Not just 3D, is Blu-ray media dying? (1 Viewer)

[jcroy]

I'm somewhat uneasy though over the implications of this...I mean, "Why would 'Net access be required for playback?" Or in a worst case, "Could this disc and its content be disabled remotely at some point unless I purcha$e a new encryption key?" Or, "Is this simply another type of DRM for hard media, intended to thwart unauthorized ripping/copying?"

Once online-only media becomes common (or even slightly before), I wouldn't be surprised at all if encryption of this type is used for each individual movie purchase.

ie. A different key for every different customer.

The easiest implementation of such a system, would be a public key type system.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public-key_cryptography

 

[Patrick Donahue]

My 2 cents on why I, as someone who used to own a large physical collection, have embraced streaming:1) The owning something physical thing just isn't important to me. My entire retirement fund (obviously more important) is not held in physical stock and bond certificates, it's in bits and bites of data on a computer somewhere. If that doesn't bother me, I can't get worked up over my copy of Anchorman.2) With brick and mortar stores mainly carrying new releases, physical buying has become a mail order endevor, and that is inconvienent. I wanted to order Bride of Frankenstein the other night. My options were - with blu I could order it for $20+shipping from Amazon and have it in a week, or with digital pay $14.99 from Vudu and have it right now.3) While I agree that a movie shouldn't be viewed for the first time in a mible device, there is absolutely a benefit to me to be able to do so. The other day while in the bathroom shaving I had Chinatown playing in the background on my iPad as something to listen to. This past weekend I was at a wedding and later on in the hotel room my date and I watched "Her" the same way. That holds value to me.4) My friends and family can easily share in my 600 title collection via adding them to my UV account.5) I don't believe a physical disc is necessairly better than a digital file quality wise. Of course, for the most part (esp with sound) that is true right now, but internet service is *kind of* of a big thing, and it will only get better. Look at an HDX film compared to what we are streaming on YouTube a couple of years ago. And if you are worried about the quality of a streaming file on your 100in screen, let's not not forget, where do you think the picture is coming from in a giant movie theater...?6) The having the physical collection on shelves thing just does nothing for me. I would much rather scroll through my collection on the 60in screen then stand in front of a bookshelf with my head cocked to one side. 7) On the argument on what do you do if your internet connection goes out... simply put I do something else. That happens maybe a couple times a year, and I'm not always even watching a movie when it does.

 

[bruceames]

My 2 cents on why I, as someone who used to own a large physical collection, have embraced streaming:1) The owning something physical thing just isn't important to me. My entire retirement fund (obviously more important) is not held in physical stock and bond certificates, it's in bits and bites of data on a computer somewhere. If that doesn't bother me, I can't get worked up over my copy of Anchorman.2) With brick and mortar stores mainly carrying new releases, physical buying has become a mail order endevor, and that is inconvienent. I wanted to order Bride of Frankenstein the other night. My options were - with blu I could order it for $20+shipping from Amazon and have it in a week, or with digital pay $14.99 from Vudu and have it right now.3) While I agree that a movie shouldn't be viewed for the first time in a mible device, there is absolutely a benefit to me to be able to do so. The other day while in the bathroom shaving I had Chinatown playing in the background on my iPad as something to listen to. This past weekend I was at a wedding and later on in the hotel room my date and I watched "Her" the same way. That holds value to me.4) My friends and family can easily share in my 600 title collection via adding them to my UV account.5) I don't believe a physical disc is necessairly better than a digital file quality wise. Of course, for the most part (esp with sound) that is true right now, but internet service is *kind of* of a big thing, and it will only get better. Look at an HDX film compared to what we are streaming on YouTube a couple of years ago. And if you are worried about the quality of a streaming file on your 100in screen, let's not not forget, where do you think the picture is coming from in a giant movie theater...?6) The having the physical collection on shelves thing just does nothing for me. I would much rather scroll through my collection on the 60in screen then stand in front of a bookshelf with my head cocked to one side.7) On the argument on what do you do if your internet connection goes out... simply put I do something else. That happens maybe a couple times a year, and I'm not always even watching a movie when it does.

If you have Amazon Prime then you'll get it the day it comes out. Otherwise either 1-2 days max. Also Prime has free streaming, which should be of interest to you. Nearly all new releases come with UV/DC codes, so you get the best of both worlds (I have well over 100 codes myself just from buying discs). The only advantage of paying $14.99 just for the VUDU UV is to watch it 3 weeks before it's available on disc. But if you're buying to own, it's not a very good value, since for $5 more you can get the BD as well, in all its better PQ/AQ, and special feature glory.

That said, there are a lot of movies on VUDU HDX that aren't available on Blu-ray, and it looks like that content gap is only going to grow as the studios shift their focus towards digital. I just wish we could get full BD quality with the subs and special features.

