Social Feed

yea well i dont like the idea of downloading the movie only to not be able to transfer the movie from place to place or watch it 5 years down the road .sorry but downloads are inferier to media disc

beast37799 said:

yea well i dont like the idea of downloading the movie only to not be able to transfer the movie from place to place or watch it 5 years down the road .sorry but downloads are inferier to media disc

Click to expand...

Agreed; and the vast majority of users will NEVER D/L movies, let alone near perfect HD movies. People that state D/L will overtake, simply just don't know the realities nor the politics involved. At best 25% of end users having a viable consistent D/L option is 10 years away, the ISPs and studios will likely fight it all the way, AND another medium will have likely emerged.

charper1 said:

Agreed; and the vast majority of users will NEVER D/L movies, let alone near perfect HD movies. People that state D/L will overtake, simply just don't know the realities nor the politics involved. At best 25% of end users having a viable consistent D/L option is 10 years away, the ISPs and studios will likely fight it all the way, AND another medium will have likely emerged.

Click to expand...

And that's what was said about music downloads about 10 years ago. Now CD sales have plummeted and iTunes, Amazon, Wal-Mart et al are doing a booming business in downloadable MP3s. To deny the technology is here today is to deny the future, and to say it'll never happen is like those who said airplanes would never fly. I'll place my bets on VOD to HDD rather than a piece of plastic in a box.

Dveldh said:

And that's what was said about music downloads about 10 years ago. Now CD sales have plummeted and iTunes, Amazon, Wal-Mart et al are doing a booming business in downloadable MP3s. To deny the technology is here today is to deny the future, and to say it'll never happen is like those who said airplanes would never fly. I'll place my bets on VOD to HDD rather than a piece of plastic in a box.

Click to expand...

I think the whole music download scenario is more complicated than you present it, and may not be parallel.

First, Pandora's box was opened by a free Napster encouraging ripping small files from unprotected CDs.

Second, the music industry was trying to make the $25 CD the norm at the time. Most people just want a song or two, so the $.99 song download becomes attractive.

Third, consumers were changing their listening model over to IPods and computer listening from the traditional stereo. Even in cars, it is attractive to go with compressed MP3s where you get ten times the density, or simply plug in the ipod. All of this requires ripping and downloading anyway, so switching modes saves a step.

Fourth, there is a big difference in the current state of the net between downloading 10 KB of music and 4 GB of movie. The only reason it is working at all is because very few people are downloading. As it stands, Comcast and others are already choking bandwidth to people doing heavy downloads.

It isn't just video. I am heavily inviolved in web based sensor technology. The government is looking at placing 100s of millions of these things all over the country. I have written papers on how this is going to require a new paradigm and the need to filter data down at the source.

I strongly believe that this is all going to come crashing down in the next few years, and is going to require 2 orders of magnitude increase in overall net bandwidth to accomodate.

jayn_j said:

I think the whole music download scenario is more complicated than you present it, and may not be parallel.

Click to expand...

I cut the rest of the post to save the space apparently needed so desperately for downloads. But on to the matter at hand. The difficulty has been the bandwidth available. But did you know the bandwidth is available? The problem has been in curb-to-home connections. There is plenty of fiber available...it just needs that final reach. It's correct that the video revolution won't mirror the CD...it will move much faster and supplant physical media a lot sooner. And just because your HDD failed, isn't a basis for judgement. Mine have never failed, and I'm still using all of my old ones in one aspect or another. The fact of the matter is, people will use what's easier. A fast download over the Net or from the satellite, or the cable system, @ $4.99 and saved to the HDD, opposed to a disc from Wal-Mart @ 24.49--guess which one the average consumer will buy? Hint: it ain't the disc. As to your papers, I don't deal with papers. I deal with real world, real time networks and video distribution. Theory doesn't cut it with the speed of change. Get ready to start downloading...the days of your physical media are dying, and you need to start facing the facts rather than living in a fantasy world.

Dveldh said:

I cut the rest of the post to save the space apparently needed so desperately for downloads.

Click to expand...

Putting a smile on the end doesn't change the flame bait aspect

Dveldh said:

But on to the matter at hand. The difficulty has been the bandwidth available. But did you know the bandwidth is available? The problem has been in curb-to-home connections. There is plenty of fiber available...it just needs that final reach.

Click to expand...

I agree that we haven't reached the choke point...YET. Do you have a pointer or further justification for this statement, or is it just fuzzy rationalization? Also, are you discussing home based networking, or industrial. Corporations are starting to see choke points on dedicated fiber and T3.

Dveldh said:

It's correct that the video revolution won't mirror the CD...it will move much faster and supplant physical media a lot sooner. And just because your HDD failed, isn't a basis for judgement. Mine have never failed, and I'm still using all of my old ones in one aspect or another.

Click to expand...

I never posted anything about HD failure. That was ONUOsFan. Please be a little more careful about your facts before attacking. Still, HD failure is an issue, and your not having one is just happy hapenstance. Those of us who are more than fifteen and use our own computers instead of daddy's know the pain of hardware failure.

HD failures are an issue because the studios have very restrictive DRM schemes in place and a HD failure will mean repurchasing all those precious downloads. (You wouldn't be the sort who plans on STEALING them, would you?)

Dveldh said:

The fact of the matter is, people will use what's easier. A fast download over the Net or from the satellite, or the cable system, @ $4.99 and saved to the HDD, opposed to a disc from Wal-Mart @ 24.49--guess which one the average consumer will buy? Hint: it ain't the disc.

Click to expand...

Probably not fair to compare emerging technology prices here. I think we all agree that Blu prices need to come down to the typical $15 new DVD release price. Who has the winner then, especially when you discover that your HD download has been compressed, that you can't take it over to your buddies for your sleepover or whatever.

