believe that is the case. All the alternatives are so far off that Blu-ray represents a solid generation for HDM.

Something better will always EVENTUALLY be available. So, you can wait for the final best that never comes, or adopt something for a good interim.

If 64GB flash or 300GB holographic is the next step, imagine what will be possible with that. Your Blu-rays will still play.

Gary

[tron3]

Originally Posted by dialog_gvf

Great post.

Why hopefully? Your message is one that change does occur. But, why fear it at all? Why not encourage it?
...
Gary

Sometimes change is too fast. DVD was a mere 10 year old when blu-ray started hitting the scene. As we all know, the change that came with HD DVD was dead within 2 years. A prime example of bad change. When change competes, someone has to lose.

Should we expect a new format every 5 years? Furthermore, should we embrace it? Blu-ray will take years to start unseating DVD on a drastic level. Change so soon will not be embraced.

Nothing is cheaper nor more reliable than hard pressed media if properly stored and used.

[mikejet]

Personally I agree with your post but then again I think the main issue is convinenece.

What's easier? Buying a CD and changing them constantly because you only listen to 2 or 3 songs or downloading it from iTunes and making a custom playlist?

What's easier? Waiting for a few hours for a HD movie to download to your computer so you can watch it there or just popping in a Blu-ray Disc?

IF, and only if digital downloads can meet the speed and quality for the vast majority of people, then they might have a chance. But that's a looong time from now. It take a few minutes for the buffer to load on the 720p Quicktime trailers for me and I use cable.

Personally, I think that's the main issue. Convinenece.

[tron3]

Originally Posted by mikejet

...

Personally, I think that's the main issue. Convienenece.

Isn't lack of a choice also inconvienent? Consider how fast 2/17/09 will be here when analog terrestrial transmission will end. Cable users are safe. People like me who currently receive digital via antenna are safe. People who buy converter boxes will be safe. What about the portion of the public who ignored the constant warnings and lose reception on that day?

I can envision a day when free TV will no longer be free. I envision a day when owning a movie will be a thing of the past. I envision new video markets like digital download which are not governed by law. Thus, I envision the consumer getting stuck with no options, and no way to fight back. TV is going to become the next celluar industry of "confus-opoly".

[Lucy Diamond]

I don't know man...I saw a juggler in the Big Apple Circus once...no clue where he was from...but he juggled a bowling ball, a puppy and a CHAINSAW and I could watch that S)(&T allllllllllll day.

[prkprkprk]

Wow. Your post is long.