But your sentiments seem more aligned with those of a casual movie fan, where having the best presentation is not essential. I'm a hardcore fan in both aspects and actually love to "cock my head" while browsing my collection (sometimes just in admiration and I love the way it adorns my wall as well).

Another thing is that I don't travel much, and when I do, I never have to kill time by watching a movie. So I don't get to enjoy that advantage inherent in digital ownership (although I have probably 300 or so movies on UV, including those I've converting from disc and purchased outright).

 

[Rob_Ray]

My 2 cents on why I, as someone who used to own a large physical collection, have embraced streaming:1) The owning something physical thing just isn't important to me. My entire retirement fund (obviously more important) is not held in physical stock and bond certificates, it's in bits and bites of data on a computer somewhere. If that doesn't bother me, I can't get worked up over my copy of Anchorman.2) With brick and mortar stores mainly carrying new releases, physical buying has become a mail order endevor, and that is inconvienent. I wanted to order Bride of Frankenstein the other night. My options were - with blu I could order it for $20+shipping from Amazon and have it in a week, or with digital pay $14.99 from Vudu and have it right now.3) While I agree that a movie shouldn't be viewed for the first time in a mible device, there is absolutely a benefit to me to be able to do so. The other day while in the bathroom shaving I had Chinatown playing in the background on my iPad as something to listen to. This past weekend I was at a wedding and later on in the hotel room my date and I watched "Her" the same way. That holds value to me.4) My friends and family can easily share in my 600 title collection via adding them to my UV account.5) I don't believe a physical disc is necessairly better than a digital file quality wise. Of course, for the most part (esp with sound) that is true right now, but internet service is *kind of* of a big thing, and it will only get better. Look at an HDX film compared to what we are streaming on YouTube a couple of years ago. And if you are worried about the quality of a streaming file on your 100in screen, let's not not forget, where do you think the picture is coming from in a giant movie theater...?6) The having the physical collection on shelves thing just does nothing for me. I would much rather scroll through my collection on the 60in screen then stand in front of a bookshelf with my head cocked to one side.7) On the argument on what do you do if your internet connection goes out... simply put I do something else. That happens maybe a couple times a year, and I'm not always even watching a movie when it does.

1) Owning a physical copy is very important to me. That's why I still have all my laserdiscs. If I can't own a physical copy with bonus extras, artwork and liner notes, I won't go out of my way to buy a copy. Title X always be somewhere in the cloud when I want to view it. I'll think about it tomorrow, which will never come.

2) With Amazon Prime, delivery time is never an issue.

3) Viewing movies on mobile devlces holds no appeal for me. Watching a movie is still a special event to me, and I'd like to keep it that way. On planes, I prefer to read a book or magazine. While shaving, I'd listen to music if anything. And when i travel, I like to focus on whereever I am, not lose myself in a movie.

4) I share my collection with family and friends too. I loan my DVDs. (However, I never loaned my laserdiscs. They were too precious.)

5) I do see a difference in quality between physical media and streaming.

6) Having a disc on the shelf is very important to me. As I mentioned in #1 above, it's a core reason I collect. Without a tangible product to look at, most titles are too ephemeral to bother ordering today. Maybe tomorrow.

7) When my internet goes out, I watch a DVD or BluRay.

 

[Carlo_M]

I was at Magnolia in a Best Buy the other day buying equipment (who knew they sold Oppo?) and was just chatting with the CSRs who helped me. They were more knowledgeable than your average blueshirt in BB. So we start talking about the Oppo 103D and BD in general, and then the topic of disc vs. streaming crept up. One guy was like me, a die hard physical media guy, the other guy was a streaming preferred guy. I said to the streaming guy, who thought that the other salesman and I were luddites, "Look the quality to the naked eye is very close if you have a great internet service provider and no bandwidth caps. But, I like to know that I own my movies, and no one, not the government, not the studios, can come in and take my right to watch my movies from me. Remember what happened to Netflix the other month, where they lost the rights to show some movies? That's just the beginning. The studios want to move to a model where you *don't* own the content. That you can only watch on their terms, on a pay-per-play basis. And if they decide not to make something available, or to pull something that you had previously had access to off of the servers, well that's your problem."

To which he had no reply. I could see though the wheels in his head turning, I'm sure he was reconsidering his position.

 

[bruceames]

Well with Netflix you don't own the viewing rights to any movies. It's just an a la carte subscription rental service (just like a buffet, where the food selection varies by day).

But with UV, you do own the viewing rights to every purchase, which are stored in you digital locker. So even if VUDU or another streaming service (which provides access to your movies) goes out of business, you can just find another service to watch them on. But that can't take away rights to movies that are in your digital locker, even if control of that movie changes hands. That would undermine the whole concept of UV itself. And with so many members in the UV consortium, you have to feel that UV is on pretty good ground and that you're protected.