Dveldh said:

As to your papers, I don't deal with papers. I deal with real world, real time networks and video distribution. Theory doesn't cut it with the speed of change. Get ready to start downloading...the days of your physical media are dying, and you need to start facing the facts rather than living in a fantasy world.

Click to expand...

Well, la de da. You don't read papers and that makes them invalid. Fortunately, the DHS, DoD, DoE, ISA and IEEE all do care and are working to mitigate the issues as they arise. I never said that we wouldn't solve these problems, but I do believe there will be a teething problem in that growth in bandwidth usage is currently outstripping capability expansion, especially when you look at government plans to start harvesting data over public networks.

Look, I'm not saying that downloads won't happen. However, I for one am not cheering on this change, and I am hoping that the public at large can see through the studio model of PPV on everything. I believe that with downloads we will get an inferior product, at an overall higher price, and with restrictions that are going to be difficult to adjust to.

Dveldh said:

The fact of the matter is, people will use what's easier. A fast download over the Net or from the satellite, or the cable system, @ $4.99 and saved to the HDD, opposed to a disc from Wal-Mart @ 24.49--guess which one the average consumer will buy? Hint: it ain't the disc.

Click to expand...

You have got to be living in a dream world if you think that the downloads will only cost around $5. If you look at iTunes right now a SD version of a newer released movie is $14.99. Lets see you can purchase a new release at the store for around $15 or downlaod it for $15 which one do you think people will buy? I personally would buy the disc for $15 over the downloaded media.

Most non-technical people have enough problems with the idea of a device connected to their TV that you slip a disc into, with an option of 4 different possible cable connections between the device and the TV for video alone (forget the audio connections to the HTS). How many of these same people do you think will ever be able to master the installation, navigation, and use a much more complex (by comparison) HTPC with external storage, which functions completely independently from their standard cable/sat box, which, by the way, offers a much easier way to stream newer release movies for a small rental fee?

More than likely these same people that finally figured out how to successfully use a DVD player thanks to Geek squad installation and support will start buying/receiving as gifts a new BD player as prices come down and their old DVD players crap out. Downloading, managing, storing, sharing digital media among devices is really beyond the technical capacity of J6P (not to mention the capabilities of their current hardware/set up).

jayn_j said:

First, Pandora's box was opened by a free Napster encouraging ripping small files from unprotected CDs.

Click to expand...

You mean Shawn Fanning was smart and RIAA stupid, right?
Don't know about the first but agree with the second. RIAA still is...

jayn_j said:

Second, the music industry was trying to make the $25 CD the norm at the time. Most people just want a song or two, so the $.99 song download becomes attractive.

Click to expand...

I don't think so.
RIAA was trying to introduce SACD/DVD-A and sell you all the music again while artificially keeping CD prices high (weren't labels charged for price fixing?)... Didn't work.

jayn_j said:

Third, consumers were changing their listening model over to IPods and computer listening from the traditional stereo.

Click to expand...

You mean people's behavior is the reason behind Napster's birth? I see it exactly the other way.

jayn_j said:

Fourth, there is a big difference in the current state of the net between downloading 10 KB of music and 4 GB of movie.

Click to expand...

Where have you seen 10 KB of music?
Any song above 64kbps is a few MB.

jayn_j said:

The government is looking at placing 100s of millions of these things all over the country.

Click to expand...

US technological leadership is fading...
Doesn't mean what they do is wrong, but I wouldn't read too much into that. Especially with this administration.

jayn_j said:

I strongly believe that this is all going to come crashing down...

Click to expand...

You mean choke? That would be interesting to see.

I believe you make a mistake when you take the technological issues out of the political context.
During the technobubble of the late 90s so much fiber optics was laid, it is still half dark
(remember when Google was caught buying dark fiber around the country for pennies a few years back?)

I believe, by the time studios are ready to look at alternatives to BD seriously (1-2 years, IMHO), there will be more than one
fast pipe into the majority of households: fiber in urban areas, satellite in rural, wireless (WiMax, 802.11N, etc.) in most.

Just like MP3 - convenience! - trounced the high resolution audio formats, the same will happen with video, I believe.
Will the winning format have 1080p and super-duper lossless audio? I don't know. But those specs won't win by itself...
What can be streamed will win. The rest will be left to the drooling --philes of all types...

Diogen.

diogen said:

I believe you make a mistake when you take the technological issues out of the political context.
During the technobubble of the late 90s so much fiber optics was laid, it is still half dark
(remember when Google was caught buying dark fiber around the country for pennies a few years back?)

I believe, by the time studios are ready to look at alternatives to BD seriously (1-2 years, IMHO), there will be more than one
fast pipe into the majority of households: fiber in urban areas, satellite in rural, wireless (WiMax, 802.11N, etc.) in most.
Diogen.

Click to expand...

It may very well be true that everyhome has a broadband connection, but that isn't necessarily a good thing. Here is an article from the current Test&Measurement World on internet bandwidth that supports my position.

OFCNFOEC: The increasing demand for bandwidth - 2/28/2008 12:23:00 PM - Test & Measurement World

The following quote is especially telling, in light of the widespread opinion that we overbuilt our fiber backbones:

T&M World said:

Wednesday at OFCNFOEC 2008 featured a panel discussion with members of companies ranging from Facebook to component maker Avago Technologies. Five other companies were represented, including Reuters. Each panel member discussed how the increasing demand for bandwidth from Facebook to YouTube to the 18-to-29-year olds is fueling the need for ever more network bandwidth. As a result, video downloads are stressing core networks and the unlit fibers of earlier this decade are now full.

Click to expand...