The only thing I don't like is that rights are non-transferable. So when you die, so does your collection.

 

[Carlo_M]

And Bruce, I agree with what you wrote. However that highlights the problem. We have Netflix, Vudu, Hulu, UV, iTunes, Digital Copy, etc. "Digital Ownership" vs. a la carte. That's just on the provider side. Then you have older computers running millions of variations of hardware and software, which may not be able to play all of the digital options well (or at all). You have Mac vs. PC ecosystem. You have internet providers who may have penalties on overuse of bandwidth, or cap peoples' usage and impose fees above it. Not to mention high-speed broadband across America is not equal (and in some places still not available).

With physical medium, you generally have one dominant format at a time: VHS, DVD, BD. You get a player, and 99% of the time it will play just fine whether you're Joe Sixpack or Jane Millionaire, Mary the Millennial or Oscar the Octogenarian.

 

[JoeBond]

This has been a very interesting topic. I love physical media just like most people here. However, I don't buy every title that seems good. I just buy what I call my favorite movies and TV shows. At the same time I use a combination of Redbox, Vudu, and iTunes for renting. For example I had never seen the movie Mary Poppins until recently after pressure from the girlfriend and my interest in Saving Mr. Banks. Well I rented it from iTunes and it look really good but did I go ahead and purchase it from iTunes? No I bought it on Blu-ray through Amazon since I constantly have gift cards since the points from my credit card turn into Amazon gift cards. When viewing the Blu-ray I could notice a slight but certain difference in picture quality. Something I could appreciate plus it came with the iTunes digital copy for free. I can see why people may prefer streaming due to mostly looking good enough but good enough is just not good enough to me. I just like knowing that I own a movie in the best quality possible. Something close to a film projection and something that if I ever got a projection set up would almost be like being at the theater. Blu-ray does that and streaming has yet to get there. Still like someone else on this thread its all about control. Its a question of do you want to control the movies you want to see or do you want to be in a situation where you are not in control the content providers are. Its a kin to waiting to watch say the James Bond movies when they show up on those holiday marathons. You know that they be on TV but your not guaranteed when and if they will still be there in the future. I enjoy knowing this won't be a problem for me since say I want to watch Lawrence of Arabia when the mood strikes I can. As long as I can buy physical discs I will. Whats funny is my girlfriend never really noticed how good picture quality can be before she met me, now she does. Nuff said!

 

[AnthonyClarke]

Well with Netflix you don't own the viewing rights to any movies. It's just an a la carte subscription rental service (just like a buffet, where the food selection varies by day).

But with UV, you do own the viewing rights to every purchase, which are stored in you digital locker. So even if VUDU or another streaming service (which provides access to your movies) goes out of business, you can just find another service to watch them on. But that can't take away rights to movies that are in your digital locker, even if control of that movie changes hands. That would undermine the whole concept of UV itself. And with so many members in the UV consortium, you have to feel that UV is on pretty good ground and that you're protected.

The only thing I don't like is that rights are non-transferable. So when you die, so does your collection.

Does that mean that your wife will be left high and dry if you die first? My Robyn wouldn't be too pleased ...

 

[bruceames]

Does that mean that your wife will be left high and dry if you die first? My Robyn wouldn't be too pleased ...

Lol, no she'll have to deal with an avalanche of movies on disc that I'll have collected and that she'll probably want to get rid of.

Regarding digital, I'm not sure how that works, but if someone dies and has a large digital collection, I think UV allows you to share with several people so those people should be able to view the collection as long as they live. (I wonder though should the UV consortium find out about the death and "whack" the collection. That would be crazy).

 

[Persianimmortal]

The Ultraviolet site says specifically that you can share your collection with up to 5 family members. I also imagine that the collection is simply tied to the account login details - whoever holds the details (username and password) controls the account. I'm sure the logged in user can change the details as necessary, such as slotting in a new credit card, home address etc. in effect transferring the account to another person should the first user die.

 

[Patrick Donahue]

The Ultraviolet site says specifically that you can share your collection with up to 5 family members. I also imagine that the collection is simply tied to the account login details - whoever holds the details (username and password) controls the account. I'm sure the logged in user can change the details as necessary, such as slotting in a new credit card, home address etc. in effect transferring the account to another person should the first user die.

At the end of the day, if someone is laying on their deathbed and they want to pass on their collection, all they need to do is give out their username and password...

 

[Ed Lachmann]

When the upcoming sky high premium prices for high speed internet start kicking in, streaming will become its own big "bag of hurt". I'm glad to own what I own, that's for sure!

 

[Jari K]

All this "everything is doomed and dying" talk is boring. Different ways to watch and consume films can co-exist.One problem is the attitude with some people. They don't like to "buy stuff" anymore, so they want that "stuff" to go away. Like for everybody. It's easier to "not to buy stuff" if that stuff is not available anymore.

 

[bruceames]

One problem is the attitude with some people. They don't like to "buy stuff" anymore, so they want that "stuff" to go away. Like for everybody. It's easier to "not to buy stuff" if that stuff is not available anymore.

The demand for "stuff" is never going to diminish. The world is filled with collectors and where there's demand there will be availability.

 

[Persianimmortal]

I feel that there is an unhealthy level of paranoia regarding companies "pulling the plug" on a digital collection. It simply wouldn't happen, ever. Why? Several reasons:

1. Most countries have consumer laws that protect consumers from blatantly unfair practices such as that being suggested by some members. No studio can just decide to block you from your own digital downloads for no good reason and get away with it. There is no way even the loosest of consumer laws would allow companies to mislead consumers by not making conditions of use for digital products clear upfront, and in turn, there's no way anyone would buy a digital product if one of the conditions was that companies can just rescind your ownership of a digital product out of the blue simply on a whim.

2. We live in an age where tech websites are just itching to find even the slightest bad news story and go global with some sensationalized angle on it. And the average consumer just loves playing the victim. For example, a recent change to the Comixology app on iOS means that digital comic buyers now have to - *gasp* - log in to a separate site to buy their digital comics, rather than buying it directly through the app. How did new of this relatively minor change reach the airwaves? As articles with titles like How Amazon and Comixology Betrayed Comic Book Readers and The Comixology Outrage. Now imagine what would happen if movie studios release digital movies, then suddenly revoked user access to them without just cause. I'm guessing the Internet would have a meltdown from the flood of complaints and calls for boycotts!

3. Every company knows the importance of maintaining good customer relations. Even in the absence of strong consumer laws and viral tech news, no major company is going to release a product that generates consumer anger and destroys repeat sales. It's not good for business. So while people love to imagine greedy corporations itching to delete digital movies off your drives or locking you out of your download/streaming accounts, it ain't gonna happen! For example, imagine Apple announcing tomorrow that all iTunes users have lost access to their digital library of purchased songs and need to rebuy them - Apple stocks would plummet, Apple users would rush to alternatives like Android within days.

Again, I can understand that people love physical discs and the certainty of ownership they bring. I do as well. But let's try to keep an open mind about the future, and not fall into fearful fantasies about technological change, as our forefathers did.

 

[Ejanss]

I feel that there is an unhealthy level of paranoia regarding companies "pulling the plug" on a digital collection. It simply wouldn't happen, ever. Why? Several reasons:

1. Most countries have consumer laws that protect consumers from blatantly unfair practices such as that being suggested by some members. No studio can just decide to block you from your own digital downloads for no good reason and get away with it.

...Disney can.
(For whatever reason the studio or otherwise copyright owner of the material wishes to withdraw distribution of their title from ALL formats, including television, theatrical and home-video.)

 

[jcroy]

If a streaming/download provider files for bankruptcy, is it still legally required to provide such streaming/downloading services?

 

[ROclockCK]

3. Every company knows the importance of maintaining good customer relations. Even in the absence of strong consumer laws and viral tech news, no major company is going to release a product that generates consumer anger and destroys repeat sales. It's not good for business. So while people love to imagine greedy corporations itching to delete digital movies off your drives or locking you out of your download/streaming accounts, it ain't gonna happen! For example, imagine Apple announcing tomorrow that all iTunes users have lost access to their digital library of purchased songs and need to rebuy them - Apple stocks would plummet, Apple users would rush to alternatives like Android within days.

Unfortunately, I know at least 2 tech pros who accepted extended gigs overseas, and not only had zip, zero, zilch access to their iTunes content while accessing the 'Net via foreign IPs, but also had problems with their accounts when they did eventually return to the U.S. and/or to Canada. That was true a couple of years ago; can't say whether it still is.

But in terms of virtual media, we do not live in a gypsy global village...yet.

 

[Paul_Warren]

Sony are just using BD as a scapegoat if they think its tanking that badly why not sell it to someone else (because they know over time it will reap huge rewards as its most likely the last ever home physical media format).

Streaming media IMO is a dead end most of Europe does not have the internet capacity to stream or download anything other than low quality youtube streams. Its going to be a long time until most of Europe has Fibre or Cable internet. I also see a lot of catalog BD's coming out in UK especially & some of the other regions like Germany must have a massive BD fanbase they get a lot of movies before anyone else does.

BD pricing is also excessive on some catalog releases £18-20 & new releases are around £15-18 depending on the popularity then after 6-9 months or so the prices fall sharply & you can suddenly pick them up in a buy 2 for £12 sale on amazon!

Why not price BD lower than DVD to begin with stop making DVD players then BD will accelerate if you put a DVD copy in the same box it cost virtually nothing to do this but Hollywood Studio greed as always prevents sensible solutions.....